The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About082603 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 [26 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AUGUST 26, 2003 - 7:00 P.M. At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M. 5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Sections: 1. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning the disposition of real property located at the corner of Diaz Road and Cherry Street. Under negotiation is the price and terms of the real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and AGK Group LLC. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim O'Grady, and John Meyer. 2. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning real property negotiations for property located at the corner of Santiago Road and Ynez Road (7.5 acres). Under negotiation is the price and terms of real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and Murrieta Tennis Club. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim O'Grady, and Herman Parker. 3. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) with respect to one matter of whether to initiate litigation. With respect to this matter, the City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City based on existing facts and circumstances and the City will decide whether to initiate litigation. 4. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) with respect to two matters of existing litigation involving the City. The following cases will be discussed: 1) City of Temecula v. County of Riverside (Domenigoni-Barton Properties) and 2) Pechanga Band v. Temecula Creek Village, LLC, etc. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2003-09 Resolution: No. 2003-105 R:~Agenda\082603 1 CALL TO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: Mayor Jeff Stone Jake Facile Pastor Ron Alsobrooks of New Covenant Fellowship Center Councilman Comerchero Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Certificates of Achievement to the Temecula Valley North Little Leaque All Stars Balloon and Wine Festival Presentation Santa Marqarita Watershed Clean Up Day Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not. on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICETO 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. R:~Agenda\082603 2 2 3 6 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of July 22, 2003. Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Purchase of Four (4) City Vehicles RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the purchase of the following vehicles from Rancho Ford: · Two (2) 2003, Mid-sized Ford Trucks $19,939.59 (each) · Two (2) 2003, full-sized ½ ton Ford Trucks $24,480.69 (each) Award of Contract for City Council Chamber AudioNisual Systems Upqrade RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Award a contract to Integrated Media Systems to upgrade the Council Chambers AudioJisual Systems in the amount of $128,320.00; 5.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve a contingency for the purchase and installation in an amount not to exceed $12,832.00; 5.3 Allocate an additional $31,152.00 to the IS Internal Services Fund Capital Account to support this upgrade. FY2003-04 Desiqnated Allocations - Community Support Budqet RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the funding agreement in the amount of $15,000 for Safe Alternatives For Everyone (SAFE) Program and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 6.2 Approve the funding agreement in the amount of $15,000 for the Circle of SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. R:~Agenda\082603 3 7 8 9 10 11 City Council Meetinq Schedule - November and December 2003 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Direct the City Clerk to reschedule the November 11, 2003 (Veterans Day) meeting to November 18, 2003; to reschedule the December 23, 2003 meeting to December 16, 2003; and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. Amended Resolution authorizinq Temporary Street Closure of Main Street between Old Town Front Street and the Murrieta Creek Bridqe for the Temecula-On-Staqe Event scheduled for Au.qust 30, 2003 and deleqate authority to issue a Special Events/Street Closures Permit to the Director of Public Works/City Enqineer RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-97 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF MAIN STREET BE~/VEEN OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE FOR THE TEMECULA-ON-STAGE EVENT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES. THE AMENDMENT CONSISTS OF A CHANGE TO THE EVENT SCHEDULE Traffic SiRnal and Safety Li~htin,q Maintenance A,qreement RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Terminate the existing agreement, dated February 2, 1999, with the County of Riverside; 9.2 Approve the agreement with the County of Riverside for maintenance of traffic signals and safety lighting and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. General Fund Transfer to Service Level D RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Appropriate $73,125 from General Fund Reserves to TCSD Service Level D to subsidize refuse collection and recycling. Second Readin,q of Ordinance No. 03-08 (John Warner Road) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: R:~Agenda\082603 ORDINANCE NO. 03-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY TEMECULA ESTABLISHING INTEGRATED FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 03-05 (JOHN WARNER ROAD) AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF CONTINGENT ASSESSMENTS THEREIN RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY R:~Agenda\082603 5 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Comerchere ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2003-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2003-17 Naggar, Pratt, Robeds, Stone, Comerchero A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 12, 2003. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\082603 6 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ron Roberts ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2003-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2003-17 Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts 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 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 August 12, 2003. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS'REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, September 16, 2003, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\082603 7 TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Next in Order: Ordinance: No. TPFA 2003-02 Resolution: No. TPFA 2003-18 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Stone ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Temecula Public Financing Authority on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item 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 22, 2003. PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the Temecula Public Financing Authority before a public hearing or may appear and may 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. R:~Agenda\082603 8 2 Formation of Community Facilities District - Wolf Creek No. 03-03 (Continued from July 22, 2003.) RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Continue the public hearing to September 23, 2003. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT BOARD MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT R:~Agenda\082603 9 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. 12 Linfield School Master Plan, Zone Change (PA02-0612), Conditional Use Permit, and Development Plan (PA01-0653) (Continued from the July 8, 2003 City Council meeting.) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKVVAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 12.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPTING SECTIONS 17.22.180 THROUGH 17.22.188 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 12.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\082603 10 RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS, AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94-ACRE SITE, GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 12.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN INCLUDING A TVVO-STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE-STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 13 Harveston Specific Plan Amendment (Planninq Application No. PA03-0249) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Make a Determination of Consistency with a previously Certified Environmental Impact Report; 13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE AND FULLY INTEGRATE WITHIN TWO OUT- PARCELS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0249) 13.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO INCLUDE TWO OUT-PARCELS WITHIN THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN RSAgenda\082603 11 COUNCIL BUSINESS 14 Participation in the Riverside County District Attorney's Office Gan.q Task Force RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE GANG TASK FORCE 15 Consideration of Adoption of Resolutions of Necessity for the acquisition in Eminent 16 Domain of certain real properties for public purposes (Continued from the August 12, 2003, City Council meeting.) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Continue the hearing to the meeting of September 16, 2003. Cable, Video, and Telecommunications Ordinance (Continued from the August 12, 2003, City Council meeting.) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGULATING CABLE, VIDEO, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND AMENDING IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 5.12 OF TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE 16.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING FEES FOR TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING CABLE TELEVISION AND OPEN VIDEO SYSTEM FRANCHISES AND REGISTRATION FEES FOR OTHER VIDEO PROVIDERS R:~Agenda\082603 12 17 Cable Franchise Renewal Committee Appointment (Continued from the August 12, 2003, City Council meeting.) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Appoint one member from the City Council to serve on the negotiation team for renewal of the Cable Franchise Agreement with Adelphia. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next adjourned regular City Council meeting, Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 6:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, for the purpose of a Joint City Council/Public Traffic Safety Commission meeting. The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting will be on Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 7:00 P.M. R:~Agenda\082603 13 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES CFA REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL JULY 22, 2003 After the Closed Session that convened at 6:00 P.M., the City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, July 22, 2003, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmembers: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Joanne Algier. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Lamont Lawson of Mountain View Community Church. ALLEGIANCE The flag salute was presented by Councilman Pratt. PRESENTATION/PROCLAMATIONS None given. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Martha Minkler and Paula Stankovich, representing the Arts Council, thanked the City for their support of the arts, and presented the City Council with a poster from the Arts in the Country Festival. B. Mr. Otto Baron, 28681 Pujol Street, requested signage rules regarding Old Town be revised. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Mr. Roberts reminded the City Council that Habitat for Humanity ground breaking take place this Saturday, July 26th, at 10:00 A.M., at the northwest corner of Pujol Street and First Street. B. Mayor Stone commended the Police Department for their enhanced enforcement with respect to the Red Light Program. He also requested an update regarding vandalism at Paloma Del Sol Park. Reporting on the League of California Cities meeting several of the council attended in Monterey, Mayor Stone reported the League will be proactive in getting an initiative on the next ballot which will safeguard the revenues the Cities receive from the State, assuring cities will be able to continue providing its citizens with quality services. R:\Minutes\072203 1 CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Resolution approvin,q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 3 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the minutes of May 27, 2003; 3.2 Approve the minutes of June 10, 2003. 4 Fire/EMS Protection Aqreement for FY 2003-04 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the amended Exhibit A to the Fire Protection Agreement for Fiscal year 2003-04. 5 Fifth Amendment to the Agreement for Law Enforcement Services RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the fifth amendment to the agreement for law enforcement services between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula to include the hiring of one motorcycle officer, one traffic investigation officer, and one patrol officer. 6 Roripau,qh Ranch Detachment from Valley Wide Recreation and Park District RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:\Minutes\072203 2 RESOLUTION NO. 03-86 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE VALLEY WIDE RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES TO BE EXCHANGED BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE VALLEY WIDE RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT RESULTING FROM THE RORIPAUGH RANCH DETACHMENT FROM THE VALLEY WIDE RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT 7 8 City Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy as proposed by staff which provides safety, liquidity, and yield for City funds. FY2003-04 Economic Development Operatin,q/Marketinq Agreements RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the operating/marketing agreements and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreements with the following organizations: · The Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce in the amount of $148,000; · The Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County in the amount of $22,500; · The Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance in the amount of $75,000. 9 Approve Economic Development Event Sponsorship Requests RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the Sponsorship and Funding Agreement in the amount of $25,000 and City-support costs in the amount up to $8,800 for The Inland Empire Affiliate of the Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Race for the Cure event; 9.2 Approve the Event Sponsorship Agreement for actual City-support costs in the amount up to $25,150 for the Temecula Fall Car Show & Old Town Cruise; 9.3 Approve the Event Sponsorship Agreement for actual City-support costs in the amount up to $5,100 for Temecula on Stage; 9.4 Approve the Event Sponsorship Agreement for actual City-support costs in the amount up to $11,900 for The Great Tractor Race. R:\Minutes\072203 3 10 First Amendment to the Pool Maintenance Services Aqreement RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the first amendment with H20 Pool and spa Services which will exercise the City's option for a one-year extension of the agreement; the agreement will be extended through June 30, 2004; 10.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $26,700.00 to provide maintenance services for the two pools at the Community Recreation Center and the one pool at Temecula Elementary School; 10.3 Approve a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,670.00. 11 Quitclaim of Sewer Pipeline Easement RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE QUITCLAIM OF A SIXTY FOOT (60') WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT FOR SEWER PIPELINE PURPOSES TO RAINBOW CANYON DEVELOPMENT, LLC (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH AND PECHANGA PARKWAY) 11.2 Authorize the City Clerk to forward the executed quitclaim deed to First American Title Company for recordation. t2 Approval of the Pre-Qualified Contractors for the Old Town Community Theater Project - Project No. PW02-23 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the following list of construction firms, as Pre-Qualified Contractors eligible to submit bids for the Old Town Community Theater Project: 2H Construction, Inc, Long Beach, CA Dennis J. Amoroso Construction Company, Inc., Irvine, CA Edge Development, Inc., Temecula, CA ProWest PCM, Inc., Temecula, CA SOPAC, Inc. dba Soltek Pacific, San Diego, CA Swinerton Builders, San Diego, CA Taylor Frager, Inc., Temecula, CA R:\Minutes\072203 4 Tovey/Shultz Construction Company, Lake Elsinore, CA W.D. Gott Construction Company, Upland, CA 13. Completion and Acceptance for the Mercantile Buildinq Seismic Retrofit Proiect - Proiect No. PW-01-20 14 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Accept the Mercantile Seismic Retrofit Project - Project No. PW01-20 - as complete; 13.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 13.3 Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. Pulled for separate action; see Page 6. French Valley Parkway/I-15 Overcrossinq and Interchan,qe - Project No. PW02-11 - Acquisition Aqreement between the City of Temecula and Joseph C. Harold Trust and Charles R. Hebard Trust RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute in substantially the form submitted, the PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND JOSEPH C HEROLD AND CHARLES R. HEBARD, for the acquisition of certain real property in the amount of $1,286,768.00 plus the associated escrow fees; 14.2 Direct the City Clerk to record the document; 14.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT DEEDS OR GRANTS CONVEYING ANY INTEREST IN, OR EASEMENT UPON, REAL ESTATE AS PERMITTED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27281 15 Arts Council of Temecula Valley Special Events Community Grant Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Approve a Special Events Community Grant Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Arts Council of Temecula Valley in the amount of $41,500; R:\Minutes\072203 5 15.2 Appropriate $7,500 from General Fund Reserves to provide for the Riverside Philharmonic Orchestra's performance at the Spring Concert. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-12, and 14 and 15. (Item No. 13 was pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate action.) The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero, and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 13. Completion and Acceptance for the Mercantile Buildinq Seismic Retrofit Proiect - Project No. PW-01-20 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Accept the Mercantile Seismic Retrofit Project - Project No. PW01-20 - as complete; 13.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 13.3 Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. Prefacing his comments with his background as a Structural Engineer, Councilman Pratt recommended after meeting with Building Director Tony EImo and the Structural Engineer, that the City put a thin membrane of gunite on the walls, to secure safety of citizens. City Manager Nelson thanked Councilman Pratt for his comments, stating there is merit to this recommendation, and when tenant improvements of the Mercantile Building are outlined, this recommendation will be brought back to the City Council for action. MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to approve Item No. 13. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Naggar, and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Mayor Stone paid tribute to Les Adams, one of the original supporters of Temecula Cityhood, who died Saturday, July 5th, 2003. He recommended that one of the Community Services Scholarships, presented to Temecula highschool seniors, be named "The City of Temecula Les Adams Scholarship." PUBLIC HEARING 16 Weed Abatement Lien Resolution for FY 2001-2002 and the FY 2002~2003 RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ORDERING CONFIRMATION OF THE SPECIAL R:\Minutes\072203 6 ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR COSTS OF ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 200'1-2002 16.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ORDERING CONFIRMATION OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR COSTS OF ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 Director of Planning Ubnoske presented the staff report (of record). Mayor Pro Tem Naggar requested that repeat offenders be subject to some type of civil penalty, and that this point be investigated during discussions of a Civil Penalty Ordinance. Reporting that this can be researched, he did state that full City costs are currently recovered during the weed abatement process. Councilman Roberts requested that the property located south of Rancho California Road and east of Ynez be mowed as soon as possible, as a safety precaution. Mayor Stone opened the public hearing at 7:43 P.M. Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Stone closed the public hearing at 7:43 P.M. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 17. Planninq Application No. 02-0257 (Conditional Use Permit & Development Plan) - Grace Presbyterian Church RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0257, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A CHURCH FACILITY IN TWO PHASES TO INCLUDE A FELLOWSHIP HALL WITH ADMINISTRATION AND CLASSROOM AREAS, A TEMPORARY MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDING, A 45 SEAT CHURCH SANCTUARY WITH YOUTH ROOM, AND ADDITIONAL CLASSROOMS TOTALING 23,770 SQUARE FEET AT BUILDING-OUT AND TO OVERRIDE THE AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION R:\Minutes\072203 7 DECISION THAT DETERMINED THE PROPOSED USE TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN ON THE 4.98 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CALLE MEDUSA AND NICOLAS ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 957-140-010 Planning Director Ubnoske presented the staff report (of record). Mayor Pro Tem Naggar asked why the Airport Land Use Commission determined this project inconsistent with the French Valley Airport Land Use Plan. Planning Director Ubnoske answered that the letter did not specify their concerns, however the letter listed conditions to be adopted if the City Council chose to override their determination. She further clarified that clearly, this project is on the outskirts of any influence area. Mayor Stone stated that this project could potentially fall within the flight pattern, as stated his concern regarding this issue. City Attorney Thorson clarified the issue, explaining the French Valley Land Use Plan only discouraged the use and did not prohibit the use, nor determine that the use would be incompatible with the airport. He explained conditions provided by the Airport Land Use Commission would effectively mitigate any concerns present. Councilman Pratt explained he is the representative for the City on the Airport Land Use Commission, and stated he is in favor of this project. Mayor Stone opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M. Reverend Jerry Hanger, 27895 Diaz Road, spoke in favor of the project and asked for the City Council's support. He introduced Russell Rumansoff, as the project architect, to answer any questions the City may have. Mr. Russell Rumansoff, 27349 Jefferson Avenue, commented he worked with the Land Use Commission who requested this project be moved 200 feet to the South, however due to sight constraints, this was impossible. He stated he is in favor with all the conditions of approval the Land Use Commission requested. Mayor Stone closed the public hearing at 7:56 P.M. Mayor Stone voiced his opposition to the project, due to the following: safety concerns; and the possibility that projects such as this will impede future development and expansion to the French Valley Airport, which provides economic development to this region. MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval, with the exception of Mayor Stone in opposition. R:\Minutes\072203 8 COUNCIL BUSINESS 17 Old Town Local Review Board Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Appoint three applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Old Town Local Review Board. City Clerk Jones presented the staff report (of record). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Naggar moved to appoint Douglas Haserot and re-appoint Albert Blair and William Harker to serve full three-year terms through May 15, 2006. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Nothing to report. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With regard to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson reported that with respect to Item No. 1, the Council did set just compensation for those properties at the intersection of Jefferson and Winchester Road, and authorized staff to submit offers to acquire that right-of-way. With regard to the remainder of Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson said there was nothing to report. ADJOURNMENT 8:06 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to a regular meeting on Tuesday, July 22, 2003, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\072203 9 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 03- 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 $1,781.839.45. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of August, 2003. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos 2003/Resos 03- 1 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. 03- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of August, 2003 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2003/Resos 03- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 08/08/03 TOTAL CHECK RUN; 08/14/03 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 08/14/03 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 08/26/02 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 192 193 194 210 261 28O 300 310 32O 33O 340 GENERAL FUND RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - ClP INSURANCE FUND VEHICLES INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES 001 165 190 192 193 194 280 300 320 33O 340 GENERAL FUND RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - ClP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: PREPARED BY RETA WESTON, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST GENIE ROBERTS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE SH-AWN NELSON, CITY MANAGER $ 229,798.71 1,193,913.48 358,127.26 389,582.94 16,652.28 242,954.12 40,282.79 28,847.09 696.42 589,600.22 6,013.50 32,926.85 9,189.00 37,286.82 7,205.28 1,423,712.19 227,056.50 5,083.06 90,024.64 82.87 4,912.99 685.30 2,464.25 1,020.16 3,289.54 5,476.02 358,127.26 $ 1,781,839.45 , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 08/0712003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA 95 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 229,798.71" Detail 08/07/2003 001 95,233.53 165 5,726.14 190 89,469.05 192 862.64 193 80.74 194 47.80 210 4.68 261 2,500.00 280 14,113.91 310 9,189.00 320 1,526.77 330 5,343.38 340 5,701.07 229,798.71 Paget apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 08/07/2003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85794 08/07/2003 005775 56 BRICK ROAD 85795 08/07/2003 85796 08/07/2003 85797 08/07/2003 85798 08/07/2003 85799 08/07/2003 85800 08/07/2003 85801 08/07/2003 85802 08/07/2003 85803 08/07/2003 85804 08/07/2003 85805 08/07/2003 85806 08/07/2003 85807 08/07/2003 006599 ADAMS, DORIS 001916 ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATES 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES 004431 AMERICAN PAYROLL INSTITU 003865 ANDYS GLASS 004482 ANSWER, THE 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY 006551 BARBIES HOT DOGS 006494 BORDER RADIO 85808 08/07/2003 006614 CALIFORNIA CITY 85809 08/07/2003 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 85810 08/07/2003 004971 CANON FINANClALSERVICES, Description Refund: Security Deposit Refund: Security Deposit 03/30-6/28/03 Adm Cfd 88-12 svcs 3/30-6/28/03 Adm Sales Tax Reim 88- Day camp excursion bus:Sea Wodd Day camp excursion bus: Wild Animal Day camp excursion bus: Movie Exper Membership:Monica Jorgenson 1037 Res Imp Prgm: Menchaca, F & E Entertainment: Park series 7/17/03 Temp help PPE 7/19 Delarm Temp help PPE 7/19 Bird Bottled wtr servs @ CRC Bottled wtr servs @ Museum Promotional items:movies/concert sar Summer day camp excursion lunch Entertainment: Hot Summer Nights 004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT June blood alcohol analysis 005384 CALIFORNIA BAGEL BAKERY & Refreshments:Council closed session CCMF memebership: Nelson, Shawn Helium tanks refilhTCSD Aug lease prat for City Copiers Jul lease prat for City Copiers Amount Paid Check Total 145.00 145.00 100.00 100.00 1,500.00 1,000.00 2,500.00 1,699.24 1,699.24 325.82 3,724.30 165.00 165.00 4,225.00 4,225.00 900.00 900.00 624.00 143.00 767.00 140.87 33.92 174.79 1,073.73 1,073.73 300.00 300.00 600.00 600.00 3,500.00 3,500.00 182.10 182.10 300.00 300.00 27.50 27.50 6,727.20 6,727.20 13,454.40 Page:l apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 08/0712003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA Rank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85811 08/07/2003 85812 08/07/2003 85813 08/07/2003 85814 08/07/2003 85815 08/07/2003 85816 08/07/2003 85817 08/07/2003 85818 08/07/2003 85819 08/07/2003 006597 CARLETON, LORRI 001326 CHULA VISTA, CITY OF 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 006603 D&D COMMERCIAL CONST. IN 001393 DATATICKET INC 006598 DELATORRE, JANET 005965 DIVERSIFIED PROTECTION 003610 DOMENOE, JIM 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI 85820 08/07/2003 85821 08/07/2003 85822 08/07/2003 85823 08/07/2003 006609 DPR CONSTRUCTION INC. 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATI 002981 DYNA MED 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 85824 08/07/2003 005052 EMCOR SERVICE (Continued) Description Refund: Sci Adv Camp-Wings Flying Employment Relations Consortium F security/fire alarm monitoring:West Wi Refund:eT inspection depst-26755 Yn June citations processing svcs Refund:Park-Picnic Area Data Ctr equip preventative maint Reimb: Portable Projection Screen Fuel for city vehicles: PW 61353 Fuel for city vehicles: TCSD 61343 Fuel for city vehicles: PW 61345 Fuel for city vehicles: B&S 61348 Fuel for city vehicles: PW 61351 Fuel for city vehicles: 61349 Fuel for city vehicles: PW 61953 Refund:eT inspection depst-26531 Yn Supplies for graffiti removal:PW Work Misc first aid supplies for aquatics Temp help PPE 7/25 Heer Temp help PPE 7/25 Rush Temp help PPE 7/25 Kanigowski Temp help PPE 7/25 Novotny Temp help PPE 7/25 Jones Temp help PPE 7/25 Cammareta Temp help PPE 7/25 Seng Temp help PPE 7/25 Bregg HVAC Repair:Wedding chapel Amount Paid Check Total 254.00 254.00 1,525.00 1,525.00 1,659.00 1,659.00 100.00 100.00 310.09 310.09 25.00 25.00 3,292.50 3,292.50 484.86 484.86 948.13 584.21 578.06 315.51 177.22 82.25 40.70 2,726.08. 218.64 218.64 324.59 324.59 1,127.27 1,127.27 2,683.92 1,908.00 1,392.77 1,357.13 1,308.47 1,138.41 1,044.41 855.36 11,688.47 495.00 495.00 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 08/07/2003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85825 08/07/2003 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 85826 08/07/2003 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED 85827 08/07/2003 006438 G M S ELEVATOR SERVICES 85828 08/07/2003 006474 GARRETT, STEPHEN (Continued) Description xx-1143 Parker Daycamp-Mtg xx-1405 Ubnoske ICSC books New ee physicals and drag testing West Wing elevator repair Refund:Company Picnic 85829 08/07/2003 000173 GENERAL BINDING CORPORAT Binding & lamination supplies:Central 85830 08/07/2003 001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I Alarm Srvcs: Police Storefrent Old Tw 85831 08/07/2003 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 85832 08/07/2003 006450 HEMETVALLEYTOOL&SUPP Hardware supplies: Parks Hardware supplies: CRC Hardware supplies: PW St Maint Hardware supplies: PW inspectors Hardware supplies: SMART prgm Hardware supplies: Sr. Center Museum exhibit supplies Hardware supplies: PW maint Hardware supplies: B&S Museum exhibit supplies Hardware supplies: SMART prgm Shelving for Art Cart Vehicle 85833 08/07/2003 003938 lAN DAVIDSON LANDSCAPE - I Design svcs:First & Front in Old Town 85834 08/07/2003 004213 LACKS BEACH SERVICE 6 Wood pole umbrella for CRC pool 85835 08/07/2003 006606 LENNAR HOMES-iNLAND DIVI Refund:OTinspection depst-Tr 29286 85836 08/07/2003 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC Paramedic squad supplies: Fire 85837 08/07/2003 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS Signs & Hardware for PW Maint Div. 85838 08/07/2003 004141 MAINTEX INC CRC custodial supplies Museum custodial supplies Sr Ctr custodial supplies Amount Paid 3,287.94 76.95 355.00 195.00 104.17 87.00 466.12 107.14 95.15 90.80 83.48 15.79 14.62 8.81 8.61 7.95 5.63 1,526.77 170.46 760,00 720.00 20.48 1,004.23 247.31 118.21 84.36 Check Total 3,364.89 355.00 300.00 195.00 104.17 87.00 904.10 1,526.77 170.46 760.00 720.00 20.48 1,004.23 449.88 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 08/07/2003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date 85839 08/07/2003 85840 08/07/2003 85841 08/07/2003 85842 08/0712003 85843 08207/2003 85844 08/0712003 85845 08/07/2003 85846 08/07/2003 85847 08/07/2003 85848 08/07/2003 85849 08/07/2003 85850 08/07/2003 85851 08/07/2003 85852 08/07/2003 85853 08/07/2003 85854 08/07/2003 85793 07/31/2003 85855 08/07/2003 (Continued) Vendor Description 601967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER temp help w/e 7/27 Dankworth 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC 006600 MC NEELY, SUZANNE 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS B&S dept letterhead/Bus. Cards for 004534 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES JulJAug EOC satellite stn phone svcs 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- A'I-rN: WomenofMeritluncheon:J.O'Grady Amount Paid CIP/AOB Covem printed Graphic dsgn:CIP/AOB covers Combs for CIP/AOB project Refund:Level 2/Toddler Swim Lessons 371.25 1,074.27 734.86 413.76 290.98 141.66 45.00 004191 NORTH COUNTY TIMES-PMT P 002292 OASIS VENDING 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 006608 PACIFIC GULF PROPERTIES I 001880 PELI GUARD PRODCUTS 006604 PETRAKOVITZ, ANTON 000249 P~- ~ I ¥' CASH 000252 POLYCRAFT INC 006613 PROJECT MANAGEMENT INST 000981 RHFINC 002072 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST renew subscription:City Mgr City Hall coffee/kitchen supplies West Wing coffee/kitchen supplies City vehicle repair/maint svcs Refund:OT inspection depst:27360 Ni lifeguard swimsuits Refund:OT inspection depst: Macy's Petty cash reimbursement Qty 6- 14" City Seal Decals:PW renew membership: Amer Attar P.D. radar equipment repair/maint svc install water meter @ TES pool 003742 REHAB FINANCIAL CORPORATI Loan servicing for Res Imprv Prgm 100.80 421.92 77.58 84.17 720.00 1,485.40 180.00 514.09 217.87 119.00 112.00 9,189.00 600.00 Check Total 371.25 2,222.89 85.00 290.98 141.66 45.00 100.80 499.50 84.17 720.00 1,485.40 180.00 514.09 217.87 119.00 112.00 9,189.00 600.00 PageA apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 08/0712003 1:16:29PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85856 85857 85858 85859 (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total 08/07/2003 08/07/2003 08/07/2003 08/07/2003 85860 08/07/2003 85861 08/07/2003 85862 08/07/2003 85863 08/07/2003 85864 08/07/2003 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE Citywide R-O-W Weed Spraying/Abat 006607 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES Refund:OTinspectiondepst:tr28850 000266 RIGHTWAY 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & 000271 ROBERT BEIN WM FROST & A 003027 ROOFTEK equipment rental - Pasec ParkJSMAR Ntc/Determination filing fee:Redhawk Jun consulting svcs:l-15/79S/Santiago Res Imp Prgm: Brown, Edward & Kon 006605 RYLAND HOMES OF CALIFORN Refd:OT inspection depst:Ryland ck05 000277 S & S ARTS & CRAFTS INC arts/craft supplies for SMART Prgm arts/craft supplies for Summer Day 005120 SAN DIEGO NATURAL HISTOR SMART Excursion:7/16/03 15,000.00 15,000.00 720.00 720.00 92.66 92.66 64.00 64.00 943.00 943.00 330.00 330.00 1,558.39 1,558.39 540.34 31.80 572.14 212.00 212.00 85865 08/07/2003 85866 08/07/2003 85867 08/07/2003 85868 08/07/2003 85869 08/07/2003 85870 08/07/2003 006615 SCAN NATOA INC FY 03/04 membership dues:P.Ruse 000645 SMART & FINAL INC supplies for Sister Cities Prgm Junior Lifeguard Supplies 000722 $OCALFASSNCODEENF.OFF BldgCodeClasses:8/22-23:J.Voshall BIdg Code Classes:8/22-23:T.Cole Field Activities Class:8/23:M.Ching 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Jul 2-02-502-8077 West Wing Jul 2-10-331-2153 TCC Jul 2-19-683-3255 Front St. Ped Jul 2-19-683-3263 Front St. Ped Jul 2-22-575-0876 Old Town Front St. Jul 2-20-798-3248 Children's Museum Jul 2-18-528-9980 Santiago Rd Aug 2-23-693-2810 Pala Rd Aug 2-24-077-3069 Pala Rd Aug 2-23-051-9399 Margarita Ped 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPAL ATHLETI 7/03-11/03 Softball Registration 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST Var. City Facilities pest control svcs 75.00 75.00 58.46 46.78 103.24 120.00 120.00 60.00 300.00 2,309.96 1,654.55 738.48 579.47 326.89 131.24 55.90 45.85 32.79 15.55 5,890.68 876.00 876.00 195,00 195,00 Page5 apChkLst 08/07/2003 1:16:29PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85871 08/07/2003 000293 STADIUM PIZZA Final Check List 85872 08/07/2003 85873 08/07/2003 85874 08/07/2003 000305 TARGET STORE 85875 08/07/2003 006596 TEMECULA CITY BALLET CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Description 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FUN July workers' comp premium 006611 STENGER, JEANNE Ref und:SMART-Balboa Park recreation supplies for Summer Day Refund:Sec. Deposit:7/28/03/CRC 85876 08/07/2003 003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL P.D. motomycle repair/maint svcs 85877 08/07/2003 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN Awards - SMART Program 85878 08/07/2003 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CRC locksmith services Park site locksmith svcs 000919 TEMECULAVALLEY UNIFIED S 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE I 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 001890 VORTEX DOORS 000339 WEST PUBLISHING CORP 002109 WHITE CAP INDUSTRIES INC 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES INC 006602 WM CHRISTIAN CO. 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLIN Amount Paid Refreshments for SMART Prgm 109.18 52,899.77 42.00 50.18 100.00 555.30 193.50 65.39 60.00 City's share/operetional costs:C.H.S. 49,952.21 6 volt batteries;PW Maint. Div. 310.32 Jul xx;<-1408 P.D. Front St. Stn. 361.09 Bay Door repairs @ Fire Stn 84 268.00 City Hall Judicial Updates 169.17 misc. maint, supplies:PW Maint. Div. 21.89 Jun engineer svcs:Traffic Review Stud 12,510.40 Refd:OT inspect depst:40900 Winches 1,000.00 Xerox fax supplies and NCR paper 888.29 Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: Page: 6 85879 08/07/2003 85880 08/07/2003 85881 08/07/2003 85882 08/07/2003 85883 08/07/2003 85884 08/07/2003 85885 08/07/2003 85886 08/07/2003 85887 08/07/2003 Check Total 109.18 52,899.77 42.00 50.18 100.00 555.30 193.50 125.39 49,952.21 310.32 361.09 268.00 169.17 21.89 12,510.40 1,000.00 888.29 229,798.71 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA 149 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 1,193.913.48 Detail 08/14/2003 001 294,349.41 165 10,926.14 190 153,485.07 192 39,420.15 193 28,766.35 194 648.62 210 589,595.54 261 3,513.50 280 18,812.94 300 11,323.42 320 35,760.05 330 1,861.90 340 5,450.39 1,193,913.48 ag11 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date 163 08/14/2003 164 08/14/2003 165 08/14/2003 166 08/14/2003 167 08/14/2003 168 08/14/2003 169 08/14/2003 85888 08/11/2003 85889 08/14/2003 85890 08/14/2003 85891 08/14/2003 85892 08/14/2003 85893 08/14/2003 85894 08/14/2003 85895 08/14/2003 Vendor Description 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIU Blue Shield HMO Payment 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE Child Care Reimbursement Payment 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SO Nationwide Retirement Payment 000246 PERS(EMPLOYEES'RETIREME PERS ER Paid Member Contr. Payme 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA), 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 003552 AFLAC 002038 ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPLY 005058 ADAMS, AARON 006635 AGUILERA, MAUREEN 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES 001375 AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION 006463 AMERICAN LANDSCAPE Federal Income Taxes Payment State Disability Ins Payment OBRA - Project Retirement Payment Install gas meter:41951 Morega Rd AFLAC Cancer Payment Pool sanitizing chemicals Reimb: MMA$C conf:7/30:Long Beac Refund: Level 4 Swim Lessons SMART excursion bus:Wild Animal P SMART excursion bus:L.B.Aquarium Day camp excursion bus: Museum Membership: Patrick Ryan Jul Sports Prk Ldscp Mntc svcs Jul North Slopes Ldscp Mntc svcs Amount Paid 48,041.34 8,265.28 18,358.09 58,194.33 64,976.68 16,172.31 5,198.54 2,156.14 1,470.70 8.40 217.36 25.00 566.42 446.12 361.91 125.00 25,645.82 15,533.00 Check Total 48,041.34 8,265.28 18,358.09 58,194.33 64,976.68 16,172.31 5,198.54 2,156.14 1,470.70 8.40 217.36 25.00 1,374.45 125.00 41,178.82 Page:l apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85896 08/14/2003 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 85897 08/14/2003 85898 08/14/2003 85899 08/14/2003 85900 08/14/2003 85901 08/14/2003 85902 08/14/2003 85903 08/14/2003 85904 08/14/2003 85905 08/14/2003 85906 08/14/2003 85907 08/14/2003 85908 08/14/2003 85909 08/14/2003 85910 08/14/2003 85911 08/14/2003 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC (Continued) Description Amount Paid 006619 ARZ_AGA, NORMA Temp help PPE 7/26 Delarm Temp help PPE 8/2 Wills Temp help PPE 7/19 Lee Temp help PPE 7/26 Wills Temp help PPE 7/26 Lee Temp help PPE 8/2 Delarm Temp help PPE 8/2 Lee Bottled wtr servs @ City Hall Bottled wtr servs @ West Wing Refund: 2 Ex:Circus 004546 AUNT KIZZYZ BOYZ Entertainment: Hot Summer Nights 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA Membership: Shawn Nelson 2579988 Membership: Marlo Munoz 25868902 006628 BARNETT, NANCY Refund: Skyhawks Seccer Camp 003221 BEAL, KELLI Reimb:Accela Conf:7/29-30:LasVegas 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV Repair gate at Low Flow Crossing 006122 BERGER, DAWN 005312 BITCH'N STITCH'N 006624 BROWN, TAMMY 002208 BUSINESS PRESS, THE 002099 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES 006046 C S A I A SPRING TRAINING 003138 CAL MAT TCSD instructor earnings Safe Driver Award Jackets Refund: Exercise- Yoga Mind/Body 1 yr newspaper subscription Aug restroom lease: Old Town Investigators Conf:10/7-10:Gray patch truck materials:PW Maint. 004248 CALIFDEPTOFJUSTICE/ACCT Fingerprints info for police dept 624.00 572.00 549.25 546.98 520.00 499.20 312.00 796.52 586.18 35.00 600.00 71.00 44.00 105.00 170.14 2,315.00 72.00 1,406.14 40.00 59.00 826.00 380.00 1,315.17 96.00 Check Total 3,623.43 1,382.70 35.00 600.00 115.00 105.00 170.14 2,315.00 72.00 1,406.14 40.00 59.00 826.00 380.00 1,315.17 96.00 Page2 apChkLst 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date 85912 08/14/2003 85913 08/14/2003 85914 08/14/2003 85915 08/14/2003 85916 08/14/2003 85917 08/14/2003 85918 08/14/2003 85919 08/14/2003 85920 08/14/2003 85921 08/14/2003 85922 08/14/2003 85923 08/14/2003 85924 08/14/2003 85925 08/14/2003 85926 08/14/2003 85927 08/14/2003 85928 08/14/2003 85929 08/14/2003 Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Vendor Description 001183 CALIFREGIONALWATERQUAL Sect401 Cert:OIdTownTheaterprjt 006075 CAMPBELL, KENTON SCO3-r TCSD instructor eamings 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE CO Mandatory Life lnsurance Payment Amount Paid 1,750.00 585.20 2,362.50 659.45 100.00 100.05 002415 CASTLE AMUSEMENT PARK 006622 CHEMICON INTERNATIONAL, I 005585 CHING, MARIA SMART excursion Castle Park Refund: Security Deposit Reimb:SCACEO Certif:6/27-28:Buena 005708 CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTI Broadcasting Hot Summer Nights 006634 CLEMONS, PATRICIA Refund: Level 3 Swim Lessons Refund: Level I Swim Lessons 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI Community Health Charities Payment 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS & Entertainment: Hot Summer Nights 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS Card Readers: City hall 006303 CONDUIT NETWORKS, INC Active Directory conversion Consultant 006481 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO, Storage supplies: Ad[ Cart-SMART prg 719.00 25.00 25.00 173.50 675.00 431.23 19,500.00 407.02 159,071.40 3,000.00 1,722,25 330.33 107.38 001009 DBXINC 002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATES 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATI Jun prgss:lntersection Monitoring Sys August federal lobbyist svcs July special events premiums Fuel for city vehicles: Planning/Police Graffiti removal supplies for PW Page: 3 Check Total 1,750.00 585.20 2,362.50 659.45 100.00 100.05 719.00 50.00 173.50 675.00 431.23 19,500.00 407.02 159,071.40 3,000.00 1,722.25 330.33 107.38 Page3 apChkLet 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date 85930 08/14/2003 85931 08/14/2003 85932 08/14/2003 85933 08/14/2003 85934 08/14/2003 85935 08/14/2003 85936 08/14/2003 85937 08/14/2003 85938 08/14/2003 85939 08/14/2003 85940 08/14/2003 85941 08/14/2003 85942 08/14/2003 85943 08/14/2003 85944 08/14/2003 85945 08/14/2003 Vendor 002981 DYNA MED 003223 EDAW INC 005052 EMCOR SERVICE 003665 EMERITUS COMMUNICATIONS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 001135 FIRSTCARE INDUSTRIALMED Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Description Misc aquatics supplies Misc aquatics supplies Biological svc: Lg Cyn Detention Basin HVAC Repair: Children Museum July long distance phone Express mail services Lot Book Rept: Schmidt )o(-9277 R.Roberts:Conf expense xx-7824 Comemhero: Conf expenses xx-9798 Stone: Conf expenses xx-6165 Yates:SWair/Mtg/Conf )o(-0432 EImo: SW air xx-0515 Thomhill: Code Bcoks/Conf Diagnosis of employee injury Diagnosis of employee injury Employee random drug testing 004239 FISHER MERRIMAN SEHGAL Amhitectual design: Old Town Theater 000795 FREDPRYORSEMINARS/CARE Manage&OrganizeNP:9/11:JY&RW 006620 FREEMAN, LARA 003946 G T ENTERTAINMENT 006630 GARCIE, CATHIE 006629 GIBBS, JUNE 005947 GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT 004607 GRACE BUILDING Refund: Intro: Flower Design Special Event Announcer:July 4th Refund: Dance-Youth Hawaiian Beg Refund 2 Sr. Excursion enrollments Express Mail Service: Fire Prevention Custodial svcs for park restrooms Page: 4 Amount Paid Check Total 214.96 71.10 286.06 1,162.00 1,162.00 1,148.00 1,148.00 177.69 177.69 54.56 54.56 150.00 150.00 2,533.18 1,434.96 1,213.43 1,140.20 408.00 202.42 6,932.19 383.28 115.45 35.00 533.73 347.78 347.78 390.00 390.00 75.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 16.86 16.86 80.00 80.00 49.22 49.22 4,315.00 4,315.00 Page~ apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85946 08/14/2003 85947 08/14/2003 85948 08/14/2003 85949 08/14/2003 85950 08/14/2003 85951 08/14/2003 85952 08/14/2003 85953 08/14/2003 85954 08/14/2003 003640 GRAYNER ENGINEERING 002104 GRILL ROOM, THE 000520 H D L COREN & CONE INC 005311 H20 CERTIFIED POOL WATER 006636 HAMMONS, BOB 000116 HEALTH NET DENTAL AND VI 002107 HIGHMARK INC 005748 HODSON, CHERYL A. 003624 HOWELL, ANN MARIE (Continued) Description Amount Paid Jun-Jul design Svcs:Children's Museu Deposit:Comm. Recognition Dinner Jul-Sept Property Tax Consulting Srvc July CRC pool cleaning svcs July TES pool cleaning svcs Refund: Swim lessons Level 6/7 Health Net DentalNision Plan Paymen Voluntary Supp Life Insurance Support Payment Graphic Design for Weaver Publicati 143.75 255.00 2,400.00 1,700.00 346.96 25.00 1,021.99 833.90 68.10 75.43 85955 08/14/2003 85956 08/14/2003 85957 08/14/2003 85958 08/14/2003 85959 08/14/2003 85960 08/14/2003 85961 08/14/2003 85962 08/14/2003 85963 08/14/2003 000194 ICMARETIREMENTTRUST45 ICMA Retirement Payment 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals 004862 INTL PAVEMENT SOLUTIONS I 001186 IRWIN, JOHN 006621 JONES, ANNETTE 003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO 000820 K R W & ASSOCIATES 006626 KELSEY, TINA 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOClAT July prgss: R.C. Sports Park ADA TCSD instructor earnings Refund:Smart Excursions Broadcasting Hot Summer Nights July consultant svcs: Ptan Check Refund: Back to the beach Review analysis rept:Jefferson Proper Consulting svs:Affordable Housing prjt 8,388.18 222.50 24,640.02 632.00 15.00 1,374.00 5,490.00 6.00 3,344.98 1,662.50 Check Total 143.75 255.00 2,400.00 2,046.96 25.00 1,021.99 633.90 68.10 75.43 8,388.18 222.50 24,640.02 632.00 15.00 1,374.00 5,490.00 6.00 5,007.48 Page5 apChkLst Page: 6 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM Check# Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Date Vendor 85964 08/14/2003 85965 08/14/2003 85966 08/14/2003 85967 08/14/2003 004597 LIFECOM INC 006623 LITTLETON, ERIN 004087 LOWE'S 006182 M C M CONSTRUCTION, INC. 85968 08/14/2003 004141 MAINTEX INC 004068 MANALILI, AILEEN 001256 MARRIO1T HOTEL 006627 MATLEY, LORI 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC 85969 · 08/14/2003 85970 08/14/2003 85971 08/14/2003 85972 08/14/2003 85973 08/14/2003 85974 08/14/2003 85975 08/14/2003 85976 08/14/2003 85977 08/14/2003 85978 08/14/2003 85979 08/14/2003 85980 08/14/2003 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE 001905 MEYERS, DAVIDWILLIAM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Description Calibrate gas detector: TCSD Refund: Toddler Swim Lessons Misc hardware supplies:Fire Preventio Prgs pmt#2:R.C.Bridge Widening CRC custodial supplies Senior Center custodial supplies CRC custodial supplies TCC custodial supplies TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Earnings HtI:C.S.A.I.A.Conf:10/7-10/03:D.G ray Refund:Sci Adv Camp-Mystery/'rreas blank paper stock for 03/04 CAFR A.O.B. tab dividers C.I.P. tab dividers Jul Hot Summer Nights Campaign Aug Hot Summer Nights Campaign MetlLife Payment TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS Business Cards:G.Flores 006633 MODARRES, ADIE Refund:Level 3 Swim Lessons 006077 NTHGENERATIONCOMPUTIN On site supporYreplacing SQL server 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATTN: Thank you ad:every 15 rain pgrm Jul public notice ads:Planning 004191 NORTHCOUNTYTIMES-PMTP renewsubscription:Planning Amount Paid 1,115.45 22.00 152.68 397,767.60 297.68 156.10 94.02 92.90 364.00 42.00 437.60 144.00 693.91 633.57 471.95 3,000.00 2,500.00 7,466.32 1,440.00 944.00 42.83 25.00 1,350.00 927.15 833.58 100.80 Check Total 1,115.45 22.00 152.68 397,767.60 640.70 406.00 437.60 144.00 1,799.43 5,500.00 7,466.32 2,384.00 42.83 25.00 1,350.00 1,760.73 100.80 Page~ apChkLst 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 85981 08/14/2003 006592 O'DONNELL SCHOOLOF MUSI 85982 08/14/2003 85983 08/14/2003 Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Description TCSD Instructor Earnings 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office Supplies for Planning office supplies for P.D.Storefront Stn 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City vehicle repair/maint svcs City vehicle repair/maint svcs City vehicle repaidmaint svcs City vehicle repair/maint svcs City vehicle repair/maint svcs City vehicle repair/maint svcs City vehicle repaidmaint svcs 85984 08/14/2003 005991 ORONA, KIMBERLY A. 85985 08/14/2003 006632 PARR~ ~, DEANNA 85986 08/14/2003 006638 PEREZ, PABLO Refund:SMART-SD Wild Animal Park Refund:SMART-SD Wild Animal Park Refund:Eng Dpst:44084 Mountain Vie 85987 08/14/2003 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG PERS Long Term Care Payment 85988 08/14/2003 000249 P~ ~ ~ Y CASH 85989 08/14/2003 002185 POSTMASTER-TEMECULA 85990 08/14/2003 005820 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES I 85991 08/14/2003 006631 PROVENCE, LINDA Petty cash reimbursement bulk mailing:qtdy newsletter Prepaid Legal Services Payment Refund:CPR Training 85992 08/14/2003 005075 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPL Jul City fac's fir matJtowel rentals 85993 08/14/2003 002841 RAiN FOR RENT Temp sprinklers:July 4th fireworks 85994 08/14/2003 000262 RANCHO CALIFWATER DIST 85995 08/14/2003 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & Various water meters Various water meters Various water meters Various water meters Jun 2003 legal services Amount Paid 560.00 533.88 378.16 481.81 357.33 295.36 184.77 97.34 61.77 47.50 6.00 20.00 995.00 227.08 644.34 3,673.32 111.65 25.00 773.55 3,302.67 30,200.51 872.13 499.36 90.56 83,695.41 Page: 7 Check Total 560.00 912.04 1,525.88 6.00 20.00 995.00 227.08 844.34 3,673.32 111.65 25.00 773.55 3,302.67 31,862.56 83,695.41 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date 85996 08/14/2003 85997 08/14/2003 85998 08/14/2003 85999 08/14/2003 86000 08/14/2003 86001 08/14/2003 86002 08/14/2003 86003 08/14/2003 86004 08/14/2003 86005 08/14/2003 86006 08/14/2003 86007 08/14/2003 86008 08/14/2003 86009 08/14/2003 86010 08/14/2003 (Continued) Description Vendor 000955 R{VERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW ST Reimb:motomycle rental:Elsinore Off 005227 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF 006537 SANDERS, SHELBY 004609 SHREDFORCE INC 000751 SKILLPATH INC 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 006374 SMITH FLOORS & INSTALLATI 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST 004496 SPARKS EXHIBITS & 004163 SPORTS CHALET 004581 SWING SHIFT 000305 TARGET STORE 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 Support Payment Entertainment:Smr Nights:8/15/03 Jul document shredding svcs City Fac. Document shred srvc:P.D.Fmnt St. St Women's Conf/K.Mclntyre:6/30/03 Women's Conf/K.Simpkins:6/30/03 supplies for Sister Cities Prgm vinyl flooring for CRC Aug 2-01-202-7330 var City street lam Aug 2-01-202-7603 arterial st. ~ights Aug 2-02-351-5281 CRC Aug 2-00-987-0775 V.R. st. lights Jul 2-05-791-8807 various mtrs Aug 2-06-105-0654 various mtrs Aug 2-10-331-1353 Fire Stn 84 Aug 2-22-417-8772 Rancho Vista Jul 2-19-538-2262 various mtrs Aug 2-14-204-1615 Front St. Radio Aug 2-23-548-1975 various mtrs Aug 095-167-7907-2 Fire Stn 84 Skate Park pest control svcs Jul-Oct C. Museum exhibits supplies 60 dozen softballs:Smr/Fal[ leagues Enter~ainment:Smr Concert Series:8/ supplies for Summer Day Camp supplies for SMART Prgm Union Dues Payment Amount Paid Check Total 600.00 600.00 132.00 132.00 300.00 300.00 110.00 24.00 134.00 149.00 149.00 298.00 48.09 48.09 628.35 628.35 35,592.38 14,138.34 9,133.32 5,020.03 3,594.37 2,272.38 1,285.28 365.79 166.67 37.01 32.72 71,638.29 98.25 98.25 39.00 39.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 2,211.03 2,211.03 1,500.00 1,500.00 30.31 25.77 56.08 3,545.00 3,545.00 Pages apChkt-st Final Check List Page: 9 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date 86011 08/14/2003 86012 08/14/2003 86013 08/14/2003 86014 08/14/2003 86015 08/14/2003 86016 08/14/2003 86017 08/14/2003 86018 08/14/2003 86019 08/14/2003 86020 08/14/2003 86021 08/14/2003 86022 08/14/2003 86023 08/14/2003 86024 08/14/2003 86025 08/14/2003 (Continued) Vendor Description 005985 TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION G Computer and Printer Supplies:LS. Computer and Printer Supplies 000309 TEMECULA COPIERS 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL 004209 TEMECULA SUNRISE ROTARY canon copier and fax supplies:Copy Ct Sunshine Fund Bus bench placement/maint agrmnt 004274 TEMECULAVALLEY SECURITY City Hall locksmith services TCC locksmith services 003140 TEMECULAVALLEY TAEKWON TCSD Instructor Earnings 003849 TERRYBERRY COMPANY 006618 THOMAS, FRANK 005937 TOMCZAK, MARIA, T. 004895 TUMBLES, J.W. Refund:Sec. Deposit:7/26/03 TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Eamings 003228 USBANKTRUSTNATIONALAS Trustee admin fees CFD 88-12 000321 UBNOSKE, DEBBIE 000325 UNITED WAY 004819 UNUM LIFE iNS. CO. OF AMERI 006625 VANTRECE, LISA EE computer pumhase prgm United Way Charities Payment Long Term Disability Payment Refund:SMART-Knott's Berry Farm Amount Paid 544.90 50.95 262.91 264.79 3,000.00 50.20 45.26 83.20 88.34 90.00 108.00 528.00 316.80 240.00 158.40 149.60 96.00 52.80 3,300.00 1,408.49 308.30 6,415.95 15.00 Check Total 595.85 262.91 264.79 3,000.00 95.46 83.20 88.34 90.00 108.00 1,541.60 3,300.00 1,408.49 308.30 6,415.95 15.00 Page~ apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 08/14/2003 9:12:39AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 86026 08/14/2003 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 86027 08/14/2003 004279 VERIZON CALIFORN1AINC. 86028 08/14/2003 004789 VERIZON INTERNETSOLUTION Amount Paid Check Total Jul x.,c<-5029 general usage 688.24 Jul x~(-5509 general usage 145.67 Jul xxx-1540 Old town parking lot 89.66 Aug xxx-1941 PTA CD ~CI-ACSD 57.24 Jul xx;(-5780 general usage 31.52 Jul xxx-5840 general usage 31.52 Jul xx~-0049 general usage 31.15 Jul xxx-2629 Naggar 30.48 Jul xxx-1289 Pratt 29.37 Jul xxx-2670 911 auto dialer 29.34 Jul xxx-2730 elevator 29.34 Jul access-CRC phone line 350.40 Jul access-RVSD Co. phone line 273.75 Intemet svcs/EOC backup @ stn 84 69.95 1,193.53 624.15 69.95 86029 08/14/2003 006617 WILLOWS INVESTMENT GROU Refund:overpayment/records copies 9.50 9.50 Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 1,193,913.48 Page~O ITEM 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 2003 Purchase of Four (4) City Vehicles APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE'~____ CITY MANAGER Prepared by: Gus Papagolos, Fiscal Services Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1 ) Approve the purchase of the following vehicles from Rancho Ford: Two (2) 2003, Mid-Size Ford Trucks $19,939.59 (each) Two (2) 2003, Full Size ¼ ton Ford Trucks $24,460.69 (each) DISCUSSION: The adoption of the fiscal year 2003/04 Annual Operating Budget approved the funding for the purchase of four (4) vehicles. The four (4) vehicles are additions to the current fleet and will be used bythe Community Services District (1), Public Works, Land Development (2), and Fire (1). On July 23, 2003 the Requests for Proposal (RFPs) were mailed to all of the local dealerships for the purchase of the four (4) 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 Dealer Vehicle/model Rancho Ford Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Price $19,639.59 (Low Bid) Norm Reeves Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $24,158.88 Carriage Motors Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $29,143.52 Fire Department One (1) Mid-Size 4WD Truck Dealer Rancho Ford Vehicle/model Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Price $19,639.59 (Low Bid) Norm Reeves Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $24,158.88 Carriage Motor Company Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up (GMC) Public Works Department Two (2) Full Size 1/2 ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Truck Dealer Vehicle/model Rancho Ford Full-size ½ ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Norm Reeves ChrysledJeep/Dodge Carriage Motor Company (GMC) Full-size ½ ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $29,143.52 Price $24,480.69(LowBid) $29,181.11 $27,968.16 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 Ford 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 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA.~'-~' CITY MANAGER ," J,~/ /~' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services August 26, 2003 Award of Contract for City Council Chamber AudioNisual Systems Upgrade Prepared by: Tim Thorson, Information Systems Manager RECOMMENDATION. That the City Council: Award a contract to Integrated Media Systems to upgrade the Council Chambers AudioNisual Systems in the amount of $128,320.00. Authorize the City Manager to approve a contingency for the purchase and installation in an amount not to exceed $12,832.00; Allocate an additional $31,152.00 to the IS internal services fund capital account to support this upgrade. BACKGROUND: The Council Chamber's AudioNisual upgrade was budgeted this year for $110,000.00. The bidding scheme chosen by staff was the Request for Qualification/Quote (RFQ), which places emphasis on the potential vendor qualifications and design methodology versus the lowest bidder. This approach will enable staffto select the most qualified vendor and will allow room for negotiating items listed in the vendor's proposal to provide functionality and capabilities desired by Council and Staff. This RFQ is an all inclusive, design-build quote to ensure that the assigned vendor will be accountable for both the system design and the final product installed. The vendor quotes ranged from $100K to $325K. Vendor Name Location TV Magic San Clemente, CA Televideo San Diego San Diego, CA Muzak Riverside, CA Audio Associates La Mesa, CA Integrated Media Systems Anaheim, CA Audio Visual Innovations, Inc Cypress, CA CompView Beaverton, OR Hoffman Glendale, CA SPL Integrated Solutions San Francisco, CA The RFQ was mailed to the City of Temecula vendor list, and posted on the City's website. No proposals were submitted by Temecula vendors. The vendor selection was a controlled process that involved 11 vendor site visits. From those visits, nine proposals were received and fourofthose vendors were invited to City Hall for interviews. From these four vendors, staff selected Integrated Media Solutions (IMS). They were chosen based on experience, qualifications and an understanding of project requirements. After the vendor was selected negotiations began, which included input from City Council Member Jeff Comemhero and City Clerk Susan Jones. Additional requirements for touch screen monitors and Dais cabinetry work increased the cost by $31,152.00. DISCUSSION: The goals of this design-build contract can be broken down into five categories: 1. Control and Voting Systems - This includes new fiat screen voting monitors and a simpler more programmable voting system. 2. Video Projection System - This will fix the big screens behind the dais. 3. Sound and Editing Systems - This will increase sound quality and replace sound room equipment that supports archiving and rebroadcast of Council Meetings. 4. Project Engineering, programming, installation, and training. 5. Dais modifications. ne TOHOWlng milestones al: ply [o [nls project: 21 May RFQ specifications sent via email to Council for comments 29 May RFQ mailed to local vendors and loaded to the City Website 6 June - 15 July Chamber on-site visits conducted by vendors 16 July Due Date for RFQ submittals 7 July - 4 Aug Staff reviews of RFQ's August- 12 Aug Vendor Interviews 3 August Final Vendor Selection Made by Committee 26 August Vendor Recommendation made to City Council as a Consent Item 27 August Signed Contract sent to Vendor 15 December Projected Completion Date 'Note: The proposal stipulates that the vendor will work around Council Meetings and; if necessary, )rovide additional equipment to record and perform a live broadcast). FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are appropriated in the 2003-04 Fiscal Year Budget from the Information Systems Internal Services fund. An additional allocation of $31,152.00 is needed to provide the desired functionality. ATTACHMENTS: AudioNisual Upgrade Agreement CITY OF TEMECULA PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION AGREEMENT CITY OF TEMECULA AND INTEGRATED MEDIA SYSTEMS (IMS) This Pumhase and Installation Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of August 26, 2003, between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Integrated Media Systems, ('~/endor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Purchase and Sale of Equipment. On and subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement and the Contract Documents, Vendor agrees to manufacture, sell and deliver to the City a complete City Council Chambers Upgrade as more particularly described in Exhibit A, Description of Equipment, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full (hereafter "Equipment"). 2. Purchase/Installation Price. The Purchase and Installation pdce which City agrees to pay to Vendor for the Equipment and service is One Hundred Twenty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty Dollars and No Cents. ($128,320.00). The Purchase price is final and shall be paid by City to Vendor. 3. Payment. a. Vendor shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement, which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Vendor shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the City Manager and Vendor at the time the City's written authorization is given to Vendor for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional purchases or installation work relating to this project, if required, up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the agreement of the Agreement or $12,832.00. Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved the City Council. b. Vendor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Vendor's fees, it shall give written notice to Vendor within 30 days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 4. Scope of Work. Vendor shall manufacture and install the equipment as described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A ("Work"). Vendor shall provide and furnish all labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shall be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. The Work shall be completed within the time set forth in the Scope of Work. Contractor shall not commence the Work until such time as directed by the City. P:',AGREEMENTS\EQUIPMENTANDINSTALLATON2001 i 5. Representations and Warranties of Vendor. Vendor makes the following representations and warranties to City: a. Authority and Consents. Vendor has the right, power, legal capacity and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. No approvals or consents of any persons are necessary in connection with Vendor's execution, delivery, installation and performance of this Agreement, except for such as have been obtained on or prior to the date hereof. The execution, delivery, installation and performance of this Agreement by Vendor have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of Vendor and constitute the legal, valid and binding obligations of Vendor, enforceable against Vendor in accordance with their respective terms. b. Title and Operatin,q Condition. Vendor has good and marketable title to all of the Equipment manufactured and installed. All of the Equipment are free and clear of any restrictions on or conditions to transfer or assignment, and City will acquire absolute title to all of the Equipment free and clear of mortgages, liens, pledges, charges, encumbrances, equities, claims, covenants, conditions and restrictions except for such as may be created or granted by City. All of the Equipment are in good operating condition, are free of any defects, and are in conformity with the specifications, descriptions, representations and warranties set forth in the Contract Documents. Vendor is aware the City is pumhasing the Equipment for use as City Council Chambers Upgrade and that City is relying on Vendor's warranties that the Equipment is fit for this purpose and the ordinary purposes for which the Equipment is normally used. c. Full Disclosure. None of the representations and warranties made by Vendor in this Agreement contain or will contain any untrue statement of a material fact, or omits to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. 6. Performance. Vendor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent perform all tasks described herein. Vendor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Vendor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 7. City Approval. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. City shall inspect the Equipment at the time and place of delivery. Such inspection may include reasonable tests and use of the Equipment by City. If, in the determination of City, the Equipment fails to conform to the Agreement IN ANY MANNER OR RESPECT, City shall so notify Vendor within ten (10) days of delivery of the Equipment to City. Failing such notice, the Equipment shall be deemed accepted by City as of the date of receipt. 8. Place of Delivery. The Equipment shall be delivered to this location: 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92589 9. Rejection. In the event of such notice of non-conformity by City pursuant to Section 6, City may, at its option, (1) reject the whole of the Equipment and Installation, (2) accept the whole of the Equipment and Installation, or (3) accept any commercial unit or units of the P:'~AGREEMENTS\EQUIPM ENTANDINSTALLATON2001 2 Equipment and reject the remainder or the Installation. The exercise of any of the above options shall be "without prejudice" and with full reservation of any rights and remedies of City attendant upon a breach. In the event of such notice and election by City, City agrees to comply with all reasonable instructions of Vendor and, in the event that expenses are incurred by City in following such instructions, Vendor shall indemnify City in full for such expenses. 10. No Replacements of Cure. This Agreement calls for strict compliance. Vendor expressly agrees that both the Equipment and Installation tendered and the tender itself will conform fully to the terms and conditions of the Agreement on the original tender. In the event of rejection by City of the whole of the Equipment or any part thereof pursuant to Section 8, City may, but is not required to, accept any substitute performance from Vendor or engage in subsequent efforts to effect a cure of the original tender by Vendor. 11. Indemnification. Vendor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, damages, costs and liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers 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 or from the Equipment or Vendor's maintenance thereof, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 12. Contract Documents. a. This Agreement includes the following documents, which are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof: (1) Price Cost Breakdown of Provided Systems, attached hereto as Exhibit B. b. In the event any term or condition of the Contract Documents conflicts with or is contradictory to any term or condition of the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Agreement are controlling. c. In the event of a conflict in terms between this Agreement, the RFQ and/or the Vendor's response to the RFQ, this Agreement shall prevail over the RFQ and the Vendor's Response to the RFQ, and the RFQ shall prevail over the Vendor's Response to the RFQ. 13. Default of Vendor. a. The Vendor's failure to comply with the previsions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event the Vendor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Vendor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Vendor. If such failure by the Vendor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Vendor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Vendor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines the Vendor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall service the Vendor with wdtten notice of the default. The Vendor shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event the Vendor fails to -3- P:'xAGREEM ENTS\EQUIPM ENTAND INSTALLATION01 cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the dght, notwithstanding any other prevision of th is Agreement, to terminate th is 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. 14. Liability Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (4) Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and prepertydamage. 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: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4) Errors and omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. 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 -4- P:X~-GREEMENTS\EQUIPM ENTAND INSTALLATION01 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 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 by the 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 previsions 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' pdor written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 15, Survival of Representations and Warranties. All representations, warranties, covenants and agreements of the parties contained in this Agreement shall survive the execution, delivery, installation and performance of this Agreement. 16. Legal Responsibilities. The Vendor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Vendor 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 Vendor to comply with this section. 17. 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, during his/her tenure or for one year -5- P:'xAGREEMENTS~EQUIPMENTA ND INSTALLATION01 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. 18. Independent Contractor. Vendor 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 the Vendor shall at all times be under the Vendor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of the Vendor or any of the Vendor's officers, employees, agents or volunteers except as set forth in this Agreement. Vendor 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 of Temecula. Vendor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against the City, or bind the City in any manner. 19 Assi,qnment. The Vendor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without pdor wdtten consent of the city. 20. 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: To Vendor at: Integrated Media Systems 1260 N. Fee Ana Street Anaheim, CA 90807 Attn: John Brereton 1-800-467-6191 To City at: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589 Attn: Tim Thorson 21. Governin,q Law. The City and Vendor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation conceming this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 22. Entire A!:lreement. 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 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. -6- P:kAGREEMENT$\EQUIPMENTA ND INSTALLATIONO1 23. Authority To Execute This A.qreement. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Vendor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Vendor and has the authority to bind Vendor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 24. Prevailin,cI Wa,qes. Pursuant to the previsions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the District 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. 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the previsions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. -7- P:La. GREEM ENTS\EQUIPMENTAND INSTALLATION01 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have duly executed in on the day and year first above wdtten. CITY OF TEMECULA Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney Integrated Media Systems 1260 N. Fee Ana Street Anaheim, CA 90807 Attn: John Brereton Integrated Media Systems -8- P:La-GREEM ENTS\EQUIPM ENTAND INSTALLATION01 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA STATEMENT OF WORK CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUDIO/VISUAL SYSTEMS UPGRADE This exhibit identifies the requirements and implementation plans for the upgrade of the city council chambers. 1. CONTROL AND VOTING SYSTEMS: A new control and voting system will be provided to allow each of the five (5) voting members of the council to view video images, input their individual votes, and issue request to speak commands from a single LCD based touch panel located in the dais in front of their seated positions. In addition the Clerk will have an identical LCD panel programmed to allow the control and presentation of voting results as well as other audiovisual system functions. The remaining three (7) positions at the dais will be equipped with a 15" LCD display (which does not include touch panel controls). These positions will also be provided with a panel-mounted button for request to speak actions. The control and voting system will include the following components: One (1) Network based IP addressable control system processor Six (6) 12" AMX Modero, video enabled touch panel displays (each panel will be programmed to include only those functions required at each position on the dais) Seven (7) 15" NEC liquid crystal display panels Seven (7) request to speak buttons The two existing color LCD touch panels will be reprogrammed for control features and re- installed in the control room at the rear of the council chambers for use by the system operations personnel. All control system programming will be included in the equipment installation contract. In addition to the basic preliminary programming, additional programming changes will be included in the installation contract after three months of system use. An electronic voting system will be provided in conjunction with the control system. Voting selections for the council members will include a "yes" vote, a "no" vote and an "abstain" vote incorporated into the touch panel displays listed above. Each touch panel display will provide a visual indication of the members voting action or the need to complete the voting action. The City Clerk through the touch screen control panel will accomplish the voting control and tally function. Once voting has taken place, the City Clerk will enable a visual display of the results. Voting results will be displayed on the video projection screens as well as the displays located at the dais. 2. VIDEO PROJECTION SYSTEMS: The rear-projection display sub-systems located at each side of the dais will be re-built to ensure that the projected image completely fills the screen from edge to edge and top to bottom. The city furnished Sharp XGP10XU LCD projectors will be re-used and mounted in the newly installed mounting systems. -9- P:'~,GREEM ENTS\EQUIPM ENTAND INSTALLATION01 In addition a new RGBHV matrix switch will be installed and new cabling will be provided to allow the LCD projectors to display their individual images at the native resolution of the source device. 3. SOUND REINFORCEMENT AND VIDEO EDITING SYSTEMS: Changes to the sound reinforcement system will include the replacement or upgrade of all microphones. A new audio digital signal processing sub-system will be installed to replace the existing I.E.D. manual audio sub-system. The system processor will provide for audio mixing of microphones, audio signal routing, equalization and mix-minus processing. The audio system will provide a feed to the existing audiocassette system for archiving of council meetings. A new Non-Linear Digital Editing sub-system will be provided to allow for video editing and production of DVD based videos of council meetings. The new system will be a PC based system from Adobe Premier Pro w/Encore DVD The new system will utilize a PC that records both digital video and audio signals on disk drives and allows the output to be authored on a DVD format. 4. Training: Provide owner training. As a minimum provide 8 hours of total instruction (2 sessions at 4 hours per session) regarding sound systems operation to owner-designated personnel. Schedule instruction times(s) with owner to occur after completion of final tests and adjustments. Coordinate with owner in advance to schedule instruction time. 5. DAIS MODIFICATIONS: The existing dais laminate top will be disassembled and re-built to allow for modifications to be incorporated in support of the new LCD based touch panels, video displays, user interface panels and existing microphones. - 10- P:'~,GREEM ENTS\EQUIPMENTAND INSTALLATION01 EXHIBIT B Price Cost Breakdown of Provided Systems 1. CONTROL AND VOTING SYSTEMS: a) AMX Ethernet Control Processor & Accessories b) Six (6) 12" Modem Touch Panels $14,330.00 $33,000.00 2. VIDEO PROJECTION SYSTEMS: a) Extron Electronics Crosspoint Matrix Switch b) Large Screen Display Projector Mount(s) c) Seven (7) NEC 15" Liquid Crystal Display(s) $3,245.00 $8,500.00 $3,150.00 3. SOUND REINFORCEMENT and VIDEO EDITING SYSTEMS: a) Biamp Audioflex DSP Processor b) Microphone Upgrades/Replacements c) Non-Linear Editing/DVD Authoring $10,500.00 $3,560.00 $9,370.00 4. PROJECT ENGINEERING, PROGRAMMING, INSTALLATION & TRAINING a) Systems Integration Labor $28,335.00 b) Miscellaneous Cables, Connectors & H/W $5,830.00 5. DAIS MODIFICATIONS: a) Woodworking/Finish Modifications $8,500.00 CONTRACT TOTAL: $128,320.00 LABOR: -ll- P:La-GREEMENTS\EQUIPMENTAND INSTALLATION01 ITEM 6 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIN~...~.~E CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manag~.A/ August 26, 2003 FY2003-04 Designated Allocations - Community Support Budget PREPARED BY: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1) Approve the funding agreement in the amount of $15,000 for Safe Alternatives For Everyone (SAFE) program and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 2) Approve the funding agreement in the amount of $15,000 for the Circle of SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND: Staff has received grant funding requests from Circle of Safe-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center and Safe Alternatives For Everyone (SAFE). On Tuesday, June 10, 2003, the City Council approved funding for these organizations as part of the City's FY2003-04 Operating Budget. Safe Alternatives For Everyone (SAFE) Staff has received a request from Safe Alternatives For Everyone (S.A.F.E.), to provide Community Support Funding in the amount of $15,000 cash. The funds are to be used to offer desperately needed services for the Temecula Valley dealing with violence, abuse, and the threat of violence and abuse inflicting great harm on children and the community. S.A.F.E. was established in 1998 by concerned citizens and community leaders to help families suffering with abuse and violence. S.A.F.E.'s goal is to help all children and families in the Temecula Valley to live in violence-free homes, schools, and communities. S.A.F.E. works closely with local law enforcement agencies, Domestic Violence agencies, local hospitals, schools, and community organizations to help families remove violence from their lives and deal with the effects that violence has had on each family member and the family as a whole. S.A.F.E. works in a comprehensive case management model with the entire family to ensure that all members receive the needed individual services needed from S.A.F.E. and utilize existing community resources as well. S.A.FE. provides the following services: · Family assessment and case management S:\Woinickg~Agendarepods\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 1 · Referral and resource support · Public education workshops · Teen community service and internship opportunities · Teen violence prevention and intervention services · In-home support services · Basic needs assistance Future services include: · S.A.F.E. At-Risk Child Development Center · Expansion of Teen Connection · Additional support groups for teens including anger management and drug education · Adolescent parenting support The S.A.F.E. office located in the Temecula Community Center on Pujol Street provides the Temecula Valley with a central agency to coordinate, case manage and provide services for children, youth, and families. S.A.F.E. is able to assist those who are currently involved with other local agencies such as probation, child protective services, JOLT and others, and need additional assistance in navigating through systems of care and provide support helping the family with following through with mandates. The S.A.F.E. Family Care Coordinator provides follow-up services with a family for up to 12 months after they are no longer in need of immediate intervention. This helps ensure that everyone stays on track and services can be delivered in a move to prevent the family from "relapsing" or to deal with new unforeseen family issues. The ultimate goal is 'q'o Help Families Help Themselves." Circle of SAFE-T Partnership Pro.qram Staff has received a request from the Circle of SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center, to provide Community Support Funding in the amount of $15,000 cash. The funds are to be used to support the second year of operation for the sexual assault trauma center at Rancho Springs Medical Center, which opened July 2, 2002. In the first year of operation, the exam center served 50 victims of sexual assault, which is double the number of previously reported cases. Numerous educational presentations have been made in Southwest Riverside County since the opening of the center. This has included a Women's Symposium, Annual Sexual Assault Awareness Day events at the Promenade Mall, and presentations in the cities and the county. The benefits to the community are many. No longer are victims transported north to the county hospital with resultant degradation of evidence and longer travel and exam times. They are now examined locally. Trained advocates respond and are with the victim through the recovery process. Law enforcement remains in the areas they are intended to serve. The DA's office participates in all quality meetings and board meetings to assure the best gathering of evidence. All law enforcement entities regularly participate to assure timely handling/support for the victims and timely investigation of suspects. The sexual assault trauma center at Rancho Springs Medical Center consists of a room adjacent to the hospital's emergency room and is equipped with an exam table, medical equipment, extra clothing, rape kits and a shower available to victims after the three-four hour forensic exam. Advocates and nurses on the SAFE-T team work in shifts, ensuring services are available at 24-hours, 7-days a week with certified nurses and certified advocates on call. This center covers from Sun City and Lake Elsinore south to the county line, west to the county line, and east to Aguanga. These parameters were determined by law enforcement agencies. S:\Wolnickg~gendareports\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 2 FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been included in the FY2003-04 Operating Budget for the recommended sponsorship amounts. The Safe Alternatives For Everyone (S.A.F.E.) funding of $15,000 cash is appropriated in Community Services Funding #001-101-999-5267. The Circle of SAFE-T funding of $15,000 cash is appropriated in Community Services Funding #001-101-999-5267. ATDACHMENTS: I. Safe Alternatives For Everyone (S.A.F.E.) Attachment 1-A - S.A.F.E. Services Attachment I-B - Funding Agreement II. Circle of SAFE-T Partnership Proqram Attachment 2-A - Circle of SAFE-T Partnership Services Attachment 2-B - Funding Agreement S:\Wolnickg~Agendarepor[s\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 3 ATTACHMENT 1-A SAFE ALTERNATIVES FOR EVRYONE (S.A.F.E.) SERVICES S:\Wolnickg~Agendareports\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 4 ATTA~T 1-A S.A.F.E. SERVICES SAFE works in a comprehensive case management model with the entire family to ensure that all members receive the needed individual services needed from S.A.F.E. and utilize existing community resources as well. SAFE provides the following services: · Family assessment and case management · Referral and resource support · Public education workshops · Teen community service and internship opportunities · Teen violence prevention and intervention services · In-home support sec'vices · Basic needs assistance Future services may include: · SAFE At-Risk Child Development Center · Expansion of Teen Connection · Additional support groups for teens including anger management and drug education · Adolescent parenting support ATTACHMENT 1-B SAFE ALTERNATIVES FOR EVERYONE (S.A.F.E.) FUNDING AGREEMENT S:\Wolnickg~Agendareports\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 5 ATTACHI~ENT 1-B FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND SAFE ALTERNATIVES FOR EVERYONE This Agreement, made this 26th day of August, 2003, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Safe Alternatives For Everyone, a California nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "S.A.F.E."). A. S.A.F.E. was established in 1998 with the goal of helping all children and families in the Temecula Valley to live in violence-free homes, schools, and communities. S.A.F.E. provides the following services: family case management, referral and resource support, public education workshops, family assessment and teen violence prevention. S.A.F.E. The City of Temecula desires to provide Community Services Funding for AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows: A. In exchange for providing Community Services Funding for S.A.F.E. of $15,000 cash, the City of Temecula shall receive the benefits and services as listed in Attachment A - 1. B. The Community Support Funding of $15,000 cash will be allocated to provide the Temecula Valley with a central agency, located on Pujol Street, and to coordinate and case manage services for children, youth, and families. In 12 months following the funding, S.A.F.E. will provide a general summary report on how funds were expended and used to benefit Temecula residents. The City requires back-up documentation (specifically copies of invoices, receipts and cancelled checks) to support the Community Support Funding. The 2003-04 funding must be adequately accounted for. Upon request, City staff may audit the supporting documentation from S.A.F.E. Within 12 months following the S.A.F.E. allocation, S.A.F.E. shall prepare and submit to the Assistant City Manager a written report evaluating the S.A.F.E. program and its accomplishments. D. The funds are to be used to offer desperately needed services for the Temecula Valley dealing with violence, abuse, and the threat of violence and abuse inflicting great harm on children and the community. E. S.A.F.E. agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the City and its elected officials, officer, agents, and employees flee and harmless fi.om all claims for damage to persons or by reason of S.A.F.E.'s acts or omissions or those of S.A.F.E.'s employees, officers, agents, or invites in connection with the S.A.F.E. central agency to the maximum extent allowed by law. F. S.A.F.E. shall secure from a good and responsible company or companies doing insurance business in the State of California, pay for and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability and liquor liability in which the City is named insured or is named as an additional insured with S.A.F.E. and shall furnish a Certificate of Liability by the City. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy or any subsequent endorsement attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall; Include the City as the insured or named as an additional insured coveting all claims arising out of, or in connection with, S.A.F.E. Include the City, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of their duties under this Agreement against all claims arising out of, or in connection with S.A.F.E. 3. Provide the following minimum limits: (A) General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. The insurer shall agree to waive all tights of subrogation against the City, its officer, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from S.A.F.E. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a tider whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever, the City shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less than thirty (30) days beforehand. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible or self-insured retention as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees or S.A.F.E. shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. G. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties, hereto, concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: SAFE ALTERNATIVES FOR EVERYONE CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Melissa Donaldson, Executive Director Safe Alternatives for Everyone 30520 Rancho California Rd., Suite 117 P.O. Box 107 Temecula, CA 92592 Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney Attachment A - 1 S.A.F.E. SERVICES SAFE works in a comprehensive case management model with the entire family to ensure that all members receive the needed individual services needed from S.A.F.E. and utilize existing community resources as well. SAFE provides the following services: Family assessment and case management · Referral and resource support · Public education workshops · Teen community service and internship oppommities · Teen violence prevention and intervention services · In-home support services · Basic needs assistance Future services may include: SAFE At-Risk Child Development Center Expansion of Teen Connection Additional support groups for teens including anger management and drug education Adolescent parenting support BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chief Jim Domenoe Sheriff Bob Doyle Chief Dan Higginbotham Hennie Monteleone Carol Niles Winifred Samstag Eva Schlussel {Donna Seegar Deborah Welled Judy Zuifiqar Presidenl Carol Niles Wini[red Samstag Secrelary Eva Schlussel Executive Director Melissa Donaldson August 20, 2003 Gloria Wolnick City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, Ca. 92591 Dear Gloria, Enclosed are the fiscal reports from S.A.F.E. and the service statistics as requested. Please let me know if there is anything additional you need. My cell phone number is 970.0123 or call the office at 587.3900. Executive Director Office Address 28816 Pujol Street Temecula, CA. 92590-2829 Moiling Address 30520 Rancho Ca. Road Suite 107 PMB 117 Temecula, CA. 92591-3282 Phone 909.587-3700 FAX 909.587-3902 TaxlD: 91-1962947 City of Temecula S.A.F.E. Expenditure Report Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Approved Proiect Budget for 2002-2003 $10,000 $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 $ 25O $ 25O $ 500 $15,000 Case management services (contract and subcontract labor) Phones and Intemet Workshop expenses (includes snacks, supplies and staff) Insurance Postage Office Supplies Resources/Subscriptions TOTAL Expenses Enclosed are financial statements prepared by Winifred Samstag C.P.A. These statements show line item expenses that verify the S.A.F.E. project budget submitted to the City on July 5, 2002. I have included statements dating from the beginning of your fiscal year, July 2002 through June 2003. This time frame is appropriate to account for the project budget expenses. Any additional information such as copies of invoices and payroll records are available to the City of Temecula upon request Audit S.A.F.E. has a fiscal year that hms from October through September. An audit will be prepared by Kuebler Pmhomme & Co. in Temecula and made available to the City of Temecula upon completion in November 2003. S.A.F.E. SERVICE ACTIVITY Month June 2002 - Sept. 2002 October- 2002 Now Coses 12 Referrals 14 8 Total Individuals sewed by month* 51 2 16 November - 2002 10 6 38 8 11 December- 2002 7 5 January - 2003 ..... F~b~tm~j':~ 2003 ..... 36 44 - ...... 5 ................ -17 .... : March--2003 3 11 22 April-2003 10 19 57 15 14 82 May -2003 June--- 2003 7 9 39 Referrals by City dune 02' to dune 30, 2003 Temecula Murrieta Menifee Lake Elsinore Winchester Perris Wildomar Riverside Homeless *This number includes al._Jl family members in the family and referrals Fypes of Presentinq Family Problems October 2002 to June 30 2003 Problems Totals APS (Adult Protective Services) 2. Child Abuse 1~4 Child Care 1.]. CPS Involvement _2 Dating Violence Death In Family _2 Domestic Violence 50 Drug Alcohol Parents 12 -Drug/Alcohol Teen ................................... 30 .................... Drug/Alcohol Teen and Parents 4_ Employment 6 Family Court 4 Family Violence 2,~3 Food/Clothing 14 Foster Care/Out of home Placement Healthcare _5 Homeless 3 Housing 19 Juvenile Court Invalvement 26 Poar Academic Achievement 16 Psycho og cai 12 Runaway 18 School Truancy 17 School Violence 10 Stalking 1_. Theft Z Transpodation ~6 Teen Pregnancy 2_ Anger management Suicidal Pregnancy Self Mutilation 4- Suicidal 3~ Eating Disorder 2 Rental Assistance 1 Possession of weapon Ilcnife) 1_ Sexual Assault 4 ATTACHMENT 2-A CIRCLE OF SAFE-T PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AND SERVICES S:\Wolnickg~Agendareports\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 6 AUG. 14.8003 9:10AM RANCHO SPRINGS ADMIM 909 6987721 M0.388 P.3/11 Date: August 14, 2003 City of Temeeula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: General Summary for SAFE-T P~mership The s~xt~al a,s~Lfll foro~sic e,~m center opened July 2, 2002. Prior to ~he opening of the cemer, there were an average of 2 exams per month from Southwest Riverside County, which were performed at the County Hospital in Moreno Valley. It was auficlpated tlmt opening a local center would likely double the number of reported sepal assaults due to the immediate awilability of comprehensive forensic exam services and advocate support. In the first year of operafior~ the e~am center served 50 victims of sexual assault, which is double the number of previously reported case~. Funds were expended as follows: 3: 5, 6. 7 $47,685.32 to So~hwest Heatheare System for:. Certified foreasic exam R.N. On-Call expenses 24 hours a day/seven days per week Salar~ expenses for monthly quality assurance meeting, · Program clerical support - p~t-fimo · Office supplies · Training to c~ify ~orensic exara nurses · Equlpmeat purchase of Adflressograph $51gl.92 to Optical Services Company for light-s~ining microscope, digitsl camera adap~r, d~g~l camera with video input, and AC adapter. $1999.84 to Valley Pr~6nS £or program brochures $1987.56 to Logo Expressions for sexusl assault prevention alert whistles on wris~ bands. $300.00 to Promen~ae Mall For booth ~or Sexual Assault Awareness Day. $50.82 to All-Pro Imaging for program logo desig~a. ~uvoices are auach~. 25500 Medical Center Drive, Murri~t~ C~ 92562 RDMCHO SPRIMGS ADMIM 989 6987721 M0.388 P.2/11 Report for SAFE-T Pertncrship Pro,ram Accomplishments Thc sexual assault forensic exam center opened Suly 2, 2002, Prior to the opening of the center, them were an average of 2 exams per month from Southwest Riverside County, wMch were performed at thc CountyHospital in Moreno Valley. It was anticipated that opening a local center would likely double the number of reported sexual assaults due to the immediate availability of comprehensive forensic exam services and advocate suppor~, In thc first year of operation, the exam center served 50 victims of sexual assault, which is double the number of previously reported cases, The first criminal trial is occurring related to a victim who was treated at the exam center. Numerous educational presentations have been made in Southwest Riverside County since the opening of the center. This has included e Women's Symposium, Annual Sexual Assault Awareness Day events at the Promenade Mall, and presentations in the dries and the county. The benefits to the community are many, No longer are victims transported north to the county hospltal with resultant degradation of evidence and longer travel and cxatla times, They are exmnined locally and returned to their love ones, Trained advocates respond and carry the victim through the recovery process, Law enforcement remains in the areas they are intended to serve, The DA's office participates in all quality meetings and board meetings to assure tho best gathering of evidence. All law enforcement entities regularly participate to assure timely bundling/support for the vict~m.q and timely investigation of suspects. The center looks forward to a continued strong community partnership for the prevention of sexual assault and comprehensive management of sexual ~ssault victims, 25500 Medical Center Drive, Murrieta, CA 92562 AUG. 14.~003' 9:llAM RANCHO SPRINGS ADMIH 989 6987721 H0.388 P.4/11 $OI~,THWG~T ' ~ BU~80F~ ~ ~CE INVOICE · M~y ~, 2003 MONTHLY QUALITY I~-nTING Salary B~pense: Jan~ 28, 2003 $ 270.00 ~¢~y ~, ~oo~ ~s.oo z~,. 2~,.~.oo,~ ~o.oo PROGRAM C~RICAL SUPPORT (parttime) '$ 3,S~4.00 FICA Tax~'paid on Salaries OFFICE SUPPLIES $ 41~8,42 $ 14~ 11.77 , To. tAt. AMOUnt Plea?eremitp~ymentto: SouthweztHealthcare SYStem ' · ' - CBO/Finance,Atm:Kelly Cripson 27720 leffer~n Ave., Ste 400 ........ Temecula~ California 9259 ! 2'7"/20 ~e. ffotson Ave. Suil~ ~400 ,, P.O. Box 9038 · Temecula, CA 92:~91 (~)9)69441[~ ~, FA,X(9O9)6~)3..0348 · FINAI~OE FA~(P~9)694.-3t~ AUG. 14.~003 9:llAM M0.388 P.5/ll RANCHO SPRIMGS ADMIM 909 II RANCHO ~ M~I~ INVOICE Inyok~ #: A 003 Due: ~et 30 ~ 2~ ~2 $ 518.24 No~ 26, 2002 $ 25~.50 CBO~~KelIy ~pmn 2~0 left. on A~,, S~ 4~ T~ ~o~!~ 92591 27720 .l'effetson Ave, Suite d400 · P,O. Box 9038 · Te..al~la, CA 92591 (9G9)694',3136 * FAX(~]9} 6~34g *, FINAIgCEF,~:(~)61~.31~ AUG. 14.~OOB 9:llAM RAMCHO SPRIMGS ADMIM 909 G9877~1 MO.B88 P.6/ll SOMTHI,'VF_.~'F H EAI,THC~AR£ SYSTEM INVOICE P~N, O~-CALL]gX~al~TSB ~ $4.0b/H~.241-a's/d~ $ 8,832.00 ' .Au~ 27, 2~2 $ 3~.28 ~~, 2002 . $ 156. g9 27720 ~n Av~ 8te ~0 277205e/~orson Ave. S~]te/~/00 * P.O. ]30x9038 · Teltt0ouln, CA92591 AUG. 14.200@ 9:llAM RANCHO SPRINGS ADMIM 909 6987721 MO.BBB ' P.?×ll $OUI"HW£$T HEALTHCARE ~Y~TEM INVOICE *1=rom: Iune 1.2002 to ~une 30. 2002 I~oice ~ A O01 Desoription Amotmi START-UP ~,XPIiiN~: .Training o.+'nursing sta~- D. Faugno, RN $ 3,000.00 -Pelvic Model for training $ 150.00 .Tr~L-ias Heaorarlum- $. Secofsky- Crime T~h $ 250.00 -Equipmen~pur~s~e- Addressograph $ 489,00 .june 26, 2002 SiatTSta~.up meeting salary expenso ,, $ 660.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUI~: $ 4,549,00 .Please remi~ payment, to: Southwest Healthcare flystem CBO/Finan~,.AtW_'Keily Oipson 27720 lefferson Ave, St~ 400 Tomecula, California 92589 2T~20 J~ffe~son Ave. Suite ~400 · P.O. Box 9038 ~, Tcm~cula, CA 9~91 (909)694-3L16 * F~(909)g93-~48 * iqNANCE PAX(909)694..31~ AUG. 14.~003 9:llAM, RARCHO SPRIHGS RDMIN 909 G9877~1 R0.~88 P.Sxll 14445 HIGH VALLEY ROAD POWAY, ,Q..ALIFORNIA 920B4' 44.77 SA~'~-T Center At,n: ~Is. L~ah Patterson Director, Critical Care Sarvlces 25500 Medioal C/~n~er Murrie~a, CA 9?562 ~ L d L _ · )[CED.ATE I:~qI~SNI?PF~ OURORDERNO, Y~tlROI,I.~ERNO,, ~RMS '~r~, ~ ~IPPEOV~ ' ' 1 Model OS04 Light Statnin9 ~icro~cop~ S3454.00 1 Model QS14 Digital Camera Adapter 282.00 I Nikon Cool~,ix 995 Digital Camera with wduo InGot 990.00 1 AC adap-t~r 60.00 ~ Subtb~.~l $4786, O0 Tax 3?0.92 To[ai i $5181.92 AUG; .14. 2003 9: 11AM RANCHO SPRINGS RDMIM 909 G987721 4, RO.B88 P.9×ll Iovoice 3/'~/2003 I 3090 SHIP TO P,O. NO, TERMS Due on ~c~ipt ITEM DESCRIPTION AMOUNT I 0,000 brochure, $ 3/4 x 15 I/2 on 100# Altlm~ Satin book, 2/2 PM~ 549 .~ 668, oor~ fold, :fuji bleeds, customer supplied disk Sales Tax VALLEY PRINTING SERVICES I,$56.00T 143.84 (/' 27620 Commerce Cenmr Drive * Suite I 12 * Temecula, CA 92590 * 1909) 308-0011 · FAX (909J 308.008 ! AUG. 14.2003 9:12AM ' RAHCHO SPRIMGS ADMIM 989 G98??E1 M0.388 P.10/11 E ORDER LWl216R Sold To: LOGO Expressions 1090/Ioshua Way # A; Vista, CA 92083 (760)598-9011 Fax (760)$98-4911 4/'23~3 5/i 9/03 l,,~$Gmu~ 500 A~td DP-312 ~ .Un,Prat Total Coil Writ Bru~let w/v~n~le 10,09' 495,IM end Mf Set-up fm (P.~MFd~) 'N/C * belud~s non-p~li~ discount TI~ 4g$.00 38,36 Black imprint ara 167 ofca~h of tl~ hot pink told n~ yelJOw, mid 166 oft~e fire cLumL, n~ instm~ l[.,ogo ~xpreasi~s, Inc.. to uso same (already apl:n'oved} ,." tkat uaed far ~ or'der 134"/$. I-I/8" wx 1-1/2"H AUG. 14.200B 9:I~AM RANCHO SPRIMGS ADMIN 909 6987721 MO.B88 Check Request - Circle.of Safe-T Address: Amount of Cheek ($)**__ (emount~.> $300 require Board approval) Date Needed: ' ~/'~'/~'~ Requested by: Depar~..ent: Full Description of Request: Approval (name) Approval signature Other instructions: . ** Itemized Receipt Required ATTACHMENT 2-B CIRCLE OF SAFE-T PARTNERSHIP FUNDING AGREEMENT S:\Wolnickg~Agendareports\SAFE, Circle of Safety 2003-04.doc 7 A't'TA~ 2-B FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND SAFE-T PARTNERSHIP/RANCHO SPRINGS MEDICAL CENTER AUXILIARY This Agreement, made this 26th day of Au.qust, 2003, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary, a California nonprofit coq3oration. A. The sexual assault trauma center at Rancho Springs Medical Center opened on July 2, 2002 with the goal of helping ail sexual assault victims in the Southwest Riverside County area. In the first year of operation, the exam center served 50 victims of sexual assault, which is double the number of previously reported cases. B. The City of Temecula desires to provide Community Services Funding for SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary. I AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows: A. In exchange for providing Community Services Funding for SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary of $15,000 cash, the City of Temecula shall receive the benefits and services as listed in Attachment A - 1. B. The Community Support Funding of $15,000 cash will be allocated to support the second year of operation for the sexual assault trauma canter at Rancho Springs Medical Center. In 12 months following the funding, SAFE-T Parthership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary will provide a general summary report on how funds were expended and used to benefit Southwest Riverside County residents. The City requires back-up documentation (specifically copies of invoices, receipts and cancelled checks) to support the Community Support Funding. The 2003- 04 funding must be adequately accounted for. Upon request, City staff may audit the supporting documentation from SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary. C. Within 12 months following the SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary allocation, SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary shall prepare and submit to the Assistant City Manager a written report evaluating the SAFE-T program and its accomplishments. D. The funds are to be used to offer desperately needed services for the Southwest Riverside County area dealing with sexual assault cases. E. SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the City and its elected officials, officer, agents, and employees free and harmless from all claims for damage to persons or by reason of SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary acts or omissions or those of SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary employees, officers, agents, or invites in connection with the SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary central agency to the maximum extent allowed by law. F. SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary shall secure from a good and responsible company or companies doing insurance business in the State of California, pay for and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability and liquor liability in which the City is named insured or is named as an additional insured with SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary and shall furnish a Certificate of Insurance by the City. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy or any subsequent endorsement attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall; Include the City as the insured or named as an additional insured covedng all claims adsing out of, or in connection with, SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary. Include the City, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of their duties under this Agreement against all claims arising out of, or in connection with SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary. 3. Provide the following minimum limits: (A) General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officer, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from SAFE-T Partnership/Rancho Springs Medical Center Auxiliary. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached adder whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever, the City shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less than thirty (30) days beforehand. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible or self-insured retention as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees or SAFE- T Partnership/Rancho Spdngs Medical Center Auxiliary shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. G. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties, hereto, concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party cenceming the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: SAFE-T PARTNERSHIP/RANCHO SPRINGS MEDICAL CENTER AUXILIARY CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Angela Moran, Auxiliary President Rancho Springs Medical Center Circle of Safety-T Partnership 25500 Medical Center Drive Murdeta, CA 92562 Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney 3 ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY //" DIRECTOR OF FINANCI~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council (:~SusanW. Jones - [,_~City Clerk/DirectorofSuppo~ Se~ices August26,2003 City Council Meeting Schedule - November and December 2003 RECOMMENDATION: Direct the City Clerk to re-schedule meetings in November and December 2003, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code as follows: Reschedule November 11, 2003 (Veterans Day) to November 18, 2003. Reschedule December 23, 2003 (Christmas Week) to December 16, 2003. BACKGROUND: Due to Veteran's Day falling on the regularly scheduled City Council date, it is suggested that City Council Meeting of November 11,2003, be rescheduled to Tuesday, November 18, 2003. During the month of December, the second regularly scheduled meeting fails on December 23rd. Since this date falls during Christmas week, it may not be the best date to hold a meeting. Staff recommends holding the second December meeting on the third Tuesday of the month, December 16, 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: Changes of dates for City Council, TCSD and RDA meetings will result in no additional cost to the City. ITEM 8 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 2003 Amended Resolution Authorizing Temporary Street Closure of Main Street between Old Town Front Street and the Murrieta Creek Bridge for the "Temecula-On-Stage" event scheduled for August 30, 2003 and Delegate Authority to Issue a Special Events/Street Closures Permit to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Steve Charette, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt an amended resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2003- AMENDED RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-97 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE FOR THE "TEMECULA-ON-STAGE" EVENT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES. THE AMENDMENT CONSISTS OF A CHANGE TO THE EVENT SCHEDULE. BACKGROUND: On August 12, 2003 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 03-97 authorizing a temporary street closure of Main Street between Old Town Front Street and Murrieta Creek Bridge for the "Temecula-On-Stage" event. The event was originally scheduled for August 30, 2003 from 6:00 PM to 11:00 PM. The event schedule has been changed. The new schedule is from 6:00 AM on August 30, 2003 to 3:00 AM, August 31, 2003. The additional time will be utilized for event clean-up. This first-class event will showcase the area's top chefs and wineries along with a variety of performances from local musicians, vocalists, actors and dancers. This event will be the focal point of the Labor Day weekend in which visitors will enjoy all that Temecula Valley has to offer at a discount, by purchasing a special passport provided by local businesses who partner with the event. Through this event, the organizers of"Temecula-On-Stage" will participate in the funding process to assist the Theatre Foundation in its efforts to promote a Community Theatre in Old Town Temecula. 1 R:'~AGENDA REPORtS~2003\082603\Temecula-on-stage street closure.amend. DOC The event will require assistance from the Public Works Department by providing support services for the street closure, public safety monitoring, and the permit process. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way. This resolution set forth processes for staff reviewing applications, denying approval or approving subject to conditions including events requiring changes in normal traffic patterns, and an appeal process to the City Manager. However the resolution did not delegate authority to temporarily close streets for these special events. The subject resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for this specific event, "Temecula-On-Stage", to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction-related closures, etc, shall remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council. These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. Some partial closures, such as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for block parties on cul-de-sac streets only do not require full street closures. These and similar partial street closures or restrictions are not submitted for similar resolutions in order to reduce or eliminate the administrative impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, and for provision, placement, and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices by the Public Works Department are included in budgetary items. A'I-rACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2003 2. Permit Application. 2 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~003\082603\Temecula-on-stage street closure.amend,DOC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- AMENDED RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-97 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE FORTHE "TEMECULA-ON-STAGE" EVENT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES; THE AMENDMENT CONSISTS OF A CHANGE TO THE EVENT SCHEDULE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula sponsors the "Temecula-On-Stage" event, for which such temporary street closure on Main Street between Old Town Front Street and Murrieta Creek Bridge promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use that street for the special event; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close Main Street for the "Temecula-On-Stage" event scheduled for August 30 and 31,2003; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to approve the temporary street closure of Main Street for the "Temecula-On-Stage" event, and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to permit the temporary street closure of Main Street for the "Temecula-On-Stage" event scheduled for August 30 and 31, 2003, and affirms the general rule that all other temporary public street closures shall be approved or denied approval by the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26t' day of August, 2003. Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor ATTEST: 3 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2003\082603\Temecula-on-stage street c[osure.amend. DOC Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted bythe City Council ofthe City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2003\082603\Temecula-on-stage street closure.amend. DOC CITY OF TEMECULA SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO BE HELD ON PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS, SIDEWALKS, OR PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY 1. AP~PUCANT'S ~ AND ADDRESS: ~ ~.??¥o ;/ed?~-~a-,~ _~d- 2.0o., -r'e.~,,,'~ccc~,.r.,~ c~zj'-~©] qoq ....... ~ 2. NUMBER OF ANTICIPATED PARTICIPANTS: 3. PURPOSE OF EVENT: 4, DATE, HOURS, PRECISE LOCATION OF EVENT: FEES TO BE CHARGED BY PERMIT'TEE: o TYPE & NATURE OF VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT, ETC.: 7. SOUND SYSTEMS - NUMBER AND AMPUFICATION RANGE: 80 TYPE OF GOODS/SERVICES TO BE SOLD/PROVIDED: /'~ O f / c_ , t~'.&/ -'/~-7~-/-,~/ )~./vl t~-7,v, ?- 90 VENDORS/NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS: 100 SECUEUTY PLAN, FOR EVENT: THE APPMCA~ HEREBY ~ATES THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS ACCU~TE UND~ P~AL~ 0F PENURY. THI APPEC~T.AGREES TO FULLY COMPleTE THE C~ OF T~ECU~ FOR ~ DA~GE TO PUBEC PROP~, AS ~ A~ TO C~ ~D 0~ERWISE R~TORE THE ~ S~E~O THE C0NDfflON ~ WHICH ff ~ PRIOR TO THE CONDU~ OI THE~, ~ ( ~ ~ . ~/ FOR CffY STAFF USE ONLY: . ~ r 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. APPLICATION FEE AMOUNT: t PAID: SPECIAL EVENT MAJOR SPECIAL EVENT MEET/CONFER WITH TRANSPORTATION DIVISION INSURANCE CERTIFICATE REQUIRED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN/TRAFFIC STUDY REQUIRED RECBFT #: p w0 l\fom~e~permits\sp eoevnt.app 092091 ITEM 9 APPROVAL ClTYATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE_/~___ CITYMANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManageflCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 2003 Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting Maintenance Agreement PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Principal Engineer - Traffic RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Terminate the existing agreement with the County of Riverside dated February 2, 1999. Approve the attached agreement with the County of Riverside for maintenance of traffic signals and safety lighting and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND: The attached agreement between the City and the County of Riverside is for maintenance of traffic signals and safety lighting. The new agreement includes the additional traffic signals that have been installed since the date of the current agreement. The agreement covers maintenance work o n traffic signals a nd safety Iighting installations located within the City of Temecula. A list of locations is provided with the agreement. The agreement provides for the County to bill the City on a time and materials basis on a quarterly basis. Either party upon thirty (30) days wdtten notice may terminate the agreement. Upon approval by the City Council the County of Riverside will finalize the agreement and forward a fully executed copy to the City. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Budget Account No. 001-164-602-5405. ATTACHMENT: Agreement for Maintenance of Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting I r:~Agenda Repor~s\2OO3\O826\signal rnaint agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 9. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING This AGREEMENT is between the County of Riverside, referred to herein as COUNTY, and the City of Temecula, referred to herein as CITY: This AGREEMENT is for maintenance work provided by the County Transportation Department on traffic signal and highway safety lighting installations jointly-owned by CITY and COUNTY at the location(s) shown on the attached Appendix. IT IS AGREED: 1. COUNTY, through its Transportation and Land Management Agency, Transportation Department, will provide routine maintenance work and emergency call-out service on traffic signals, highway safety lighting, flashing beacons, and other electrically operated traffic control or warning devices located partly within the boundaries of CITY and partly within the boundaries of COUNTY. In providing said maintenance COUNTY shall do the following: - Inspect the signal system and clean the control cabinet every six (6) weeks; re- lamp and clean incandescent lamped signal heads every three (3) years and re- lamp light emitting diode (LED) signal heads as needed; re-lamp and clean luminaires every five (5) years. CITY shall pay COUNTY that percentage for each location of the total costs of electrical energy, routine maintenance and emergency service, including all COUNTY costs for wages, benefits, transportation, materials, and administrative accounting, as set forth in the attached Appendix, as the percentage of CITY's location ownership. COUNTY shall be responsible for that percentage of the total of the aforementioned costs for each location, as set forth in the Appendix, as the percentage of COUNTY's location ownership. Records for the work provided under this Agreement shall be kept by COUNTY 1 2 3 4 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7. 23 24 25 26 27 8. 28 and shall include the cost of all services performed. Billing shall be made quarterly and shall include an annual itemized accounting of all costs and services. CITY shall submit in writing any dispute in COUNTY billing within thirty (30) working days after receipt of such billing. Otherwise, CITY shall pay for services within thirty (30) days after receipt of billing from COUNTY. This Agreement shall become effective thirty (30) days from the date this Agreement is approved by resolution of the COUNTY Board of Supervisors. COUNTY will provide CITY notice of the official Board action no later than two (2) weeks before the effective date. This Agreement shall remain in force until terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. If COUNTY is of the opinion that any work COUNTY has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this Agreement and constitutes Extra Work, COUNTY shall promptly notify CITY of that opinion. COUNTY shall be the sole judge as to whether or not such work is in fact beyond the scope of this Agreement and constitutes Extra Work. However, for purposes of COUNTY proceeding to perform same, this is not intended to deny CITY its civil legal remedies in the event of a dispute. In the event that CITY agrees that such work does indeed constitute Extra Work and authorizes COUNTY to perform the Extra Work, it shall provide extra compensation to COUNTY upon a fair and equitable basis in accordance with COUNTY's standard rate. Upon and subject to further agreement of the parties acknowledged in writing by COUNTY's Director of Transportation, and CITY's Director of Public Works, facilities of like nature may be added hereto or deleted herefrom the Appendix without further review by either the Board of Supervisors of COUNTY or the City Council of CITY. CITY shall indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless COUNTY, its officers, agents, servants and employees of and from any and all liability, claims, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 ¢. 16 17 18 19 ///// 20 ///// 21 22 23i 24 25 26 27 28 demands, debts, damages, suits, actions and causes of action of whatsoever kind, nature or sort, including, but not by way of limitation, wrongful death, personal injury or damage to property, the expenses of the defense of said parties and the payment of attorneys' fees in any such claim or action, arising out of or with any act or omission of CITY or CITY employees done or performed hereunder. COUNTY shall indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless CITY, its officers, agents, servants and employees of and from any and all liability, claims, demands, debts, damages, suits, actions and causes of action of whatsoever kind, nature, or sort, including, but not by way of limitation, wrongful death, personal injury or damage to property, the expenses of the defense of said parties and the payment of attorneys' fees in any such claim or action, arising out of or with any act or omission of COUNTY or COUNTY employees done or performed in the furnishing of goods and services hereunder. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements pertaining to the locations stipulated in the attached Appendix. This Agreement may only be modified in writing, signed by each party. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 WEM:DC:dc 07~03 24 25, 26 27 28 10. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be sent to each party shall be sent by regular mail, addressed as follows: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Transportation and Land Management Agency Transportation Department Riverside, CA 92502 CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 P.O. Box 1090 Attention: City Manager Attention: George A. Johnson, Director of Transportation IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives on ,2003. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA By: By: Chairman, Mayor Board of Supervisors Attest: Nancy Romero, Attest: Clerk to the Board By: By: Deputy Clerk of the Board Approved as to form: City Clerk Approved as to form: BY~Villiam Katzenstein, County Counsel By: City Attomey's Office RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: George A. Johnson, Director of Transportation By: City Engineer 1 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 APPENDIX MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND HIGHWAY SAFETY LIGHTING INSTALLATIONS MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE JOINTLY OWNED BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AUGUST 2003 SG # I Traffic Signal Location I Ownership 1273 Butterfield Stage Road & Rancho California Road City = 50% County = 50% 1215 Redhawk Parkway & Vail Ranch Road City = 50% County = 50% 1323 Redhawk Parkway & Wolf Store/Via Rio Temecula City = 50% County = 50% APPENDIX MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND HIGHWAY SAFETY LIGHTING INSTALLATIONS WHOLLY-OWNED BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REVISED JULY 2003 7825 Avenida Barca & Margarita Road 7951 Butterfield Stage Road & Crowns Hill Drive 7923 Camino Campos Verdes & North General Kearny 7921 Camino Del Sol & Campanula Way 7848 Cosmic Drive & Rancho California Road 7884 Costco Driveway & Margarita Road 7870 Dartolo Road & Margarita Road 7906 De Portola Road & Margarita Road 7702 Del Rio Road & Front Street 7799 Diaz Road & Rancho California Road 7931 Diaz Road & Winchester Road 7886 Enterprise Cimle West & Winchester Road 7797 Front Street & Rancho California Road 7707 Front Street & Via Montezuma 7900 Jefferson Avenue & Overland Drive 7700 Jefferson Street & Winchester Road 7807 La Serena Way & Margarita Road 7935 Loma Linda Road & Pechanga Parkway 7846 Lyndie Lane & Rancho California Road 7703 Margarita Road & Moraga Road 7889 Margarita Road & North General Kearny Road 7890 Margarita Road & Overland Drive 7904 Margarita Road & Pauba Road 7905 Margarita Road & Plo Pico Road 7704 Margarita Road & Rancho California Road 7705 Margarita Road & Rancho Vista Road 7847 Margarita Road & Rustic Glen Drive 7874 Margarita Road & Santiago 7849 Margarita Road & Solana Way 7930 Margarita Road & Stonewood Road 7922 Margarita Road & Verdes Lane 7868 Margarita Road & Yukon Road/Honors Drive 7871 Meadows Parkway & Rancho California Road 7706 Mira Loma Drive (East) & Rancho Vista Road 7701 Moraga Road & Rancho California Road 7733 Motor Car Parkway & Ynez Road 7927 Old Town Front Street & Santiago Road (l't Street) 7988 Old Town Front Street & Western By-Pass 7920 Overland Drive & Promenade Way 7887 Overland Drive & Ynez Road 7724 Palm Plaza Entrance & Ynez Road 7888 Palm Plaza South & Ynez Road 7873 Pauba Road & Fire Station 84 7709 Pauba Road & Ynez Road 7941 Pechanga Parkway & Pechanga Casino Entrance North 7878 Pechanga Parkway & Pechanga Casino Entrance South 7872 Pechanga Parkway & Rainbow Canyon Road 7936 Pechanga Parkway & Wolf Valley Road 7735 Rancho California Road & Towne Center 7875 Rancho Californa Road & Via Las colinas 7798 Rancho California Road & Ynez Road 2 7708 Rancho Vista Road & Ynez Road 7710 Santiago Road & Ynez Road 7715 Solona Way & Ynez Road 7892 Tierra Vista Road & Ynez Road 7808 Towne Center/Tower Plaza & Ynez Road - North 7809 Towne Center/Tower Plaza & Ynez Road - South · , go6. F~SHING~BE~)N~EE),~A~NS . F_/b Amarita Way w/o Via Rami W/b Amarita Way e/o Via Alora F_Jb La Serena Way e/o Via Halcon W/b La Serena Way w/o Promenade Chardonnay Hills S/b Margarita Road n/o Plo Pico Street N/b Margarita Road n/o De Portola Road E/b Margarita Road w/o Paseo Brilliante W/b Margarita Road e/o Moraga Road N/b Moraga Road n/o Rancho California Road E/b Rancho Vista Road w/o Mira Loma Drive (signal) W/b Rancho Vista Road e/o Mira Loma Drive (signal) E/b Margarita Road e/o Avenida Barca W/b Margarita Road n/o La Serena Way ' N/b Meadows Parkway n/o McCabe Drive S/b Meadows Parkway s/o Pauba Road E/b Rancho Vista Road e/o Margarita Road W/b Rancho Vista Road w/o Via El Greco S/b Margarita Road s/o Rancho Vista Road N/b Margarita Road n/o Pauba Road E/b Pauba Road w/o Via Rami W/b Pauba Road e/o Green Tree Drive WEM.'DC 07/03 ITEM 10 APPROV/)~2~., CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTO~ CITY MANAGER /..'i'7! TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council ~ Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service . August26,2003 General Fund Transfer To Service Level D RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council appropriate $73,125 from General Fund Reserves to TCSD Service Level D to subsidize refuse collection and recycling. BACKGROUND: At the direction of the City Council, acting as the Board of Directors during the rates and charges approval process on June 24, 2003, the Board of Directors reduced the proposed rate and charge for Service Level D, which funds refuse collection and recycling from $176.28 to $172.54 annually. As a result, additional funds are needed to provide services through Service Level D for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. The subsidy is equivalent to $3.74 per residential unit or $73,725. The City's current resident unit total is 19,152. Staff anticipates this total number of units increasing by approximately400 equivalent new units during the fiscal year. FISCAL IMPACT: Level D. A total of $73,725 from General Fund Reserves is needed to subsidize Service RSZIGLERG~EPORTX082603 General Fund Transfer.doc ITEM 11 ORDINANCE NO. 03-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING INTEGRATED FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 03-05 (JOHN WARNER ROAD) AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF CONTINGENT ASSESSMENTS THEREIN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, on June 24, 2003 the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Temecula (the "City") adopted a resolution of intention (the "Resolution of Intention"), to acquire and construct improvements in connection with the proposed City of Temecula Assessment District No. 03-04 (John Warner Road) (the "Assessment District"), and the related City of Temecula Integrated Financing District No. 03-05 (John Warner Road) (the "Integrated Financing District"), and referred the proposed acquisition and construction of improvements to the Engineer of Work for the Assessment District; and WHEREAS, the Council thereby directed the Engineer of Work to make and file with the City Clerk a report (the "Report") in writing in accordance with and pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (the "Act") and provisions of the California Government Code applicable to integrated financing districts; and WHEREAS, the Report was duly made and filed with the City Clerk, whereupon said City Clerk presented it to the Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, on June 24, 2003 the Council thereupon duly considered said Report and each and every part thereof and found that it contained all the matters and things called for by the provisions of the Act and the Government Code for integrated financing districts, including (i) maps and descriptions of lands and easements to be acquired; (ii) plans and specifications of the proposed improvements; (iii) itemized and total costs of said improvements; (iv) a diagram of the Integrated Financing District; and (v) a contingent assessment according to special benefits, all of which was done in the form and manner required by the Act, and, where applicable, the Government Code; and WHEREAS, the Council found that the Report and each and every part thereof was sufficient in every particular and determined that it should stand as the Report for all subsequent proceedings under the Act and the Government Code for the Integrated Financing District, whereupon the Council, pursuant to the requirements of the Act and the Government Code, appointed a time and place for a public meeting and public hearing on the Integrated Financing District at which time and place all protests in relation to the Integrated Financing District were heard; and WHEREAS, notice of the public meeting and public hearing was provided to each owner of property in the Integrated Financing District, and said public meeting and public hearing were duly and regularly held at the appointed time and place; and WHEREAS, all persons desiring to be heard at the public hearing were given an opportunity to be heard, and all matters and things pertaining to the Integrated Financing District were fully heard and considered by the Council, and the Council has acquired jurisdiction to R:/Ords 2003/Ords 03-08 I order said acquisition and construction of improvements and the confirmation of said diagram and contingent assessment to pay the costs and expenses thereof; and WHEREAS, following the public meeting and public hearing, the City Clerk tabulated ballots in the election regarding the Integrated Financing District, and this Council adopted a resolution overruling any protests and declaring the results of the election to be more than a majority of the ballots case in the election (weighted according to the proposed maximum contingent financial obligation of each property voting) in favor of the Integrated Financing District and the levy of the contingent assessments therein; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the Integrated Financing District for the Council to retain said jurisdiction to acquire and construct said improvements and levy said contingent assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct. Section 2. Based upon the Report and the testimony and other evidence received at the public meeting and hearing, it is hereby determined that: (a) all properties within the boundaries of the Integrated Financing District will receive a special benefit from the improvements identified in the Report; (b) the proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel proposed to be contingently assessed has been determined in relationship to the cost of the acquisition and construction of the Improvements; (c) no contingent assessment is proposed to be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit to be conferred on such parcel from the improvements; (d) only special benefits have been contingently assessed; and (e) there are no parcels within the Integrated Financing District which are owned or used by any agency as such term is defined in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, the State of California or the United States. Section 3. That the Integrated Financing District benefited by said acquisition and construction of improvements and to be contingently assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and the exterior boundaries thereof are more particularly described in said Resolution of Intention and made a part hereof by reference thereto. That all public streets and highways within said Integrated Financing District in use in the performance of a public function as such shall be omitted from said district and from the levy and collection of the special contingent assessments to be hereafter levied and collected to cover the costs and expenses of said acquisition and construction of improvements. Section 4. That the plans and specifications for the proposed acquisition and construction of improvements contained in said Report, be, and they are hereby, finally adopted and approved as the plans and specifications to which said work shall be done as called for in said Resolution of Intention. Section 5. That the Engineer of Work's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses in connection therewith, contained in said Report, be, and it is hereby, finally adopted and approved as the Engineer of Work's total and detailed estimate of the costs and expenses of said acquisition and construction of improvements. R:/Ords 2003/Ords 03-08 2 Section 6. That the public interest and convenience require and the Council does hereby order the acquisition and construction of improvements to be made as described in and in accordance with said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk, reference to which is hereby made for a more particular description of said acquisition and construction of improvements, and also for further particulars pursuant to the provisions of said Act. Section 7. That the diagram showing the Integrated Financing District referred to and described in said Resolution of Intention, and the boundaries and dimensions of the respective subdivisions having been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in the Report, be, and hereby are finally approved and confirmed as the diagram of the properties to be contingently assessed to pay the costs and expenses of said acquisition and construction of improvements. Section 8. That the contingent assessments upon the several subdivisions of land in the Integrated Financing District in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by said subdivisions, respectively, from the acquisition and construction of improvements, and of the expenses incidental thereto, contained in the Report, be, and the same hereby are finally approved, confirmed and are hereby levied as contingent assessments to pay the costs and expenses of said acquisition and construction of improvements, said contingent assessments to be due and payable in a lump sum at the time of approval by the City Council of tentative subdivision map, vesting tentative subdivision map or final subdivision map (whichever may first occur) for a respective parcel in the integrated Financing District. Section 9. as a whole. That the Report be, and the same hereby is finally adopted and approved Section 10. That the City Clerk shall forthwith deliver to the Public Works Director, in his capacity as Superintendent of Streets for the City, the contingent assessment (in the form of the final Report), together with said diagram thereto attached and made a part thereof, as confirmed by this Council with the Clerk's certificate of such confirmation thereto attached and of the date thereof; and that said Public Works Director shall record said diagram and contingent assessment in his office in a suitable book to be kept for that purpose, and append thereto his certificate for the date of such recording, and such recordation shall be and constitute the contingent assessment roll herein. The City Clerk also shall execute and record a Notice of Contingent Assessment in the office of the Public Works Director Section 11. Upon confirmation of the contingent assessments and recordation of the contingent assessment roll and diagram with the Public Works Director, a certified copy of the contingent assessment diagram shall be immediately filed in the Office of the County Recorder. Immediately thereafter, a copy of the notice of contingent assessment shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder in the manner and form as set forth by law and specifically Section 3114 of the Streets and Highways Code of the state of California. Upon recordation of the notice of contingent assessment, such contingent assessment shall constitute a lien upon the real property against which the notice is recorded and such line shall continue until the contingent assessment and all penalties, if any, are fully paid or the property is sold to satisfy the lien. The contingent assessment lien shall have the same force, effect, priority, and duration as would a delinquent lien under the Act, and the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (commencing with Section 8500). R:/Ords 2003/Ords 03-08 3 Section 12. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933. Section '13. The appropriate officer or officers of the City are hereby authorized to pay any and all fees required by law in connection with the above. Section 14. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Section 15. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 2003. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Michaela A. Ballreich Deputy City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Michaela A. Ballreich, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 03-08 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 12th day of August, 2003 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following roll call vote: AYES: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Michaela A. Ballreich City Clerk R:/Ords 2003lOrds 03-08 4 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AUGUST 12, 2003 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:55 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Comerchero presiding. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts, and Comerchero ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None 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 July 22, 2003. MOTION: Director Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Director Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comment, GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. Minutes.csd\081203 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:56 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, August 26, 2003, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\081203 2 TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUGUST 12, 2003 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:56 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, and Roberts ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 22, 2003. 2 Second Amendment to Agreement between the Redevelopment Aqency of the City of Temecula and Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. for the proposed Educational Facility RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Authorize staff to amend existing contract to the Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Agreement for the Educational Facility. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I - 2. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING 3 Amendment for Humanity of the Inland Valleys, Inc. Housing Proiect RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: R:',Minutes. rda\081203 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE AGENCY AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 3.2 That the Temecula Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 03-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE'FVVEEN THE AGENCY AND HABITATFORHUMANITY Because he is on the Board of Directors for Habitat for Humanity, City Attorney Thorson recommended that Chairman Roberts not participate in the discussion of this item. Mr. Roberts stepped down from the dais. Housing and Redevelopment Director Meyer provided the staff report (as per agenda material). There being no public input, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Agency Member Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Chairman Roberts who abstained. 4 Second Amendment for the Affirmed Housin.q Sixth Street Homeownership Project - Approve Staff Recommendation (4-1-0, Agency member Comerchero in RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND AFFIRMED HOUSING PARTNERS - TEMECULA, LLC (SIXTH STREET HOUSING PROJECT) 4.2 That the Temecula Redevelopment Agency Board adopt a resolution entitled: R:'Wlin utes. rda\081203 2 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 03-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND AFFIRMED HOUSING PARTNERS - TEMECULA, LLC (SIXTH STREET HOUSING PROJECT) Housing and Redevelopment Director Meyer reviewed the staff report (of record). Questioning whether or not Affirmed Housing Partners should be partially responsible for the additional costs for infrastructure improvements, Housing and Redevelopment Director Meyer noted that at times the developer will be held responsible for additional, unexpected costs but when costs are increased that are not the norm, the Agency would be responsible; and that the proposed improvements would not be expected to be the norm and, therefore, should be the responsibility of the Agency. There being no public input, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Agency Member Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Chairman Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Comerchero who voted n._~o. RECESS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING At this time, Chairman Roberts returned to the dais. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 8:02 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, August 26, 2003 in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Chairman Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:'.Minutes.rda\081203 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ITEM 1 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY JULY 22, 2003 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public Financing Authority was called to order at 7:35 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, and Stone ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 8, 2003. MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PUBLIC HEARING Abandonment of Prior Proceedinq and Formation of New Community Facilities District - Wolf Creek (Continued from July 8, 2003) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 03-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OF ABANDONMENT OF PROCEEDINGS TO FORM THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-3 (WOLF CREEK) 2.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:minutes.tpfa\072203 1 RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 03-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY FACILKITIES DISTRICT AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN - WOLF CREEK 03-03 2.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 03-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE PROPOSED TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANVCING AUTHORITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 03-03 The public hearing remained open from the previous meeting. Hearing no requests to speak, Chairman Jeff Stone closed the public hearing at 7:37 P.M. MOTION: Authority Member Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation on Items 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. The motion was seconded by Authority Member Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:38 P.M., the Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Chairman Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:minutes.tpfa\072203 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE ..~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA REPORT Temecula Public Financing Authority Executive Director Shawn Nelson August 26, 2003 Formation of Community Facilities Distdct - Wolf Creek No. 03-03 RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND: hearing be continued. Continue the public headng to the meeting of September 23, 2003. Due to ongoing discussions, it is recommended that this public ITEM 12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIN/AN/C~ C,TY MANAGER ~.p? CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City _Council Debbie Ubnoske~i~ctor of August 26, 2003 Planning Linfield School Master Plan, Zone Change (PA02-0612); Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan (PA01-0653) PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: Dan Long, Associate Planner The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 2. Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPTING SECTIONS 17.22.180 THROUGH 17.22.188 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955- 002-002 R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Staff Report-l.doc 1 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE, GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 4. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN INCLUDING A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 BACKGROUND: This project was initially noticed for the July 8, 2003 City Council meeting. At that meeting, the applicant requested a continuance to the August 26, 2003 City Council meeting to allow them time to respond to comments from the State Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the environmental review of the project. Since that time, the applicant has responded to the Agencies comments and the environmental documents have been revised. The application consists of the following: · Zone Change: · Conditional Use Permit: · Development Plan: Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) A Master Plan and Design Guidelines Phase A-1 of the Master Plan, including a 38,358 square foot high school building and a 9,728 square foot administrative office building R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiel~CC Staff Repor~-I .dcc 2 DISCUSSION: STAFF ANALYSIS Staff forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission based on the following analysis: Zone Chanqe The proposed land use change from PI to PDO and the related use matrix to permit student and/or faculty housing is consistent with the General Plan. The use matrix within the PDO document is similar to the uses permitted under the PI zone, however the primary change is the addition of residences as a permitted use. The housing portion of the project functions as a secondary use to the primary educational facility. Conditional Use Permit The proposed Master Plan provides a long term "blueprint" for the project site, including design guidelines and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The educational facility is permitted in the PI zone with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The design guidelines provide a common design theme to promote visual compatibility throughout the project site. Development Plan Phase A-1 of the Master Plan includes a high school building and an administrative office building. Phase A-1 is in conformance with the current General Plan and PDO development standards. As subsequent phases are proposed, an administrative development plan will be required for approval. Environmental Review An Initial Study was prepared and staff determined that with mitigation measures ~ncorporated with the Conditions of Approval, the project would not have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring program is recommended. PLANNING COMMISSION ANALYSIS The Planning Commission concurred with the staff recommendation and determined that the proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan. The Master Plan includes uses that are permitted in the current zoning district (PI), and the PDO provides flexibility to permit up to 28 total residential units as a support use. The residential portion of the project will function as a secondary use to the educational facility because the residential units may not be sold or subdivided into individual units. In addition, the provision to allow for faculty and/or student housing will reduce vehicle trips on public streets. Questions raised by the Planning Commission included whether they should take a position on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to the closing of the public comment period. The Assistant City Attorney responded that the Planning Commission is R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-l.doc 3 only making a recommendation to the City Council and the public comment period will be closed at the time the City Council takes action. Questions were also raised in regards to the architecture and roofline of the Development Plan Application. staff provided additional architectural elevations that show variations in the roofline submitted by the applicant to clarify the questions raised. The Planning Commission voted 3-0 (one abstaining and one absent), recommending City Council approval. PUBLIC COMMENTS The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 21, 2003 to consider the application. Numerous students, family members and citizens in the vicinity of the Linfield Christian School spoke in favor of the proposed project. Staff has not received any formal letters voicing opposition of the project. Attached are letters received by staff suppoding the proposed project. ATTACHMENTS: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Draft Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Ordinance approving a Zone Change Draft Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit Draft Resolution approving a Development Plan Adopted Planning Commission Resolutions Draft Excerpt, Planning Commission Minutes (May 21, 2003) Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits (May 21, 2003) PDO-7 Text Master Plan and Design Guidelines Letters of support R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-l.doc 4 ATrACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfieid\CC Staff Report-1 .doc 5 RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002. 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 A. Karen Raffery, Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Applications No. PA02- 0612 Zone Change and PA01-0653 Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit, located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of Meadows parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Pamel No. 955-002-002 ("Project"). B. The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on May 21, 2003 to consider the application for the Project. D. 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. 2003-031 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project. E. On August 26, 2003, 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. F. On August 26, 2003, 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. 03- , which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 2. findings: The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following A. 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 R;\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso Mitigated Neg Dec.doc 1 Study, Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Program are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. B. 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. C. The City Council reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration were discussed at a public hearing of the City Council held on August 26, 2003. D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA E. There is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment. F. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. G. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan set forth 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 Program for the Project as 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 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 2003 A'I-I'EST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso Mitigated Neg Dec.doc 2 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. 03- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfiel~CC Reso Mitigated Neg Dec.doc 3 EXHIBIT A INITIAL STUDY NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso Mitigated Neg Dec.doc 4 City of Temecula Plannin De artment Notice of Completion SCH # 2003041174 Project Title: Planning Applications Nos. PA02-0612 a Zone Change/Planned Contact Person: Dan Long Development Overlay and PA01-0653 is a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan Title: Associate Planner Lead Agency: City of Temecula Street Address: 43200 Business Park Drive Phone: (909) 694~6400 City: Temeeula, CA Zip: 92590 Project Location Within 2 miles City of Temecula, Riverside County State Hwy #: Interstate 15, Highway 79 Cross Streets: Located between Rancho Airports: n/a Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of Waterways: n/a Meadows Parkway and approximately Railways: None 1000 feet east of Margarita Road Schools: Paloma Elementary, Sparkman Elementary, Temecula Valley High School, Margarita Middle School, Temecula Elementary School, Vail Elementary Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-002-002 School Total Acres: 94 CEQA Document Type [ ]NOP IX]Negative Declaration [ ]Supplement E1R [ ]EIR (Prior SCH #)_ [ ]Early Consultation [ ]Draft Ell>, [ ]Subsequent EIR [ ]Other Local Action Type [ ]General Plan Update [ ]Specific Plan [X]Rezone [ ]Annexation [ ]General Plan Amendment [ ]Master Plan [ ]Prezone [ ]Redevelopment [ ]General Plan Element [ ]Planned Unit Development [X]Use Permits [ ]Coastal Permit [ ]Conununity Plan IX]Site Plan/Plot Plan [ ]Subdivision of Land [ ]City Development Project [ ]Other Development Type [X]Residential: Units 2~6 Acres 9.81 [ ]Water Facilities: Type MGD [ ]Office: Sq.ft. Acres Employees [ ]Transportation Type. [ ]Commercial: Sq.ft. Acres_ Employees [ ]Mining: Mineral [ ]Industrial: Sq.ft.__ Acres Employees [ ]Power: Type. [X]Educational:_l~rivate school, athletic fields/facilities [ ]Waste Treatment: Type. [ ]Recreational: [ ]Hazardous Waste: Type_ [X]Other: Planned Development Overlay, school, athletic facilities with secondary student/faculty housing Project Issues Discussed in Docuraent [ ]Aesthetic/Visual [ ]FloodPlain/Flooding [ ]Schools/Universities [ ] Water Quality [ ]Agricultural Land [ ]Forest Land/Fire Hazard [ ]Septic Systems [ ]Water supply/groundwater [ ]Air Quality [ ]Geologic/Seismic [ ]Sewer Capacity IX]Wetland/Riparian [X]Archeological/Historical [ ]Minerals [ ]Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grad [X]Wildlife [ ]Coastal Zone [X]Noise [ ]Solid Waste [ ]Growth Inducing [ ]Drainage/Absorption [ ]Population/Housing Balances[ ]Toxic/Hazardous [ ]Land Use [ ]Economic/Jobs [ ]Public Services/Facilities [X]Traffic/Circulation [X]Cumulative Effects [ ]Fiscal [ ]Recreation/Parks [ ]Vegetation [ ]Other: Light & Glare Present Land Use: Private school and athletic fields Current Zoning: Public Institutional (PI) General Plan Use: Public Institutional (PI) Project Description: PA02-0612 is a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) proposal to modify th~ land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 93.77 acres including educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities. RSP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~qOTICE OF COMPLETION.doc PA01-0653 is a (Master) Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan application. The Master CUP application applies to the overall project and phasing. In addition, the Master CUP establishes design guidelines and provides a "blueprint" for future site layout. The overall proposal includes 120,374 square feet of new high school facilities, 11,243 square feet of new middle school facilities, 9,100 square feet of new elementary school facilities, 19,000 square feet of new kindergarten and pre-school facilities, one new junior varsity baseball field, one new middle school soccer field, one new football/track stadium, 6 new tennis courts, 3 new outdoor ball courts, 10,189 square feet of middle school lockers, courts and student store, 28,114 square foot gymnasium and pool, and 15,000 square feet of various sports and accessory structures. The project also includes a sensitive resource area proposed for preservation. The development plan proposal is for the design of phase A- 1 as outlined in the Master CUP document. The Master CUP establishes the overall site into 3 planning areas. Area lA is broken down into various phases beginning with phase A-1 (High School) to phase F-2 (Superintendent/Caretaker housing). Mailt~: StateCleadnghouse, 1400 Tenth Street, Sacratnento, CA 95814 (916)445-0613 R:XP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~NOT1CE OF COMPLETION.doc REVIEWING AGENCIES CHECKLIST KEY S=Document sent by lead agency X=Document sent by SCH T=Suggested distribution __ Resources Agency __ Boating/Waterways Coastal Commission __ Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board _T_T Conservation ._T.T Fish and Game __ Forestry T Office of Historic Preservation _ Parks and Recreation Reclamation __ S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation, & Housing Aeronautics Califomia Highway Patrol __ Caltrans District No. 8 __ Department of Transportation Planning (Headquarters) __ Housing & Community Development Other State & Consumer Services __ General Services __ OLA (Schools) Environmental Affairs Air Resources Board __ APCD/AQMD California Waste Management Board T SWRCB: Clean Water Grants SWRCB: Delta Unit _TT SWRCB: Water Quality __ SWRCB: Water Rights T Regional WQCB # 9 ( Youth & Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions & Offices __ Energy Commission T_T__ Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission __ Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Land Commission __ Tahoe Regional Planning Agency __ Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date 8, 2003 Ending Date May 27, 2003 Date 23, 2003 Lead Agency (Complete if Applicable): City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Contact: Dan Long Phone (909) 694-6400 Applicant Linfield Christian School Address 31950 Pauba Road Temecula, CA 92591 Phone (909) 676-8111 For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: RAP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~NOTICE OF COMPLETION.doc City of Temecula Planning Department Agency Distribution List PROJECT: Planning Application No. PA01-0653 Master CUP/Development Plan Planning Application No. PA02-0612 Zoning Amendment for a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) DISTRIBUTION DATE: April 28, 2003 CASE PLANNER: Dan Long CITY OF TEMECULA: Building & Safety ..................................... (X) Fire Department ...................................... (X) Police Department .................................. ( ) Parks & Recreation (TCSD) .................... (X) Planning, Advance .................................. ( ) Public Works ........................................... (X) STATE: Caltrans ................................................... (X) Fish & Game ........................................... (X) Mines & Geology ..................................... ( ) Regional Water Quality Control Bd ......... (X) State Clearinghouse ............................... (X) State Clearinghouse (15 Copies) ............ (X) Water Resources .................................... ( ) FEDERAL: Army Corps of Engineers ........................ (X) Fish and Wildlife Service ......................... (X) REGIONAL: Air Quality Management District .............. (X) Western Riverside COG ......................... ( CITY OF MURRIETA: Planning .................................................. ( R:~P D 0~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Nofice of Intent.doc RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Clerk and Recorder's Office .................... (X) Airport Land Use Commission ................. ( ) Engineer .................................................. ( ) Flood Control .......................................... (X) Health Department ................................. (X) Parks and Recreation .............................. ( ) Planning Department ............................... ( ) Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA). (X) Riverside Transit Agency ........................ (X) UTILITY: Eastern Municipal Water District ............. (X) Inland Valley Cablevision ........................ (X) Rancho CA Water District, Will Serve .... (X) Southern California Gas ......................... (X) Southern California Edison ..................... (X) Temecula Valley School District ............. (X) Metropolitan Water District ..................... (X) OTHER: Pechanga Indian Reservation ................. (X) Eastern Information Center .................... (X) Local Agency Formation Comm .............. ) RCTC ...................................................... ) Homeowners' Association .......................... ) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Linfield Christian School Master Plan Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Dan Long, Associate Planner (909) 694-6400 Project Location 31950 Pauba Road. Located between Pauba Road and Rancho Vista Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway (Assessors Parcel No. 955-002-002) Project Sponsor's Name and Address Linfield Christian School, 31950 Pauba Road, Temecula, CA 92592 General Plan Designation Public Institutional (PI/ Zoning Public Institutional (PI) Description of Project PA02-0612 is a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) proposal to modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 93.77 acres including educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities. PA01-0653 is a (Master) Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan application. The Master CUP application applies to the overall project and phasing. In addition, the Master CUP establishes design guidelines and provides a "blueprint" for future site layout. The overall proposal includes 120,374 square feet of new high school facilities, 11,243 square feet of new middle school facilities, 9,100 square feet of new elementary school facilities, 19,000 square feet of new kindergarten and pre-school facilities, one new junior varsity baseball field, one new middle school soccer field, one new football/track stadium, 6 new tennis courts, 3 new outdoor ball i courts, 10,189 square feet of middle school lockers, courts and student store, 28,114 square foot gymnasium and pool, and 15,000 square feet of various sports and accessory structures. The project also includes a sensitive resource area proposed for preservation. The development plan proposal is for the design of phase A-1 as outlined in the Master CUP document. The Master CUP establishes the overall site into 3 planning areas. Area lA is broken down into various phases beginning with phase A-1 (High School) to phase F-2 (Superintendent/Caretaker housing). Surrounding Land Uses and Setting North: Low-Medium Density Residential (single-family residences) East: Very Low Density Residential (single-family residences & vacant lots) South: Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan/Low Medium Residential (single-family residences/Paloma Elementary School) West: Public Institutional (Temecula Valley High School) Other public agencies whose approval California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, ;s required United States Fish and Wildlife Service, San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initJal study-l.doc 1 Vicinity Map ect Site R:\P D 0~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.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. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agricultural Resources Population and Housing X Noise Air Quality Population and Housing X Biological Resources, Water Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geologic Problems X Transportation/Traffic Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service Systems Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning None Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant impact 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 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 proposed project, nothing further is required. April 24, 2003 Date Dan Lonq, Associate Planner Printed name City of Temecula For R:\P D O~002\02-0612 LJnfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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 outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic hi~lhway? c. Substantially 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? Comments: 1 .a. No Impact. The existing property has not been identified as a scenic vista in the City of Temecula's General Plan. 1.b. No Impact. Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road are not designated as scenic resources nor is the site within the view of a state scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the proposed project or future development of the site. 1 .c. No Impact. The general character of the site will be maintained through site design and by maintaining an abundance of the existing landscaping and mature trees. Additional trees and landscaping have been proposed to maintain the rural character and blend with the existing site. The design of the site has been proposed which maintains the rural components of the site, including landscaping, on-site pond, open space and athletic fields. 1 .d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will introduce new lighting in the area that could impact adjacent residences and Mount Palomar observatory unless mitigated. Conditions of approval have been implemented which require the athletic field lighting to have limited hours of operation (10:00 PM) and ali security and parking lot lighting will be conditioned to comply with Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 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: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield'dnitial study-l-Revised.dcc Comments: 2a.-c. No Impact. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past the site has not been used for agricultural purposes. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no significant impact related to this issue. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Suppor[in9 Information Sources Impact 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: 3.a, No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with the air quality plan. The land use and proposed density are consistent with the City's general plan air quality element because the use is consistent with the general plan land use designation and the 26 residential units proposed are considered secondary to the primary use because the residential units are proposed only for students and/or faculty of the school. 3.b.c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations. The project will not create an unreasonable amount of vehicle trips per day than already existing for the site and will not produce additional air pollution than currently existing for the site because the site will continue to be primarily used as a school facility with secondary residential uses. The project is not identified as a major source of air pollution. Temporary impacts due to construction of the site may be expected, however the impacts are not considered significant and conditions of approval have been incorporated that will mitigate these temporary impacts. 3.d. Less Than Significant Impact. As proposed the project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrators. The proposed project will fall below the significance levels established by SCAQMD for construction and operational emissions. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 3.e. No Impact. Typical construction odors may be present during construction activities, however these impacts are considered temporary and will not contribute significant long-term impacts. No other objectionable odors are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. R:\P C O~002\02-0612 Linfield~n[tial st[Jdy-l-Revised.dcc REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURE/CONDITION OF APPROVAL The project will be required to provide a water truck to continuously "water down" the graded areas to reduce the amount of dust from excavation. During grading activities, site shall be watered down no less than three times per day in order to comply with AQMD Rule 403-Fugitive Dust. In addition, all heavy equipment must be regularly maintained to reduce emissions. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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 on 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 established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 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: 4.8, Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The General Plan does not designate the project site as a potentially sensitive habitat site, however a current biological survey of the site (A General Biological Resources Survey and Jurisdictional Delineation on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001) has identified the project site as potentially environmentally sensitive habitat areas for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (QCB), southwestern willow flycatcher and least Bell's vireo. In addition a follow-up focused raptor survey was recommended. A follow-up study has been completed for the QBC (Focused Survey For The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School, L & L Environmental, Inc., June 2002), however the results indicated that it is unlikely that QBC individuals or a QBC breeding population currently utilize the subject property. In a follow up letter from L & L Environmental, Inc., dated February 19, 2003, it was determined that further studies are not necessary for least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher since the area determined to provide habitat for these species lies R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc within a resource area to be preserved. A follow-up focused raptor survey has been complete (Results of a focused raptor nesting survey for APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., March 21, 2002) and has determined that while a single raptor nest was observed on the project it was determined to be abandoned or currently unoccupied. The report recommends a follow-up site visit is necessary to determine if the nest has become occupied. As a mitigation measure and condition of approval, the applicant, prior to issuance of a grading permit shall perform a follow-up site visit by a qualified biologist to determine if the nest has become occupied by a raptor. In addition, the riparian trees and riparian habitat and associated drainages are regulated under state and federal permits which are required for this project. The biological survey (August 2001) submitted for the project as mentioned above has identified on-site wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act and the necessary permits are required prior to commencement of various construction on the project site. The necessary studies have been completed for the project site, as well as focused follow-up studies and have determined that no significant impacts will occur as a result of the proposed development. Mitigation Measures have been applied. At the request of the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant has prepared a focused Survey for the Least Bell's Vireo and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Focused survey for the Least Bell's Vireo and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher on the Linfield Christian School, L & L Environmental, Inc., August 2003), and an ongoing focused survey for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Status of the Ongoing Focused survey report for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher on the Linfield Christian School, L & L Environmental, Inc., July 31,2003), which is anticipated for completion in October of 2003. The U.S. Department of Fish and Game authorized compressed scheduling for the U.S.F.W.S. protocol studies to include eight surveys, five days apart for Least Bell's Vireo. Also approved by the U.S.F.W.S. was an amended protocol survey for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, which included missing survey period one and conducting a fifth site visit July 17 - July 25. The focused survey for Least Bells Vireo and Southwestern Flycatcher were conducted within areas of suitable habitat during the months of June to July of 2003. During this time no Least Bell's Vireos or Southwestern Willow Flycatchers were observed or detected. The study concluded that neither of theses species do not currently occupy the project site. No further studies or mitigations have been proposed or recommended for these particular species. The particular area of concern in regard to the Coastal California Gnatcatcher is the southwestern portion of the project site, which includes Planning Area 2 of the Master Plan. This area is not proposed for development at this time, but is included in the Master Plan as a residential area for future development. The area in question will require a subsequent development plan application prior to any disturbance to this area. The applicant is in the process of completing the required Coastal California Gnatcatcher studies for this particular area. However, four of the required nine surveys have been complete. During the course of the four completed surveys, no Coastal California Gnatcatchers have been observed or detected on the project site. As a Condition of Approval and Mitigation Measure, the applicant will complete the nine surveys for the project site and submit a summary report with conclusions and recommended mitigation measures if necessary. Upon the request for development in the area, the Coastal California Gnatcatcher study will be complete and mitigations measures and Conditions of Approval will be implemented. Mitigation Measures have been applied. 4.b. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site contains a mixed riparian habitat within the project site that falls within the state jurisdictional area. A significant amount of the mixed riparian area will be preserved as a result of the proposed project or it is in a currently developed area, but will be maintained as an open space area. As a part of the proposed project, a resource area has been set aside for preservation on the project site. This area will remain undeveloped and is designated as a sensitive resource area. Mitigation Measures have been applied. 4.c. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site contains wetland areas on the project site. There are a total of 2.85 acres of streambeds or wetlands per the definition of the State criteria for judicial streambeds and .57 acres that meet the federal criteria for Waters of the United R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 4. e.f. States. Approximately 1.09 acres of state streambeds, 1.81 acres of state wetlands and .83 acres of federal wetlands will be impacted by the project as currently proposed. The remaining wetland and streambed acreage will be maintained as open space and will be identified as such on the master plan. Mitigation Measures have been applied. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site includes riparian woodlands, streambeds and wetlands. The study (A General Biological Resources Survey and Jurisdictional Delineation on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001) identified three fish species of special status, however no habitat occurs on the site for any fish species. No special status mammals were noted during the biological survey. The project site does not contain a significant open grassland area, habitat for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, listed as Threatened, Endangered or a candidate for listing. The project site is, however, within the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Plan for this species. Seventeen bird species were observed on the project site, including several special status raptors. A follow-up study has been complete and found a single raptor nest was identified, however it was either abandoned or unoccupied at the time the study was performed. Additionally, the study area includes riparian habitat and drainages that are regulated under state and federal jurisdiction. State and Federal permits are required for this project. Two amphibian species (western toad and pacific tree frog) were observed on the project site. No reptiles were observed on the project site, however no species known to be Endangered, Threatened or on a candidate list are expected to be found on the site. Habitat for Quino checkerspot butterfly is very poor. A focused study was complete and found that while the site does support Quino checkerspot larval host plant resources, no adult, ova, larvae or pupae were detected during the six week study and it is unlikely that Quino checkerspot butterfly individuals or a breeding population currently utilize the project site. Since no Endangered, Threatened or species on the candidate list were observed on the project site, the impacts are less than significant, however Mitigation Measures have been applied for areas under state and federal jurisdiction. No Impact. 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. This will serve as suitable impact mitigation. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The project is required to apply for and obtain the necessary state and federal permits, including a section 401 permit, 1603 streambed alteration agreement, and a Corps Nationwide 39 permit as recommended in the Biological resource survey by L & L Environmental Inc. (August, 2001, August 24, 2001, March 2002, and June 2002). 2. The project has established a resource area that will be preserved and will not be developed. The resource area shall remain in its current state unless development is proposed in the resource area, which will be subject to additional environmental review and a public hearing. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a follow-up site visit from a qualified biologist shall be conducted to determine if the raptor nest has been occupied. A report with recommendations shall be provided prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 4. The proper habitat conservation and Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 5. All Coastal Sage Scrub habitat on the site including the patch in the southwest corner, between the riparian corridor and the road as well as the approximately .05 acres of hillside/top habitat in the northwest portion of the project site shall be avoided. In addition, a 150-foot buffer between the habitat areas and any proposed development shall also be avoided. In the event that the proponent submits a grading plan application for development or grading in either of the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat areas, the proponent shall also submit to the City and the U.S.F.W.S. a completed focused, full protocol study, either nesting or non-nesting season with negative finding and a conclusion by R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiel~initial study-l-Revised.doc 8 the U.S.F.W.S. permitted biologist that the species will not be negatively impacted by the proposed development plan and/or grading plan. In the event that the site is found to be occupied and a survey with positive findings is produced, no work within the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat or the 150- foot buffer area shall occur until a formal consultation with the U.S.F.W.S. has occurred and a permit for incidental take has been issued. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.57 b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.57 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: 5.a. Less than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. The subject site does not meet the criteria of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition the City of Temecula General Plan and associated EIR does not identify the site as a historical resoume area. The General Plan has identified the project site as a highly sensitive site for paleontological resource area. An amhaeological and paleontological survey (A Phase I Amhaeological and Paleontological Survey Report on the Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002- 002, L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11, 2003) has been complete for the project site. The results of the records search indicated that there are no previously recorded archaeological sites within the subject parcel. The report did recognize that an important lithologic deposit underlies the ground surface area of the project site and has the potential for yielding scientifically significant specimens. Mitigations have been recommended including paleontological and archaeological monitoring during all earthmoving activities of the site. 5.b-d. Less Than Significant Impact. A phase I archaeological and paleontological study (A Phase I Archaeological and Paleontological Survey Report on the Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11, 2003) was completed for the project site. According to the study, while there were no materials identified during the field survey, the study concluded there is a Iow probability that prehistoric or historic resources will be impacted by continued development of the project site. Additionally, neither the City of Temecula General Plan Environmental Impact Report nor the City's General Plan identifies this project site as an area of significant cultural resources. The project will include conditions of approval to provide a paleontologist and an archaeologist or representative monitor present during all earthmoving phases with the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigations measures as recommended in the phase I archaeological and paleontological survey, prepared by L & L Environmental, Inc., dated February 11,2003. 2. The applicant shall provide an on-site archaeological and paleontological monitoring during all phases of earthmoving activities as recommended in the Phase I archaeological report by L & L Environmental, Inc. (February 2003). R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiei~initial study-l-Revised.doc Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant must enter into an agreement with the Pechanga Band that addresses the treatment and disposition of all cultural resources and human resources and human remains discovered on-site. Prior to the completion of the project a phase II, and if warranted a phase III survey shall be performed. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including archaeological artifacts found on the project site, to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for proper treatment and disposition. All sacred sites within the project area are to be avoided and preserved. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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 X the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? 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? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils 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: 6.a. Less Than Significant Impact.. The project site is not within any known fault zones as recognized in the City of Temecula General Plan. The nearest known fault to the project site is the Wildomar Fault zone, and is located approximately 1-2 miles to the west. According to the General Plan EIR (GPEIR), the City of Temecula is in Ground shaking Zone II, which will experience moderate to intense ground shaking in the event of a major regional earthquake. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. In addition, the project will be conditioned to provide a soils report prior to grading and recommendations contained in said report are followed during construction. 6.b. No Impact. The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 6.c.d.e. .6, No Impact. Potential impacts will be mitigated by the building construction, which requires new construction to comply with the Uniform Building Code standards. A soils report shall be required as part of the development and shall contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquefaction), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of proper compaction of the soils and landscaping. Less Than Significant Impact. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, 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 complied with during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soi]s. No Impact. Additional septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be connected to the existing public sewer system in Pauba Road; therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Less Than Potentiaily Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, 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 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 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? 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 interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised,doc residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: 7.a Less Than Significant Impact. The project may include some remedial hazardous materials on the project site such as lead based paints, fertilizers, pesticides or other typical agricultural and/or maintenance materials on the project site. Since the site is predominately undisturbed, the impacts are less than significant, however a mitigation measure is added to comply with California environmental regulations. 7.b-h No Impact. The project will not create a significant impact in the creation of any health hazard, potential health hazard, risk of explosion, release of hazardous substances and it is not located near, nor is it a site 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. The project site has not included historic or current uses that result in the release of hazardous wastes/substances that are considered potentially significant in causing harm. The project site is not known to maintain any potentially contaminated material that would pose a threat to human health or the environment. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. The project will not create a fire hazard in an area with flammable brush, grass, or trees. While there are existing trees and brush on the site, the site is not considered a wild land area subject to significant risk of loss due to fire. The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with all applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Any hazardous wastes/materials encountered during construction shall be remediated in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. Prior to any initiating any construction activities, an environmental assessment shall be conducted to determine if a release of hazardous wastes/substances exists on the project site. Proper investigation and remedial actions shall be conducted at the site prior to its new development. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality 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 R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 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 that 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 e 0~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc g. Place housing within a 100-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 100-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: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is 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 that is less than significant. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b.f. Less Than Significant Impact. 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 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 a significant impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site, however it would not result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on- or off-site. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Much of the proposed project will maintain its permeable surface, such as athletic fields and open space. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of structures, accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances are required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff that is created. As conditioned, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the existing facilities. 8.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not anticipated to create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the development of the subject site. In addition, the project is conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. A less than significant impact is associated with this project. 8.g. No Impact. This project represents a development plan for a public institutional use within an area zoned for public institutional uses. Some residential uses are permitted uses and may be developed in the future, however the project site is not located within a flood plain or an area prone to flooding as identified on the FEMA maps. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.h. No Impact. 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) and the Flood Insurance Rate Map Community-Panel Number 0607420005B and 0607420010B. No potential for exposure to R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\initial study-l-Revised.doc 14 significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact, The project site is not subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow, as these events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportinp Information Sources 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 mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 9.a. No Impact. The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The property to the west is a public high school, which provides many of the same amenities as the proposed project. On the south and north side of the street are single-family residences. To the east of the project site are Iow-density residences with various vacant lots. 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. 9.b. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not conflict with the General Plan designation, environmental plans or policies adopted be agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project includes a zone change to PDO-7, which allows for flexibility in the uses permitted. The primary use of the area will remain institutional, as a private school and administrative offices. The associated uses permitted within the PDO are secondary uses to the primary institutional uses and/or they are as allowed under the public institutional zoning and general plan designation. Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. A subsequent traffic study has been prepared by the applicant to address the potential impacts from the residential area proposed by the applicant. Implementation of PDO-7 and the development of Linfield Christian School do 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 for 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 is anticipated the appropriate comments will be received as to how this project relates to their specific environmental plans and/or policies. Significant portions of the project site have been previously disturbed and used for educational and recreational purposes and services are currently in place for the proposed project. With the mitigation measures in place there will be less than significant impacts on adopted environmental plans or policies 9.c. No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The 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~002\02-0612 LinfieJ~initial study-l-Revised.doc 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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? Comments: lO.a.b. No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources 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, it has been determined that this area contains no deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in a report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California, Special Report 165, prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 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 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 project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: 11 .a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures. The proposed project is located on an approximately 94-acre (Minus 23-acre land lease area) site directly adjacent to single-family residences and an existing public high school. The City of Temecula's General Plan has identified residents as sensitive receptors. A 65 CNEL has been adopted as the maximum exterior noise level R:\P O 0~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 11.b. 11.c.d. 11 .e.f. acceptable for sensitive receptors. The CNEL is an average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. The proposed site and residences are separated by a 90 to 95 foot right-of-way, including a street, a 20 foot landscape slope on the residential side and a 20 foot setback on the PDO-? side, grade elevations varying from 1-foot to greater than 35 feet and a combination of solid and wrought iron fencing. Noise levels as measured from an adjacent similar facility (Temecula Valley High School, 59.3 measured and 61.2 adjusted) do not exceed the 65 dBA CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) as noted for the existing residential homes and as adopted in the Noise Element of the General Plan. The addition of a new ball field should not increase the noise dba above the maximum 65 dba allowed since sporting events are not expected to occur beyond 10:00 PM. Other athletic courts and fields are proposed, however they are no less than 180 feet from the right-of-way and are separated by slopes and riparian and woodland area to be maintained. The following mitigation measures will be implemented. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. All outdoor events and public gatherings must cease from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. Less Than Significant Impact. The uses proposed by the project are not activities that would expose persons to, or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. Although there wilt be an increase in ground-borne vibration and noise during grading and construction, these will be of a temporary and short in duration. Due to the limited nature of this exposure and by maintaining compliance with the City Noise Ordinance there will be a less than significant impacts. Less Than Significant Impact. The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction and thereafter. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, this soume of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be considered significant. Furthermore, the project will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of construction activity from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 P.M. Monday through Friday and 7:00 A.M. to 3:60 P.M. on Saturdays. Construction will not be permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized holidays. A less than significant impact is anticipated at this time. No Impact. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, therefore, student, teachers and other persons within the area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. Consequently no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact 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: 12.a.b.c. No Impact. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project site is the expansion of an existing educational facility surrounded by single-family residences R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 17 and other public schools. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the site is developed within a public institutional zone. The project will neither displace housing nor people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13. 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: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportin~ Information Sources Impact incorporated impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associates 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: b. Fire protection? X c. Police protection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X Comments: 13.a.b.c.e. Less Than Significant Impact. 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 be used to provide public facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 13.d. No Impact. The project will not have an impact upon, or will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City. No impacts are anticipated. 13.f. Less Than Significant Impact. 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 and the Riverside Department of Environmental Health have been made aware of this project. A condition of approval has been placed on this project that will require the proponent to obtain '~/Vill Serve" letters from all of the public utilities agencies. Service is currently provided for the surrounding residential development, so extending service to this site is possible, which would result in less than significant impacts as a result of the project. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources 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? R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiel~initial study-l-Revised.doc 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? X Comments: 14.a. No Impact. The project is an educational project with open space and athletic facilities. The anticipated need to increase the neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities as a result of this project is not anticipated. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.b. No Impact. The project includes the potential to include a maximum of 26 residential units in addition to the two existing units which will be replaced and relocated on-site. All residential units are intended to provide housing for students and/or employees of the school. Since these residential units are secondary uses to the school and there is not a substantial number of residential units proposed, no impacts are anticipated for recreational facilities. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Wouldthe project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No issues and Supporting Information Sources 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)? Comments: 15.a-c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. The project site is currently zoned Public Institutional, 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 Linscott Law & Greenspan, the proposed project will decrease the level of service (LOS) for AM/PM peak hour traffic from D to E. However, the required mitigation measures should improve the LOS to D once the mitigation measures are constructed. With mitigation measures in place, the project is consistent with General Plan goals and polices of maintaining a Level of Service "D" or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours. The proposed project is not anticipated to cause significant impacts to the R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc existing traffic system within the City of Temecula. Additionally, the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the cumulative impacts during the approval process and has determined that the project's traffic impacts warrant no further study or mitigations beyond those recommended by the traffic analysis. The following Mitigation Measures will be implemented: Mitigation Measures: 1. Restripe the southbound approach of Margarita Road to provide an additional southbound left turn lane (dual southbound left turn lanes) at the intersection of Pauba Road and Margarita Road. 2. Provide a traffic signal at the realigned intersection of Via Rami/Linfield Way @ Pauba Road. 3. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' RAN) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements 720' west of Linfieid Way to the West Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 4. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' RNV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 5. Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' RNV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 6. Future traffic studies may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. 7. A school zone and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by developer. 8. Payment of the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). 15.d-g. No Impact. The proposed development of this property will not result in a change in air traffic patterns by increasing the traffic levels in the vicinity. The site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight overlay district. The design of the project will not pose a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the people utilizing the roads in the vicinity of the project because there are no sharp curves or dangerous intersections proposed. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.e. No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project, as designed, complies with current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.f. No Impact. The proposed development complies with the City's Development Code parking requirements for public institutional uses. Many of the uses, such as athletic fields will only be used during off-peak hours and therefore shared parking will be utilized. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.g. No Impact. The proposed project does not propose to provide public transportation or a public transportation turnout. Since the proposed project is a private school, it is not anticipated that a significant need for public transportation will occur. The project as proposed does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Because the project does not propose to significantly increase its employee base, alternative transportation programs specifically designed for this project are not necessary. The project will be required to provide bicycle racks at a rate of 1 rack per 20 required parking space per the Development Code. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.dcc 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No tssues and Supporiing Information Sources 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: 16.a.b.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will require on-site storm drains to be constructed. The project will require various State and Federal Permits. The project will include the construction of underground storm drains and drainage swales in various location within the project site. No off-site storm drains or expansion of existing facilities are required as a result of this project. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has reviewed the proposed plan and has determined that the proposed project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Rancho California Water District has provided "water available" letters to the City indicating water resoumes are available to serve to proposed project, provided the applicant signs an Agency Agreement with the Water District. The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan and the General Plan Final EIR in regards to use and policies. Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f.g. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated 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. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supportin,~ Information Sources 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 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? 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. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated, . The project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment on site or in the vicinity of the project. The site includes natural drainage courses and areas identified as riparian woodland. Environmental studies have been completed and have identified an area to be set aside a resource area. The developer is required to obtain various State and Federal Permits including, a Section 1602 permit from the Department of Fish and Game, Clean Water Act Section 401 permit from the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers and clearance from the Department of Fish and Wildlife for various biological concerns on the project site. A cultural resources monitor is required to be present on the project site during all earthmoving activities. A traffic analysis has complete and was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer to identify traffic calming devices and mitigation measures to maintain an acceptable level of service as required in the General Plan. 17.b. Less Than Significant Impact. The individual effects from the project are less than significant with Mitigation Measures incorporated into the project. The project will not have a cumulative effect on the environment since the project site is an isolated area, surrounded by development. 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. With the mitigation measures in place, the project will be consistent with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impacts related to the future development will not have a significant impact. 17.c. No Impact. The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The institutional facility will be designed and developed consistent with the Development Code, PDO, and the General Plan. No 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. I Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. R:\P D O~2002\02-0012 Linfielc~initia[ study-l-Revised.doc b. 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 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. Comments: 18.a. There were no earlier analyses specifically related to this project site. 18.b. 18.c. 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, which affected this project. The mitigation measures are addressed in the Initial Study. R:\P D 0~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.dcc 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. SOURCES City of Temecula General Plan, adopted November 9, 1993. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted July 2, 1993 Linfield Christian School Master Plan and Design Guidelines, dated February 21, 2003 Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulic Study of Linfield Christian School, Kenneth W. Crawford, Jr. dated December 12, 2001. Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Linfield Christian School Master Plan, Linscott Law & Greenspan, dated December 7, 2001 Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum, Linfield Christian School Master Plan, Linscott Law & Greenspan, dated February 5, 2003 A General Biological Resources Survey And Jurisdictional Delineation on APN #955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated August, 2001 Results of A Focused Raptor Nesting Survey For APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., The Linfield School Project, dated March 21,2002. Focused Survey For The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly ON APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated June, 2002. A Phase I Archaeological And Paleontological Survey Report on The Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated February 11, 2003 Focused Survey Report for the Least Bell's Vireo and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher on the Linfield Christian School, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated August 2003. Status of Ongoing Focused Survey Report for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher on the Linfield Christian School, L & L Environmental, Inc., July 31 2003. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l-Revised.doc Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: Planning Application PA01-0653 Master CUP Planning Application PA02-0612 Planned Development Overlay Location: Applicant: South side of Rancho Vista Road, north of Pauba Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, 31950 Pauba Road, (APN: 955-002-002). Linfield Christian School 31950 Pauba Road Temecula, CA 92515 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Air Quality A temporary impact of offensive odors and additional dust due to the operation of heavy equipment during construction phases of the project. The project is required to provide a water truck to continuously '~vater down" the graded areas to reduce the amount of dust from excavation. During grading activities, site shall be watered down no less than three times per day in order to comply with AQMD Rule 403-Fugitive Dust. In addition, all heavy equipment must be regularly maintained to reduce emissions. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of on-going field verification and inspections. On-going during all grading activities Building Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land that potentially supports habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and California Gnatcatcher and raptors. The project will be required to acquire the necessary permits from federal and state agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 1 Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning and Public Works staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of grading permit. Planning Department and Public Works Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land containing riparian woodlands An environmental resource area has been set preservation and will not developed. aside for Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party As a part of the Master CUP, the plan designates the sensitive riparian woodland as a resource area not to be developed. Upon approval of the Master CUP and PDO Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land containing wetlands as identified by state and federal regulations The project will be required to acquire the necessary permits from federal and state agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the building plan check and grading permit review process. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Planning Department and Public Works Department R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~litigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land that potentially supports habitat for the Least Bell's Vireo, Southwestern Willow Flycatcher and California Gnatcatcher. All Coastal Sage Scrub habitat on the site including the patch in the southwest corner, between the riparian corridor and the road as well as the approximately .05 acres of hillside/top habitat in the northwest portion of the project site shall be avoided. In addition, a 150-foot buffer between the habitat areas and any proposed development shall also be avoided. In the event that the proponent submits a grading plan application for development or grading in either of the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat areas, the proponent shall also submit to the City and the U.S.F.W.S. a completed focused, full protocol study, either nesting or non- nesting season with negative finding and a conclusion by the U.S.F.W.S. permitted biologist that the species will not be negatively impacted by the proposed development plan and/or grading plan. In the event that the site is found to be occupied and a survey with positive findings is produced, no work within the Coastal Sage Scrub habitat or the 150-foot buffer area shall occur until a formal consultation with the U.S.F.W.S. has occurred and a permit for incidental take has been issued. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning and Public Works staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure prior to the issuance of a grading permit within the areas mentioned above. Prior to the issuance of grading permit for grading the habitat area. Planning Department and Public Works Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Hazardous Materials Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials Any hazardous wastes/materials encountered during construction shall be remediated in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. Prior to any initiating any construction activities, an environmental assessment shall be conducted to determine if a release of hazardous wastes/substances exists on the project site. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 3 Proper investigation and remedial actions shall be conducted at the site prior to its new development. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the building plan check and grading permit review process. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Noise Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance. All outdoor events and public gatherings must be complete prior to 10:00 P.M. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures via Code Enforcement. Ongoing Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party; Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified archaeologist shall develop a mitigation plan and a discovery clause/treatment plan, which includes mitigation monitoring to be implemented during all earthmoving phases of the project. The Planning Department and Building Department, in conjunction with the Luiseno Band will ensure monitors are provided during all earthmoving phases of the project. On-going during all earthmoving phases of the project Planning Department, Building Department, and Luiseno Band R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~M[tigation Monitoring Program.doc 4 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified archaeologist retained by the developer and approved by the City of Temecula shall review the approved project. The archaeologist shall conduct a pre-construction work recommendation plan and participate in a pre-construction meeting with the development staff and construction operators to ensure an understanding of the mitigation measures requires during construction. The Developer will retain a monitor(s) and conduct the required meetings with the Building Division and the Luiseno Band to ensure a plan is developed and an understanding is reached for monitoring. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department, Building Department, and Luiseno Band General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A final report must be prepared by the archaeologist for submission to the project proponent, the Eastern information Center and the City of Temecula. The report must describe the parcel history, summarize field and laboratory methods used, and include any testing or special analysis information conducted to support findings. The developer is responsible for acquiring an archaeologist to prepare a final report and submit the findings to the appropriate agencies. Prior to project completion Planning Department R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 5 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist retained by the developer and approved by the City of Temecula will develop a storage agreement with the LACM Vertebrae Paleontology Section, San Bernardino County Museum, or another acceptable museum repository to allow for the permanent storage and maintenance of any fossil remains recovered in the project area as a result of the monitoring program, and for the archiving of associated specimen data and corresponding geologic and geographic site data at the museum repository. The developer is responsible for retaining the required personnel and providing an agreement document to the City of Temecula for review. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist and develop a mitigation plan and a discovery clause/treatment plan that when implemented during earthmoving activities will allow for the recovery and subsequent treatment of any fossil remains and associated specimen and site data uncovered by these activities. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist to prepare a mitigation plan and submit to the City of Temecula for review Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfiel~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 6 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. The qualified paleontologist and/or a paleontologist construction monitor (both are required if a separate monitor will be provided) will attend a pre-construction meeting to explain the monitoring program to grading contractor staff and to develop procedures and lines of communication to be implemented if fossil remains are uncovered by earthmoving activities, particularly when or if a monitor may not be on-site. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist and/or paleontologist monitor and schedule a pre-construction meeting along with City of Temecula staff. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department and Building Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resoume, including amhaeological and/or paleontological resources. Paleontologic monitoring of all earthmoving activities on a full-time basis. The supervising paleontologist shall have the authority to reduce monitoring once he/she determines the probability of encountering fossils has dropped below an acceptable level. A written letter must be provided to City of Temecula staff prior to the monitor reducing his/her monitoring duties. The developer is responsible for acquiring a qualified paleontologist monitor on-site at all times until it is determined unnecessary and approved by City of Temecula staff. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department and Building Department R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 7 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A final report must be prepared by the paleontologist for submission to the project proponent, the County of Riverside, and the City of Temecula following accessioning of the Linfield Christian School fossil collection into the museum repository fossil collection. The report must describe the geology and stratigraphy parcel, summarize field and laboratory methods used, include faunal list, and an inventory of catalogued fossil specimens, evaluate the scientific importance of the specimens and discuss the relationship of any newly recorded fossil site in the parcel to relevant fossil sites previously recorded from the fossil-bearing rock unit in the parcel vicinity and from correlative rock units in other regions. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist to prepare a final report and submit the findings to the appropriate agencies. Prior to project completion Planning Department General Impact: intersections Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements from 720' east of Linfield Way to the West Boundary of the site, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit This work can be phased with phase 1 being completed with the relocation of the entry road. Phase 2 of the improvements would be the roadway in front of the elementary school and completed with Certificate of Occupancy of any new buildings east of Linfield Way, on Pauba Road or within 5 years, whichever occurs first. Phase 3 would include the remaining improvements adjacent to R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 8 Planning Area 2 (Future Faculty Housing) to the west boundary of the site and would be completed with the first building permit within Planning Area 2 or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key intersections Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' RNV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Ranch Vista Road or phase 3 of the improvements, whichever occurs first. Public Works and Planning Department Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Transportation Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' RAN) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Rancho Vista Road or Phase 3 improvements, whichever occurs first. Public Works and Planning Department R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 9 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key intersections A traffic study may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of a grading permit. Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key intersections A school zone and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by developer. Payment of Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of first building permit. Public Works and Planning Department R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 Linfield\Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 10 ATrACHMENT NO. 2 DRAFT ORDINANCE APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfieid\CC Staff Report-1 .doc 6 ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPTING SECTIONS 17.22.180 THROUGH 17.22.188 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 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 A. Karen Raftery, Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA02- 0612, a request for a Zone Change to amend the zoning designation from Public Institutional to Planned Development Overlay, and to adopt Sections 17.22.180 through 17.22.188 of the Municipal Code to include the PDO text and development standards for property generally located north of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 ("Project"). B. The application for the Project was processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on May 21, 2003 to consider the application for the Project. D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-032, recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA02-0612, a Zone Change to amend the land use designation from Public Institutional to Planned Development Overlay and to adopt Section 17.22.180 including the PDO text and development standards for property generally located north of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 ("Project"). E. On August 26, 2003, 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. F. On August 26, 2003, 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. 03- , which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Ord Zone change.doc 1 Section 2. findings: The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following A. The proposed zone change is consistent with the proposed land use designation for the General Plan. The PDO text as proposed and incorporated as attached Exhibit A are also consistent with the General Plan. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Planning Application No. 02-0612, A Zone Change to amend the zoning designation from Public Institutional to Planned Development Overlay and adopt sections 17.22.180 through 17.22.188 of the Municipal Code to include the PDO text and development standards for property generally located north of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated by reference and made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 2003 ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the forgoing Ordinance No. 03- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of July, 2003, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of August, 2003 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Ord Zone change.doc 2 EXHIBIT A PDO-7 Text R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Ord Zone change.doc 3 LINFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.22.180 Title Sections 17.22.180 through 17.22.188 shall be known as "PDO-7" (Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District). 17.22.181 Purpose and Intent The Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-7) is intended to create a unique mixed-use area within the city, blending educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities in a comprehensive master plan that builds upon the existing campus development. PDO-7 allows for the introduction of compatible housing opportunities within the conventional zoning district and serves to implement the objectives of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan. Supplemental development standards have been provided to recognize the transition between the existing campus facilities and the new development areas, to promote compatibility with the surrounding land uses, and to insure the long term design quality of the Linfield Christian School PDO District. 17.22.184 Relationship with the Development Code and Citywide Design Guidelines The List of permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22.186.B. Except as modified by the provisions of Section 17.22.188, the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. Where this PDO is silent, the development standards of the Public Institutional (PI) district in the Development Code shall apply (Section 17.12). The development standards in the Development Code that would apply to the Medium Density Residential District, and are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete, for any proposed residential housing to be located in Planning Area 2 of PDO-7. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. 3. The Master Plan and Design Guidelines approved as a part of the Linfield Christian School Master Plan shall apply to all components of this PDO. R:tP D 0~002102-0612 Linfiel~CC Ord Zone change, doc07/31~2003 - 4 - 17.22.186 Use Regulations The list of permitted land uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22.186.B. PDO-7 contains three different Planning Areas as shown in Exhibit 17.22.186.A. The three Planning Areas are identified as follows: Planning Area 1: Educational/Institutional: identified as (El) in Table 17.22.186.B. Planning Area 1 is further separated into two sub-areas: Planning Area lA is the main Linfield Christian School Campus, and Planning Area lB is the existing Elementary School Campus. Planning Area 2: Educational/Residential: identified as (ER) in Table 17.22.186.B; and, · Planning Area 3: Public/Institutional: identified as (PI) in Table 17.22.186.B. Where indicated with the letter "P" the use shall be a permitted use. A letter "C" indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Where indicated with a "-", the use is prohibited within the Planning Area. Description of Use A Art Gallery Auditorium Area lA &l B (El) P Area 2 (ER) P P C Area 3 (PI) P C B Reserved C Christmas tree lots P p p C C P P C Churches, Temples, religious institutions Colleges and Universities Communications and microwave installations (1) C C P C C Community Health Clinics Community Center Conference Center Congregate care housing Congregate living health facility Construction trailer (temporary) Convalescent homes C C C P P C C C C P P P C P P D Day care center P P P Day care health center P P E Reserved R:IP D 0~2002102-0612 LinfielolCC Ord Zone change, doc 5 Food services (for campus and special events) P P P G Garages, public parking C C Golf courses C P Golf college or sports training facility C P Government offices P P Government services P P Group home H Helipad or heliport C C Hospital C C I Reserved J Reserved K Reserved L Library P P P M Maintenance facility (accessory to primary use P C P only) Modular classrooms (used as interim classroom P P space) Museum P P P N Reserved O Reserved P Parks and recreation areas P P P Performing arts, theaters and places of public P C assembly Police/sheriff station P C Post office P Public utilities C C C Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting studios P P Recording studios P P Religious facilities C C C Residential - single family detached, school P P P superintendent or dean's home, caretaker home, (accessory to private school use only) R:IP D 0~002t02-0612 Lin field, CC Ord Zone change, doc 6 Residential- single-family attached or duplex P housing for school faculty Residential- multiple family housing for school P faculty Residential-senior housing C C Residential- student dorms C C C S Schools, public (elementary, jr. high, high school) P P P Schools, private P C C Skilled nursing facility C C C Sports and recreation facilities P P P T Trade or vocational schools C C C U Utility offices and service yards C C C V Reserved iw Reserved X Reserved Y Reserved Z Reserved NOTES: (1) Subject to Section 17.40 of the Ternecula Municipal Code. Legend: P= Permitted by right in the district C= Permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the district - = Use is prohibited in the district (El) = Educational/Institutionah Planning Areas lA and lB (ER) = Educational/Residential: Planning Area 2 (PI) = Public/Institutionah Planning Area 3 R:iP D 012002t02-0612 Linfielc~CC Ord Zone change, doc 7 LINFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNING AREA MAP Rancho Vista Road PLANNING AREA lA Pauba Road PLANNING AREA lB Green Tree Lane LEGEND: Planning Area lA Planning Area lB Planning Area 2 Planning Area 3 56.89 acres 4.78 acres 9.81 acres 22.29 acres Educational/Institutional (El) Educational/Institutional (El) Educational/Residential (ER) Public/Institutional (PI) EXHIBIT 17.22.186.A R:tP D 0t2.002102-0612 Linfield~CC Ord Zone change, doc 8 17.22.188 Supplemental Development Standards Permitted and conditionally permitted uses within PDO-7 shall comply with the development standards of the underlying Public/Institutional zoning district except as modified or augmented by the standards contained in this section. A. General All new development occurring within Planning Areas lA and lB shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan, provided that modifications of up to 20% of the estimated square footage of the individual or combined structures may be approved by the Planning Director. Minor modifications to the site location or number of new facilities may also be approved by the Planning Director. Major modifications to the overall scale, intensity or intended land uses within the Planning Areas shall be referred to the Planning Commission for approval. All new development deemed to be in compliance with the Linfield Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be subject to the Administrative Review process, pursuant to Section 17.05.020 of the Temecula Development Code. Development proposals for faculty housing units within Planning Area 2 of PDO-7 shall be subject to the development standards of the Medium Density Residential (M) zoning district, and will require review and approval of a Development Plan by the Planning Commission. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. B. Setbacks Landscape setbacks along the Pauba Road and Rancho Vista Road street frontages shall be an average of twenty (20) feet, except for Planning Area lB which shall be a minimum of five (5) feet, due to the presence of the existing Elementary School parking lot. The overall average front setback along either roadway shall be no les than 20 feet. 2. Sidewalks, pedestrian paths, paving, driveways and wrought iron or chain link fencing are permitted to be located within the landscaped setback area. C. Building Height Structures within Planning Area I shall not exceed two stories, or forty-five (45) feet in height. Architectural projections such as mansards, towers and other design elements shall be permitted to extend an additional ten (10) feet above the height of the building. Structures designed as split-level in order to accommodate the existing site grades are permitted up to a height of sixty (60) feet as measured from the lowest grade. Any structures over forty five (45) feet in height shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest property line, and a minimum of 250 feet from the property line of any single-family residential structure. R:tP D 0t2.002102-0612 Linfield~CC Ord Zone change, doc 9 2. Single family residential and multi-family residential structures shall not exceed two stories, or a maximum of thirty (30) feet in height. D. Parking Parking requirements for assembly facilities within Planning Area I shall be considered as shared parking in conjunction with the standard spaces required under the Development Code for school parking. This determination applies to those assembly or special event facilities primarily used by the student population and faculty during the school day, or those facilities conducting events after school or in the evening hours when regular school parking is available. In order to provide sufficient onsite parking in the case of a special event on campus, and to prevent potential overflow parking on surrounding public streets, temporary, special event parking may be provided on designated outdoor play courts in Planning Area 1. Such temporary parking areas shall be clearly identified, and cease operation at the conclusion of the special event. E. Landscaping and Fencing I. Landscaping within parking lot areas shall be consistent with Section 17.24.050.H of the Temecula Development Code, with the following exceptions: Landscaped planters shall not be required within the interior of parking lots except for at the ends of each row of parking spaces, due to the need to insure clear visibility in parking areas for campus security purposes. Required trees within the parking lot area shall be limited to the islands at the end of the parking rows, and within the landscaped areas at the perimeter of the parking lot. Trees shall be minimum fifteen-gallon containers, and may be spaced in a liner fashion around the perimeter or clustered. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of 1 tree for every 4 required parking spaces. Due to the extensive amount of existing mature trees within the District, and the internal nature of the parking lots within the landscaped setting, existing trees immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. c. Parking lot landscaping standards shall only apply to new or substantially redeveloped parking lot areas within the District. Fencing for school facilities and outdoor recreation areas shall be exempt from the fence height requirements of Section 17.12.050 of the Public/Institutional District of the Temecula Development Code. Acceptable fencing materials include finished wrought iron or tubular steel, chain link, vinyl and decorative masonry. R:IP D 0~002t02-0612 LinfielolCC Ord Zone change, doc 10 ATrACHMENT NO. 3 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Repor~-I .doc 7 RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE, GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-002-002. 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 A. Karen Raftery, Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01- 0653, a Conditional Use Permit to establish a master plan and design guidelines for a private school complex, athletic fields and related facilities and a future residential area for up to 26 residents on a 94 acres site located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 ("Project"). B. The application for the Project was processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on May 21, 2003 to consider the application for the Project. D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-033, recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA01-0653, a Conditional Use Permit to establish a master plan and design guidelines for a private school complex, athletic fields and related facilities and a future residential area for up to 26 residents on a 94 acres site located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 E. On August 26, 2003, 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. F. On August 26, 2003, 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. 03- , which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso CUP.doc 1 Section 2. In approving the Conditional Use Permit to establish a master plan and design guidelines for a private school complex, athletic fields and related facilities and a future residential area for up to 26 residents on a 94 acres site, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following findings: A. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the general plan. The PDO meets the purpose and intent of as conditional use permit as defined in section 17.04.010A of the Development Code. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of the adjacent uses, buildings and structures, because the proposed uses are similar or function similar to the surrounding uses in the immediate area, which includes schools and single family residences. C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the development code and required by the Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood because the project has been proposed in a manner that the site can accommodate the necessary improvements including fencing, walls, yards, parking, loading areas, landscaping, buffer areas and other features prescribed in the PDO text and Master Plan and Design Guidelines. In addition, the project includes conditions of approval and a mitigation monitoring program that ensure the project integrates the use with other uses in the neighborhood. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community because the proposed PDO is consistent with the land use surrounding the project site, which includes residential and educational facilities. The applicant has submitted traffic reports and staff has concluded that the 26 additional residences will not have a negative impact, therefore additional improvements will not be required. E. The decision to approve that portion of Planning Application No. PA01-0653, a Conditional Use Permit to establish a master plan and design guidelines for a private school complex, athletic fields and related facilities and a future residential area for up to 26 residents on a 94 acres site was based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the City Council. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Planning Application No. PA01-0653, a Conditional Use Permit to establish a master plan and design guidelines for a private school complex, athletic fields and related facilities and a future residential area for up to 26 residents on a 94 acres site located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-02-002, 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:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso CUP.doc 2 Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 2003 Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor A'I-rEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 03- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfie[d~CC Reso CUP.doc 3 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso CUP.doc 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0653 (Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to establish future educational, recreational, institutional, and residential facilities on 93.77 acres and to adopt a Master Plan and Design Guidelines Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-002-002 Approval Date: August26,2003 Expiration Date: August 26, 2005 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department 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 Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso CUP.doc 5 All these conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). A follow-up raptor survey shall be prepared and submitted to staff for review as recommended in the raptor nesting survey, prepared by L & L Environmental Inc., dated March 21, 2002. Said survey shall take place during the raptor-breeding season as recommended by a qualified biologist. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations and Master Plan Document dated February 21, 2003, on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division, unless superceded by these conditions of approval. 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. The Applicant shall submit ten (10) copies of the Amended Master Plan and Design Guidelines document to the Planning Department within 30 days of the approval date. The following revisions are required: a. The Master Plan shall be revised to eliminate the word Master for Master Conditional Use Permit in all locations of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. b. Section 2.4.8 on page 16 of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be revised to read as follows: "Based upon the available net acreage of the site and building design, a maximum of 26 residences may be developed within Planning Area 2." A section shall be added requiring Planning Area 2 to provide a direct access path intended for vehicular and/or pedestrians to the main campus facility. Language indicating that only those trees existing immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. The bottom line of the front cover sheet of the Master Plan document to read: For Conditional Use Permit PA01-0653. The Design Guidelines shall include specific language that student drop-off zones adjacent to residential zones are to be enhanced by the landscaping of shrubs and trees. All exhibits within the Master Plan shall be revised to be consistent with each other, as shown on exhibit 2.2.B. Table 3.4.3 shall be revised to indicate the use of Mosco lighting for recreation fields and courts. Section 3.2.2 shall be revised to include stucco finish as a permitted finish. Section 3.3.5 shall be revised to include vinyl fencing as a type of fencing permitted. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso CUP.doc 6 The fencing plan. Figure 3.3.5 must be revised to accurately reflect the type of fencing existing and proposed, including height and type and provide separate symbols for each type of fencing. Language indicating that mitigation and landscaping for the drainage course located along the western portion of the project site will be required and determined by the California Department of Fish and Game as part of the 1603 permit should be included into the Master Plan text. The area immediately south east of the lake should be identified as habitat area and planted with native habitat to support this issue. This should be clearly labeled on the exhibits in the Master Plan and included in the text document. Delete Cortaderia selloana from Table 3.3.6 unless sterile varieties are used. Delete Schinus terebinthifolius from Table 3.3.6, as it is not zoned for the Temecula area. Language indicating wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along retaining walls. Add the following language into the Master Plan and Design Guidelines: 1 ) Structures existing on the Linfield Christian School campus as of the date of adoption of this ordinance shall be considered "grandfathered" in regard to any new development standards, setbacks, and design guidelines adopted subsequent to the original construction date of these facilities. 2) All new development occurring in PDO-7 shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan Design Guidelines approved in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit # PA01- 0653. 3) Future Development in Planning Area 2 shall be consistent with the design theme, materials, and color palette established for the main campus in Planning Area lA, as set forth in the Master CUP and Design Guidelines for the Linfield Christian School. In Planning Area 3, the design and architecture shall be consistent with the currently approved plans for the Golf College Training Facility. In the event this use is not established, future development in Planning Area 3 shall conform to the Design Guidelines established for Planning Area lA in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. 4) Buildings constructed with pre-finished metal panels and set on a permanent foundation are permissible for maintenance and storage buildings within Planning Area 1. Said buildings shall be treated with rust-proof, powder coated paints, and shall be consistent with the main color theme established for the campus. 5) Chain link fencing located at property boundaries adjacent to residential uses shall incorporate vines or screening hedges to provide greater privacy. Installation of screening plant materials along existing fences shall be provided in conjunction with the Development Plan approval for the affected Development Sub-Area, as shown in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiel~CC Reso CUP.doc 7 10. The lighting plan shall be revised and submitted to staff to verify consistency with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. Lighting proposed adjacent to residential lots shall be setback twice the distance of the height of the fixture up to 25 feet. All lighting shall be fully shielded and directed down and reduce glare onto adjacent parcels. 11. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 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. 12. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at the time of building, plan submittal. 13. 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 for each building may vary and 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) COMMUNITY SERVICES 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit additional residential units will be subject to Quimby in-lieu fees calculated in accordance with Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance 16.33 and will be due prior to the issuance of any building permits for these new dwellings. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso CU P.doc 8 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfieid~CC Staff Report-l.doc 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A 'tWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALLING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED BE'r~VEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOW PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-002-002 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 A. Karen Raffery, Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01- 0653, A Development Plan for phase A-1 of the Linfield School master plan to include a two story high school building totaling approximately 38,358 square feet and an approximately 9,728 square foot one story administrative office building, generally located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002 ("Project"). B. The application for the Project was processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on May 21, 2003 to consider the application for the Project. D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-034, recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. 01-0653, A Development Plan for phase A-1 of the Linfield School master ptan to include a two story high school building totaling approximately 38,358 square feet and an approximately 9,728 square foot one story administrative office building generally located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002. E. On August 26, 2003, 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. F. On August 26, 2003, 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. 03- , which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 1 Section 2. findings: The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following A. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Public Institutional (PI) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses as typical uses in the Public Institutional designation. The proposed project includes a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) with permitted uses within the project site. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the PDO. The project has been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. B. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in PDO. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Master Plan and Design Guidelines of the Linfield Christian School. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation; architectural design and site plan design. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Planning Application No. 01-0653, A Development Plan for phase A-1 of the Linfield School Master Plan to include a two story high school building totaling approximately 38,358 square feet and an approximately 9,728 square foot one story administrative office building generally located between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road, west of meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 955-002-002, 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 shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 2003 ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayer Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso DP.doc 2 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. 03- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso DP.dcc 3 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0653 (Development Plan) Project Description: A Development Plan application for Phase A-1 of the Linfield School Master Plan, an approximately 38,358 square foot, two story high school building and an approximately 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. DIF Category: Public Institutional (Educational) Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-002-002 Approval Date: Expiration Date: August 26, 2003 August 26, 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 5 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 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 development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Planning Department. Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "N" (Conceptual Landscape Plan). 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. The applicant shall screen all roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences, utilizing architectural elements as a screening method. Ground cover shall be used to fill in all shrub beds and all landscape areas below trees. Ground covers and spacing shall be as approved by the planning Director. Species and varieties of all shrubs and trees used shall be as approved by the Planning Director. ........ '~ by *~'" o~....;.,, r~;.~.,... (D ~-~- ................... u ......... eleted at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) Provide a minimum 5' width planting area at the ends of all parking rows. The planter length is to be equal to the adjoining parking space. The planter is to contain a minimum of one tree, shrubs and ground covers. Provide a minimum of one broad canopy type tree per 4 parking spaces. Plants shall be provided at sizes to meet minimum City of Temecula Development Code and City-Wide Design Guideline requirements and recommendations. All utilities shall be screened from view. Show and label all utilities on landscape plans and provide appropriate screening. Provide a 3' clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Substitute shrubs shall be provided for Lantana and Carissa as they are not zoned for the Temecula area. Wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along the segmental retaining wall located to the north and west of the Phase 1 classroom building as approved by the Planning Director. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 6 16. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily tufted, seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control as approved by the Planning Director. 17. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 18. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 19. 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. 20. The applicant shall submit a revised parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code, Master Plan and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees and not to impact neighbors. 21. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 24. An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 25. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 26. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 27. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 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 plans shall be accompanied by the following items: R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 7 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 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 Building Occupancy 28. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. 29. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 30. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building or monument sign closest to the street. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 31. 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. 32. 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. 33. All improvement plans, 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. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 8 34. The Developer shall construct 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 35. 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. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 36. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 37. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 38. A Soil 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. 39. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 40. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 41. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 Linfielc~CC Reso DP.doc 9 a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 42. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off- site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 45. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 46. 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. Prior to Issuance of the Ist Building Permit 47. The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of 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 Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements from 720' east of Linfield Way to the West Boundary of the site, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). This work can be phased with phase 1 being completed with the relocation of the entry road. Phase 2 would be the roadway in front of the elementary school and completed with Certificate of Occupancy of any new buildings located east of Linfield Way on Pauba Road or within 5 years, whichever occurs first. Phase 3 would include the remaining improvements adjacent to Planning Area 2 (Future Faculty Housing) to the west boundary of the site and would be completed with the first building permit within Planning Area 2 or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. b. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfiero~cc Reso DP,doc 10 48. 49, 50. but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Rancho Vista Road or Phase 3, whichever occurs first. c. Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from M~rG-~r!t"- Pauba Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until Phase 2 improvements are required. (Revised at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) 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. Flow line 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, 801,802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400,401, and 402. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flow line grades. h. 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. /; .... *';"* ........ * ";~ """'~;~" ~tc.) (Deleted at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Pauba Road and Linfield Way to include signal interconnect with the signal(s) at the intersection(s) of Pauba Road and Margarita Road. Work must be designed, bonded and a contract let prior to issuance of the first building permit. (Added at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso DP.doc 11 51. A School Zone signing and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included with the street improvement plans for the project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by the developer. (Added at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) 52. 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. (Added at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) 53. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. (Added at Planning Commission hearing 5/21/03) 54. All proposed storm drain systems shown onsite shall be privately maintained. 55. 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. 56. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 57. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 58. 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 59. 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. 60. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, all public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City Standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 61. 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. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso DP.doc 12 62. Streetlights on the private interior streets will be maintained by the property owner. 63. All perimeter walls, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian accesses, private recreational amenities and open space shall be maintained by the property owner. 64. Street improvements will include Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. 65. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure area. 66, An irrevocable Offer to Dedicate in fee shall be provided to the City of Temecula for the area which includes the MWD easement along the westerly boundary for a future multi- use trail as identified in the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. The offer to dedicate shall be provided not later than six months following the approval date of the project. The offer shall remain until the City either accepts the offer or expressly relinquishes the offer. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 67. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 68. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on March 31, 2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 69. 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 and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 70. 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. 71. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 72. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 73. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) R:\P D O',2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 13 74. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building(s). 75. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry of the building(s). 76. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 77. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 78. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 79. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 80. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 81. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 82. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 83. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 84. Show all building setbacks. 85. 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 86. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at the time of building, plan submittal. 87. 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 R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfleld\CC Reso DP.doc 14 88. 89. 90. 91, 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. for a total fire flow of 4850 GPM with a 4-hour duration. The required fire flow for each building may vary and 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) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of hydrants for each building will be set at time of water plan submission, but the complex overall shall provide on-site hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system and they 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 required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 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) 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) 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) 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) 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) All traffic-calming devices that could impede or slow emergency vehicle access are prohibited, except those expressly approved by the fire prevention bureau individually on a case-by-case basis when they maintain the required travel widths and radii. 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) R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Reso DP.doc 15 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. Prior to any 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 local water company signs the plans, 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 gave 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 a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for this school facility. The complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex, which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. 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 in each building. 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 in each building, and linked together as approved. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, one or more "Knox- Box" shall be installed as approved. 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) R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfielo~CC Reso DP.doc 16 105. 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) 106. 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. 107. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developedapplicant 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 108. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple p~ot 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. This shall be provided for each building prior to final or C of O on THAT BUILDING. 109. If there are changes to underlying maps then prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. 110. 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) 111. 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) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 112. The applicant shall consult with the Riverside Transit Agency regarding the attached letters dated December 5, 2002 and April 28, 2003 from the Riverside Transit Agency. 113. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated December 4, 2002 from the Rancho California Water District. 114. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated January 25, 2002 from the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 17 115. 116. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated February 11, 2002 from the U.S. Department of the Army. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated March 18, 2002 from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Date Name printed R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Reso DP.doc 18 ATI'ACHMENT NO. 5 ADOPTED PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Staff Report-1 .doc 9 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-031 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code and an initial study was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, a Mitigation Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared including, in the time and manner prescribed by State, local law and CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program as attached Exhibit 'A" subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Environmental Compliance Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. R:~P D O't2002~02-0612 Un.field, Staff Relx~ PC-I.doc 18 · Section 3. Commission this 218t day of May 2003. ATTEST: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning John ~elesio, Co-Chairperson ~ Ubnoske, SeCretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORN~,;',,/ COUNTY OF RIVEI~,~,~DI~ CITY OF TEMECULA I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC 'Resolution No. 2003-031 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21~ day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, OIhasso NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: .1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~taff Repoll PC.l,doc 19 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-032 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 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. 02-0612 Zoning Map Amendment, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered the Application on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findin.qs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0612 (Planned Development Overlay) hereby makes the following findings: A. The proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (PI) Public Institutional of the City General Plan. B. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the residential an(~ educational development proposed, R:~P D 0~.002~02-0612 Linfield~taff Repo~ PC-l.doc 21 C. The proposed Planned Development Overlay Zoning District is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the project will not approve any specific on-the-ground development and future development will require additional and appropriate review Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An environmental initial study has been prepared for Planning Application No. PA02-0612 in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act. As a result, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for this Planning Application (PA02-0612) Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 218t day of May 2003. John "l~elesio, Co-Chairperson ATTEST: [sEAL] STATE OF .CALIFORNIA~/ ' COUHT, Y OF RIVERSIDE,' CITY OF 3'EMECULA SS I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-032 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21 st day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio D~b~ie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Unficl~taff Report PC-I.doc 22 PC RESOLUTION NO, 2003-033 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE cl'r~ COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Unfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0653 Master Conditional Use Permit, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered Planning Application No 01-0653 on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upo.n the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findlnqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby makes the following findings: A. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, because the proposed PDO meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code B. The nature of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community, because the proposed PDO is consistent with the land uses surrounding the project site, which includes residential and educational facilities..The applicant has submitted traffic reports and staff have concluded that the additional residences will not result in a negative impact. R:~P D 0~2002\02-0612 Liafield~glaff Report PC-I.doc 24 C. The proposed conditional use permit 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, because the proposed uses are similar or function similar to the surrounding uses in the immediate area, which include schools and single- family residences D. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood, because the project site maintains vast amounts of open space and is designed to compliment the natural environmental setting, while establishing clearly defined areas of education and recreation uses with the use of landscaping and fencing. In addition, if approved, the project will maintain its own set of development standards to be approved and adopted by the City Council which will govem parking standards, loading areas, fences, walls, buffer areas and landscaping. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. 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 21st day of May 2003. Joh i~ Co-~hairperson ATTEST: Debbie ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] R:~P D Ok2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-I.doc 25 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. 2003-033 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~P D O~00~02-0612 [~field~acef Re~tx~t PC-I,doc 26 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL R:~P D O~2002\0241612 Linfi¢ld~taff Repo~ PC-! .doc 27 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0653 (Condltl0nal Uae Permit) Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to establish future educational, recreational, institutional, and residential facilities on 93.77 acres and to adopt a Master Plan and Design Guidelines Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-02-002 Approval Date: May 21, 2003 Expiration Date: May 20, 2005 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department 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 Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. All these conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit. R:~P D O~2002\02-06l 2 [Jnfield~Staff Report PC-I .doc 28 The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). A follow-up raptor survey shall be prepared and submitted to staff for review as recommended in the raptor nesting survey, prepared by L & L Environmental Inc., dated March 21, 2002. Said survey shall take place during the raptor-breeding season as recommended by a qualified biologist. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations and Master Plan Document dated February 21,2003, on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division, unless supemeded by these conditions of approval. 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. The Applicant shall submit ten (10) copies of the Amended Master Plan and Design Guidelines document to the Planning Department within 30 days of the approval date. The following revisions are required: a. The Master Plan shall be revised to eliminate the word Master for Master Conditional Use Permit in all locations of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. b. Section 2.4.8 on page 16 of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be revised to read as follows: abased upon the available net acreage of the site and building design, a maximum of 26 residences may be developed within Planning Area 2." c. A section shall be added requiring Planning Area 2 to provide a direct access path intended for vehicular and/or pedestrians to the main campus facility. d. Language indicating that only those trees existing immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. e. The bottom line of the front cover sheet of the Master Plan document to read: For Conditional Use Permit PA01-0653, f. The Design Guidelines shall include specific language that student drop-off zones adjacent to residential zones are to be enhanced by the landscaping of shrubs and trees. g. All exhibits within the Master Plan shall be revised to be consistent with each other, as shown on exhibit 2.2.B. h. Table 3.4.3 shall be revised to indicate the use of Mosco lighting for recreation fields and courts. i. Section 3.2.2 shall be revised to include stucco finish as a permitted finish. j. Section 3.3.5 shall be revised to include vinyl fencing as a type of fencing permitted. k. The fencing plan. Figure 3.3.5 must be revised to accurately reflect the type of fencing existing and proposed, including height and type and provide separate symbols for each type of fencing. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~taff Report PC.l.doc 29 10. Language indicating that mitigation and landscaping for the drainage course located along the western portion of the project site will be required and determined by the California Department of Fish and Game as part of the 1603 permit should be included into the Master Plan text. The area immediately south east of the lake should be identified as habitat area and planted with native habitat to support this issue, This should be clearly labeled on the exhibits in the Master Plan and included in the text document. Delete Cortaderia selloana from Table 3.3.6 unless sterile varieties are used. Delete Schinus terebinthifolius from Table 3.3,6, as it is not zoned for the Temecula area. Language indicating wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along retaining walls. q. Add the following language into the Master Plan and Design Guidelines: o Structures existing on the Linfield Christian School campus as of the date of adoption of this ordinance shall be considered "grandfathered" in regard to any new development standards, setbacks, and design guidelines adopted subsequent to the original construction date of these facilities. All new development occurring in PDO-7 shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan Design Guidelines approved in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit # PA01-0653. Future Development in Planning Area 2 shall be consistent with the design theme, materials, and color palette established for the main campus in Planning Area lA, as set forth in the Master CUP and Design Guidelines for the Linfield Christian School. In Planning Area 3, the design and amhitecture shall be consistent with the currently approved plans for the Golf College Training Facility. In the event this use is not established, future development in Planning Area 3 shall conform to the Design Guidelines established for Planning Area lA in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. Buildings constructed with pre-finished metal panels and set on a permanent foundation are permissible for maintenance and storage buildings within Planning Area 1. Said buildings shall be treated with rust-proof, powder coated paints, and shall be consistent with the main color theme established for the campus. Chain link fencing located at property boundaries adjacent to residential uses shall incorporate vines or screening hedges to provide greater privacy. Installation of screening plant materials along existing fences shall be provided in conjunction with the Development Plan approval for the affected Development Sub-Area, as shown in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. The lighting plan shall be revised and submitted to staff to verify consistency with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. Lighting proposed adjacent to residential lots shall be setback twice the distance of the height of the fixture up to 25 feet. All lighting shall be fully shielded and directed down and reduce glare onto adjacent parcels. R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 1 infielchSlaff Report PC-I.doc 30 11. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 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. 12. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the Califomia Building Code (CBC), Califomia Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in fome at the time of building, plan submittal. 13. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-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 for each building may vary and 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) COMMUNITY SERVICES 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit additional residential units will be subject to Quimby in- lieu fees calculated in accordance with Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance 16.33 and will be due prior to the issuance of any building permits for these new dwellings. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:~P D O~02~02-0612 Linfield~S~aff Report PC-I .doc 31 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-034 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. 01-0653 Development Plan Application, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered the Application on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findlnq$. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby makes the following findings: A. 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 because the project includes a PDO, which allows for a flexibility in uses and development standards and it has been determined that the development plan application is consistent with the general plan, PDO, state law and all applicable city ordinances. R:h~ D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC- l.doc 33 B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare because the project provides enhanced opportunities for student facilities and the project has been designed in compliance with the overall master plan, which provides public improvements to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the persons in the area. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. Approval. That the City of Temecuia Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution for Planning Application No. PA01-0653 (Development Plan), substantially in the form contained in Exhibit "D." Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. ATTEST: John Telesio, Co-Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-034 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~ D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 34 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 35 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0653 (Development Plan) Project Description: A Development Plan application for Phase A-1 of the Linfield School Master Plan, an approximately 38,358 square foot, two story high school building and an approximately 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. DIF Category: Public Institutional (Educational) Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-02-002 Approval Date: May 21, 2003 Expiration Date: May 21, 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711,4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 IAnfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 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 development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Planning Department. Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "N" (Conceptual Landscape Plan). 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. The applicant shall screen all roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences, utilizing architectural elements as a screening method. Ground cover shall be used to fill in all shrub beds and all landscape areas below trees. Ground covers and spacing shall be as approved by the planning Director. Species and varieties of ail shrubs and trees used shall be as approved by the Planning Director. Schinus molle trees shall be used as street trees along interior streets unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director. Provide a minimum 5' width planting area at the ends of all parking rows. The planter length is to be equal to the adjoining parking space. The planter is to contain a minimum of one tree, shrubs and ground covers. Provide a minimum of one broad canopy type tree per 4 parking spaces. Plants shall be provided at sizes to meet minimum City of Temecula Development Code and City-Wide Design Guideline requirements and recommendations. All utilities shall be screened from view. Show and label all utilities on landscape plans and provide appropriate screening. Provide a 3' clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Substitute shrubs shall be provided for Lantana and Carissa as they are not zoned for the Temecula area. Wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along the segmental retaining wall located to the north and west of the Phase I classroom building as approved by the Planning Director. R:\P D 0\2002\024)612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-I.doc 37 16. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily tufted, seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control as approved by the Planning Director. 17. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 18. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 19. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and retum one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 20. The applicant shall submit a revised parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code. Master Plan and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees and not to impact neighbors. 21. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 24. An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 25. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 26. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 27. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 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 plans shall be accompanied by the following items: Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. R:W D Ok2002\024)612 L,iafieltl~taff Report PC-l.doc 38 Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with 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 Building Occupancy 28. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. 29. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 30. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building or monument sign closest to the street. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 31. 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. 32. - 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. 33. All improvement plans, 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. 34. The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. 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 R:~ D O\2002\024~612 Linfi¢ld~qtaff Report PC-l.doc 39 35. Storm drain facilities Sewer and domestic water systems 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 cimulation as required by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 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. The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in confo~'mance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 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. 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 provided by the Developer. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 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. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 4O and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. '44. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work pedormed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 45. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 46. 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. Prior to Issuance of the 1st Building Permit 47. 48. The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of 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 Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements from 720' east of Linfield Way to the West Boundary of the site, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). This work can be phased with phase 1 being completed with the relocation of the entry road. Phase 2 would be the roadway in front of the elementary school and completed with Certificate of Occupancy of any new buildings located east of Linfield Way on Pauba Road or within 5 years, whichever occurs first. Phase 3 would include the remaining improvements adjacent to Planning Area 2 (Future Faculty Housing) to the west boundary of the site and would be completed with the first building permit within Planning Area 2 or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. b. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Rancho Vista Road or Phase 3, whichever occurs first. c. Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' RAN) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until Phase 2 improvements are required. 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: R:XP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 41 a. Flow line grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C, paving, 49. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. Streetlights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800,801,802 and 803. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400, 401, and 402. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centedine, top of curb and flow line grades. ho 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 proposed ddveway shown as "emergency/secondary gated ingress-egress" off of Rancho Vista Road should be re-aligned to match the existing street's location across the street (i.e. Via El Greco) and/or show how the driveway's access will be restricted (i.e. restrict movement via median, etc.) Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Pauba Road and Linfield Way to include signal interconnect with the signal(s) at the intersection(s) of Pauba Road and Margarita Road. Work must be designed, bonded and a contract let prior to issuance of the fimt building permit. A School Zone signing and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included with the street improvement plans for the project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by the developer. 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. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. All proposed storm drain systems shown onsite shall be privately maintained. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06, The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. R:\P D 0\2002\02-0612 Linfield',S~aff Report PC- I .doc 42 Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 58. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 59. 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 60. 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. 61. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, all public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City Standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 62, 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. 63. Streetlights on the private interior streets will be maintained by the property owner. 64. All perimeter walls, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian accesses, private recreational amenities and open space shall be maintained by the property owner. 65. Street improvements will include Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. 66. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure area. 67. An irrevocable Offer to Dedicate in fee shall be provided to the City of Temecula for the area which includes the MWD easement along the westerly boundary for a future multi-use trail as identified in the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. The offer to dedicate shall be provided not later than six months following the approval date of the project. The offer shall remain until the City either accepts the offer or expressly relinquishes the offer. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 68, All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 69. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on R:~P D O't2002\02-0612 Linfi¢ld~Staff Report PC.l.doc 43 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79, 80. 81. 82. 83, 84. 85. Mamh 31,2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 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 and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees, Obtain all building plans and permit approvals pdor to commencement of any construction work. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building(s). Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry of the building(s). Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans pdor to permit issuance. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan raview. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. A pro-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covero, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. Show all building setbacks. R:~P D OL2002\02-0612 Linfield~S~aff Report PC-I,doc 44 86. 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 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau, These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at the time of building, plan submittal, 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 tiro flow for each building may vary and 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) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A minimum of hydrants for each building will be set at time of water plan submission, but the complex overall shall provide on-site hydrants (6" x 4" x 2- 2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system and they 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 required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 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 stroet, 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) 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) 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 sudace for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any R:\P D Ok2002~02-0612 Linfi¢ldXStaff Report PC-I.doc 45 94. 95. 96. 97, 98, 99, 100. 101. 102. portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access reads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access reads 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) pement. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) All traffic-calming devices that could impede or slow emergency vehicle access are prehibited, except those expressly appreved by the fire prevention bureau individually on a case-by-case basis when they maintain the required travel widths and radii. 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 tumareund capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to any building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface reads, as appreved 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 local water company signs the plans, 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 ) Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, appreved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible frem the street or road frenting the preperty. 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 gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the frent and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as appreved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for this school facility. The complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex, which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. R:~PDO~2002\02-O612Linfield~StaffReportPC-l.doc 46 103. 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 in each building. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 104. 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 in each building, and linked together as approved. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 105. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, one or more "Knox-Box" shall be installed as approved. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum ofsix (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 106. 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) 107. 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. 108. 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 109. Pdor 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. This shall be provided for each building prior to final or C of O on THAT BUILDING. 110. If there are changes to underlying maps then prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau' must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. 111. 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) 112. 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) R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 l.infielo~Staff Report PC-l.doc 47 OUTSIDE AGENCIES 113. The applicant shall consult with the Riverside Transit Agency regarding the attached letters dated December 5, 2002 and April 28, 2003 from the Riverside Transit Agency. 114. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated December 4, 2002 from the Rancho California Water District. 115. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated January 25, 2002 from the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. 116. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated February 11,2002 from the U.S. Department of the Army. 117. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated March 18, 2002 from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have road, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:~P D O~2002\02~612 Linfleld~Staff Repmt PC-I.doc 48 A'I-I'ACHMENT NO. 6 DRAFT EXCERPT, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES (May 21, 2003) R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-1 .doc 10 DRAFT EXCERPT FROM THE MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 21,2003 (AGENDA ITEM NO. 5) New Items 5. Planning Application No. PA02-0612: A Zoning Amendment to adopt section 17.22.180 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amend the official Zoning Map of the City of Temecula from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7), PA01-0653: A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a master plan and design guidelines for the development of Christian school facilities, athletic fields, and facilities, a residential area, and approve phase A-1 of the master plan located on the north side of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road and east of Temecula Valley Hiqh School, APN: 955-02-002 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-031 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE MNFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: excerpt052103-Item No.5 5.3 5.4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-032 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 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-033 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Adopt a resolution entitled: excerptO52103-1tem No.5 .~ PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-034 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN PAUBA ROAD AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Because of close proximity of his residence to the proposed project, Commissioner Telesio advised that he would be abstaining. Associate Planner Long presented an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: · That the proposed project includes a zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO); That the parameters of the project extend from Rancho Vista Road to Pauba Road -Temecula Valley High School to the west and some single-family residences on the east. Planned Development Overlay (PDO) That the Planned Development Overlay (PDO) text includes a matrix of the uses allowed and the development standards for the Planned Development Overlay (PDO) zone; that the applicant is proposing to permit student and/or faculty residences within the project; that since the existing PI zone does not allow for residential uses, the zone change to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) was required to provide for this flexibility. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) · That the Master Plan includes a blueprint for future development of the Linfield Christian School site including a conceptual site layout and Design Guideline; That the long-term plan includes: new high school buildings, administrative office building, library/media center, dining hall, outdoor amphitheatre, fine arts auditorium, middle school expansion, elementary school expansion, and multi- purpose room, new kindergarten and pre-school building, and various new athletic fields and courts, and including a new gymnasium and pool and that in excerpt052103-Item No.5 3 addition, the Master Plan includes an area intended for a student/faculty residential area (Planning Area 2), which could result in a maximum of 26 residences. · That the proposed Design Guidelines are specifically for a campus facility. Development Plan That staff has reviewed the proposed development plan and has determined the proposed project is consistent with the Planned Development Overlay (PDO) development standards and Master Plan and Design Guidelines because the location of the proposed use is consistent with the Master Plan and includes architecture elements as required in the design such as vertical elements, distinct rooflines, plazas, courtyards, outdoor seating, arcades, and columns. Environmental Determination That staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the project site; that staff primarily focused on Traffic, Biological and Cultural Resources, and Noise; and that. the Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared and has been included in the Conditions of Approval. The following conditions of approval were amended, deleted and added: Amend: Condition #9 that London Plane Tree be used as street trees along interior streets. Condition # 47c that installation of half-width street improvement from Pauba Road to the North Boundary ... Delete: Condition # 49 that the proposed driveway shown as "emergency/secondary gated ingress-egress" off of Rancho Vista Road should be realigned to match the existing street's location across the street (i.e. Via El Greco) and/or show how the driveway's access will be restricted (i.e. restrict movement via median, etc.) Add: Condition # 51 That 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. excerpt052103-Item No.5 4 Condition #52 That the Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Progam as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Condition #53 Condition #54 That all public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. That 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 Staff has determined that the project, as proposed will consistent with the General Plan, and therefore, staff would recommend that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopt an ordinance approving the Zone Change Amendment, adopt a resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit, and adopt a resolution approving a Development Plan for phase A-I. For Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that the previously performed Supplemental Traffic Analysis included in the cumulative affects of the golf course plus the proposed project and that the Level of Service (LOS) at build-out will remain at C. In response to Commissioner Mathewson, Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified that there would not be a piecemealing concern as it relates to Commission California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to this project and the golf course project (Planning Area 3). Ms. Karen Raffery, the applicant, 22971 Anasaze Drive, spoke in favor of the project stating that Linfield Christian School has been open since 1936, and has been operating in the Temecula Valley since 1967; that Linfield Christian School is an independent, Christian College Preparatory School that serves Kindergarten through 12th grade; that Linfield Christian School seeks to provide students an excellent education, opportunities for athletics, spiritual guidance, and preparation for life of service; that Character and leadership development is an integral part of its education process; and that Linfield Christian School facilities need to be renovated and improved in order to keep pace with the enrollment demand. excerpt052103-Item No.5 In response to Commissioner Mathewson's query regarding faculty residences, Ms. Deanna Elliano, 22359 Whirlway Court, planning representative for Linfield Christian School, relayed that the proposal for faculty residences is a long-term proposal and that these 26 units would be used to help supplement teacher income. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. The following individual spoke in favor of the proposal: Dee Butler Mr. Dan Atwood Mr. Tom Blaylock Ms. Taylor Martindale Mr. Ryan Weillry Ms. Krista Rogers 31422 Inverness Court 37104 De Portola Road 31285 Corte Rimola 41440 Valencia Way P.O. Box 2218 23160 Compass Drive The above-mentioned individuals spoke in favor of the proposal for the following reasons: · That nearly 100% of graduates advance on to college; · That Linfield Christian School offers strong academics; · That Linfield Christian offers a strong athletic program; · That Linfield Christian builds self-confidence; · That the teacher/student relationships are well developed and strong. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Mathewson expressed concern adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program prior to closure of public comment period. Assistant City Attorney Curley provided information regarding California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines as it relates to the advisory bodies jurisdiction to consider the proposed Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring program before making its recommendation noting the following: · That for the advisory board, (Planning Commission) there would be no need to integrate the public comments into its recommendations or decision-making process; excerpt052103-Item No.5 {~ That the decision making body (City Council) shall consider the proposed Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program together with comments received during the public hearing review process. In response to Commissioner Olhasso's query regarding the long rooflines on the school buildings, Associate Planner Long relayed that the intent of the long rooflines is to reduce the scale and the bulk of the building I~IOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Item No. 5 subject to the additions, deletions, and amendments as noted on pages 4-5. Commissioner Olhasso seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who abstained and Chairman Chiniaeff who was absent. excerpt052103-Item No.5 ? ATFACHMENT NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS (May 21, 2003) R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-l.doc 11 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING ORIGINAL CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 21, 2003 Planning Application No(s). PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 Prepared By: Dan Long, Associate Planner Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 R:~P D O~2002\02~0612 LinfielchStaff Report PC-l,doc 1 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CiTY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 4. Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARIONAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Linfield Christian School PROPOSAL: PA02-0612: A Zoning Amendment to adopt section 17.22.180 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amend the official Zoning Map of the City of Temecula from Public Institutional (Pt) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7). PA01-0653: A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a master plan and design guidelines for the development of Christian school facilities, athletic fields, and facilities, a residential area, and approve phase A-1 of the master plan. RAP D O~2002~02-0612 Liafield~Staff Report PC- I.doe 2 LOCATION: North side of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road and East of Temecula Valley High School, APN: 955-02-002 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Public Institutional (PI) EXISTING ZONING: Public Institutional (PI) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) South: Low Medium Density Residential Institutional (PI) East: Very Low Density Residential (VL) West: Public Institutional (PI) (LM)/Public EXISTING LAND USE: Pdvate School and athletic facilities SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Single-Family Homes South: Single-Family Homes/Public Elementary School East: Single-Family Homes West: Public High School BACKGROUND On December 26, 2001, the applicant applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)and Development Plan (DP). Due to a request to include a residential component into the project, which is not permitted in the PI zone, staff advised the applicant that a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) would also be required. On March 28, 2002, the applicant applied for Minor Conditional Use Permit (PA02-0155) to move forward with needed on-site improvements, including relocating the main entry to line up with Via Rami, improving existing on-site parking lots including landscaping, play fields and improving Pauba Road. The Planning Director approved the Minor Conditional Use Permit on June 20, 2002. On April 11,2002, a community meeting was held to discuss the Linfield School Master Plan project. The majodty of concerns expressed at this meeting were regarding the golf college and traffic generated from both projects. On November 12, 2002, the applicant submitted a formal application for a PDO. On December 12, 2002 the applications for a Zone Change from PI to PDO, a CUP, and DP was deemed complete and a development review committee (DRC) meeting was held to discus the various issues. The primary issues discussed at the DRC included the following: The need for design guidelines to address planning areas 2 (residential) and 3 (golf college lease area) and how they should reflect the primary campus to establish a campus atmosphere. 2. The use matrix to reflect the PI zone, except where necessary. 3. The maximum residential density for planning area 2 must be addressed. 4. Landscape standards. 5. Access point(s) for planning area 2. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfi¢ld~taff Report PC-l.dcc 3 6. A multi-use trail located on the western portion of the lot per the City's Master Trails Plan. Environmental studies/plans required, including a lighting plan, archaeology study, drainage, biology studies and; 8. Additional exhibits to be included in the master plan such as a fencing plan. On February 21,2003, the applicant resubmitted the Master Plan document, PDO and the additional requested exhibits with revisions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Linfield School is an existing private school providing elementary and secondary education. The proposed project includes a Zone Change from Public Institutional (PI) to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO), a Conditional Use Permit for a Master Plan, and a Development Plan to implement Phase A-1 of the Master Plan. The PDO is the requested zoning designation and includes a text establishing permitted uses and development standards for new development within the PDO. Planned Development Overlay The purpose for a zone change from PI to a PDO is to provide flexibility of permitted uses and to establish a mixed-use project site. The PDO text includes a matrix of the uses allowed and the development standards for the PDO zone. The applicant is proposing to permit student and/or faculty residences within the project. Since the existing PI zoning does not allow for residential uses, the zone change to a PDO was required to provide for this flexibility. The PDO establishes four planning "sub" areas within the project site. Planning Area lA includes the primary high school, junior high school, administrative offices, recreational fields and facilities, maintenance facilities and two residences. Planning Area lB includes the existing elementary school and it's proposed expansion, recreation fields and a proposed preschool and kindergarten facility. Planning Area 2 includes a maximum of 26 student/faculty residences and Planning Area 3 includes the land lease area for the previously approved golf college facility. Table 2.2.2 in the Master Plan includes a list of buildings proposed for development, existing buildings to remain, and buildings to be removed. Each area is identified in the PDO text and includes a list of principally permitted and conditional uses allowed in each "sub" area. The PDO text also includes supplemental development standards for all development proposed in the project site. The development standards establish specific requirements for new development within the project site in the following areas: · a. Setbacks b. Building Height c. Building Materials d. Parking e. Landscaping and Fencing Conditional Use Permit The Conditional Use Permit request is to allow the applicant to establish the proposed uses and site layout as outlined in the Master Plan. The Master Plan includes a blueprint for the future development of the Linfield Christian School site including a conceptual site layout and Design R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Lialield~S laff Report PC-l.doc 4 Guidelines. The long term plan includes the following components; new high school buildings, administrative office building, library/media center, dining hall, outdoor amphitheatre, fine arts auditorium, middle school expansion, elementary school expansion and multi-purpose room, new kindergarten and pre-school building, and various new athletic fields and courts, including a new gymnasium and pool. In addition, the Master Plan includes an area intended for a student/faculty residential area (Planning Area 2), which could result in a maximum of 26 residences. A table is provided below to summarize all new buildings and facilities to occur within the project site, Following is a summary of the new facilities included in the Master Plan site: Facility Description Square footage High School Classroom Building 38,358 SF Administration Building 9,728 SF Classroom Building 21,120 SF Library/Media Center Building 16,456 SF Dining Hall 20,612 SF Outdoor Amphitheatre 7,500 SF Fine Arts Auditorium 6,654 SF Middle School Classroom Building 11,243 SF Elementary Classroom Building 3,600 SF Elementary Multi-purpose room and library 5,500 S.F. Pre-School and Kindergarten Building 19,000 S.F. Junior Vamity Field N/A Middle School Soccer Field N/A Football/Track Stadium N/A Tennis Courts 6 Courts Outdoor Ball Courts 3 Courts Middle School Student Store, P,E. Lockers, & 10,198 S.F. Covered Courts Gymnasium and Pool 28,114 S.F. Misc. Sports Accessory Bu!ldings 15,000 S.F. Maintenance Building 6,000 S.F. Superintendent Residence & out Building 3,500 S.F. (Relocated) Caretaker Residence (Relocated) 2,000 S.F. Faculty/Student Housing, 26 units Max. Ave, 1,700 S.F. Max. 44,200 S.F. Development Plan (Phase A-l) The applicant is proposing a Development Plan for the first phase (A-1) of the project. Phase A-1 includes the construction of a 38,358 square foot, two-story high school building and a 9,728 square foot single story admihistrative office building. They are located on the north side of the lake and on the interior of the loop road. The buildings are connected by an overhead amade, which will include a scripture message, decorative cornice and columns at various intervals. Each of the buildings includes a painted stucco material for the base, red window and doorframes, decorative cornice at the roof with metal roofing at various locations. The administrative building includes a stone base at select location on each side of the building. Both buildings utilize arcades and vertical tower elements with overhangs to signify the main entrance of the building as required in the design guidelines. Each building has long distinct rooflines that vary in height in order to reduce the scale of the buildings. In addition to the two buildings, the development plan for phase A-1 includes an R:~P D O~2002\024)612 Linfield~taff Rcpo~ PC- l.doc 5 enhanced student entryway, plazas, gazebo, seating areas, and a portion of the walkway that will eventually lead around the lake. A landscape plan has been submitted as a part of the development plan application. The landscaping for area A-1 includes the area between the high school building and the loop road, down to the lake and up to approximately 25 feet to the area east of the administration and high school building, as well as a portion along the path of the lake. Landscaping is concentrated around the base of each building and at walkways. Some of the species proposed include Honey Locust, London Plane Tree, California Pepper, Crape Myrtle, Carmel Creeper, India Hawthom and Hop seed Bush. Parking for the first phase will be provided by an existing parking which will be enhanced by improved circulation, additional spaces and landscaping. Environmental Review f. g. h. ANALYSIS An Initial Study was prepared for the project site and has identified potentially significant environmental impacts as a result of the proposed project. The proposed Mitigation Measures reduces the impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and is proposed for adoption along with the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The following technical reports were submitted and used to complete the environmental analysis: a. Traffic Impact Analysis Report The Linfield School Master Plan, (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, December 7, 2001) Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum Linfield School Master Plan (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, February 5, 2003) Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulic Study of Linfield Christian School (KWC Engineers, Inc., December 12, 2001) A General Biological Resource Survey and Jurisdiction Delineation on APN#955-02- 002, The Linfield School Project, (L&L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001 ) Final Reports for APN#955-02-002, The Linfield School Project (L&L Environmental, Inc., August 24, 2001) Results of a Focused Raptor Nesting Survey for APN#955-02-002, The Linfield School Project (L&L Environmental, Inc., March 21,2002) Requested Focused Surveys for the Linfield Christian School (L&L Environmental, Inc., February 19, 2003) A Phase I Archaeological Survey Reportation The Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN #955-02-002 (L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11,2003) Planned Development Overlay Residential Component The proposed zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) is consistent with the General Plan designation. The General Plan designation for the project site is Public Institutional (PI). The primary use of the project site will continue as a private school. The main reason for the zone change is to allow residences on the site, which is not allowed in the PI zone. A maximum of 26 residences are proposed in Planning Area 2 and two residences are R:~P D Ok2002~024)612 Lim'i¢ld~Staff Report PC- 1,doc 6 proposed as part of Planning Area 1. Staff supports the residential portion of the site since it's intended specifically for students and/or faculty use. The individual residences will remain under the ownership of the school and will not be sold or subdivided. By providing on-site housing for students/faculty, there will be fewer vehicle trips, which will reduce vehicle trips on public streets. The applicant has submitted a traffic report and addendum analyzing the potential impacts of the residences and has determined the level of service will not be impacted by the addition of residences and no additional mitigation measures are required. Plannin,q Areas In addition, the PDO document establishes four Planning Areas. Planning Area lA includes the primary high school, junior high school, administrative offices, recreational fields and facilities, maintenance facilities and two residences. Planning Area lB includes the existing elementary school to be expanded, recreation fields and a proposed preschool and kindergarten facility. Planning Area 2 includes the faculty/residential housing and Planning Area 3 includes the area for the previously approved golf college facility. Permitted Uses Staff has reviewed the proposed PDO text, including the proposed uses and the development standards. The table below summarizes the uses deleted from the PI zone and the uses added to the PDO: Uses Included in PI, Deleted from PDO New Uses Included in PDO, Not Included in PI Cemetery Conference Center Sanitarium Construction Trailer (Temp.) 3hildren's Home Food Service for campus and events ~)etention Center Golf Course ;)rug Abuse and Recovery Center G01f College .~mup Homes Maintenance Facility ~emberships, clubs, lodges, non-profit ~'ommunity user Modular Classrooms .Residential Care for Elderly Radio Broadcasting studio Rest homes Recording studio Residential, single family attached or duplex ~ousing for school faculty F{esidential, single family detached, school superintendent, or dean's home, caretaker home accessory to private school use) ={esidential, multiple family housing for school :acuity :{esidential, student dorms R;~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc Some of the uses proposed in the PDO vary from the uses listed under the PI zoning, however the proposed uses are consistent with the intent of the general plan because they are either consistent with the types of uses in the PI zone, or they are secondary uses to the primary use of the school. Development Standards The PDO text includes the necessary information required for a PDO under section 17.22 of the Development Code. The text includes development standards required for new development within the project site. Where the PDO is silent, the Development Code will apply. The PDO development standards differ from the Development Code in the following three areas: The number of parking spaces for the project is not consistent with the Development Code requirements. The total number of required parking spaces for the project is 860. The applicant is proposing a total of 808 parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the number of required parking spaces to allow for the flexibility of shared parking for special events and assembly uses within the elementary multi-purpose room, amphitheatre and fine arts building. The total number of parking spaces required for the pre-school, kindergarten, elementary school, middle school, high school, administrative office building and maintenance facility is a total of 582 parking spaces. The special event and assembly facilities, which include the elementary multipurpose building, amphitheatre and fine arts building requires an additional 278 parking spaces. Since these facilities will not be used at the same time as the primary school facilities, staff has determined that this reduction in parking is acceptable. The development standards for landscaping on the project site refer to Development Code, with the exception of landscape planters, which are only required at the end of parking rows. Staff is supportive of the proposed changes because the project is for the private use of students and faculty, they are primarily located internal to the project site with the exception of the parking lots located at the kindergarten facility and football/track stadium and the elimination of landscaping islands provides for better security in the parking lot areas. The development standards in the PI zone do not contain a maximum height requirement. Therefore, the development standards in the PDO establishes a maximum building height of 2 stories or 45 feet for Planning Area 1. Amhitectural elements are permitted to project an additional 10 feet above the maximum height. The height requirement for residential structures is two stories, or a maximum of thirty (30) feet in height. Staff believes that the proposed height standards are appropriate for the project site. Conditional Use Permit The Conditional Use Permit is a request to approve a Master Plan document. The Master Plan document includes a site layout with intended uses for each Planning Area and Design Guidelines. The proposed uses in the Master Plan are consistent with the objectives of the Planned Development Oveday and Public Institutional zone, because the primary use of the site will remain an educational facility, including the residential portions of the site intended for students/faculty housing. Master Plan The Master Plan describes the long-term plan for the project site. Each phase will require an administrative development plan to ensure the proposed development is consistent with the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Stal~ Report PC-l.doc 8 Circulation and Access The access and cimulation of the project includes an internal cimulation pattern established under the previously approved minor CUP (PA 02-0155), however the Master Plan identifies additional access points and cimulation patterns (figure 2,5 of Master Plan). The minor CUP also permitted the applicant to improve the loop road and provide additional parking along the loop road and improve existing parking lots, Additional access from Pauba Road includes an access point for Planning Area 2, which was required to line up with Via Cerda and an access point east of the main entrance for the proposed pro-school and kindergarten building. The kindergarten and pre-school access point will be limited to right in and right out turning only, The applicant will provide additional detail of these access points upon a request to develop these respective areas. A secondary access point is provided from Rancho Vista Road on the northern portion of the project site. This access point will connect into the loop road and includes additional parking lots. This access point is intended for special events that may warrant a secondary access point and as an emergency access point if needed. All existing access points, including those previously approved for the golf college located in planning area 3 and those used for the elementary school will remain as they currently exist. Compatibility The Master Plan conforms to City standards and ensures that the project is designed in a manner to reduce the impacts to surrounding residential areas. The Master Plan site layout is designed to concentrate the primary uses of the school on the interior of the site surrounded by open space and athletic fields. The majodty of recreation fields and courts aro located on the western portion of the site, which is bordered by Temecula Valley High School. There aro two baseball fields (one of which will include lighting) and an elementary play field located on the southern portion of the project site, which is bordered by Pauba Road, single-family residences and Paloma Elementary School to the south. Staff has determined that the noise impacts will not be significant because there is an elevation change between the uses ranging from 1-foot to approximately 35 feet in height and approximately 130-foot separation between the uses. The separation includes a 90-95 public right- of-way, a 20-foot landscaped slope on the residential side and a 20-foot setback from the property line for the project site. In addition, the project includes a Condition of Approval that all outdoor events and public gatherings must be completed prior to 10:00 P.M. A lighting plan has been submitted and reviewed by staff to ensure lighting and glare will be reduced to a less than significant level and is consistent with the Mount Palomar lighting Ordinance 655. Mosco lighting is proposed for the athletic fields and courts. The City routinely uses this type of lighting system because it significantly reduces light glare and spillage. There are two recreation fields located on the eastern portion of the site, which will be used by the middle school campus. Elementary students will use this recreation aroa during daytime hours only. Lighting is not proposed for these fields. Staff believes these fields will not have significant impacts because they are intended for daytime use only. A student drop off aroa is proposed along the eastern property line, which is a concem for noise and lighting impacts upon neighbors. Staff has included a Condition of Approval for the Master Plan document and Design Guidelines to include language that requires student-loading areas adjacent to residences to provide enhanced landscaping to include shrubs and trees. The applicant will be required to show how landscaping in these areas is enhanced and buffers the area from the residences in comparison the other areas on the project site. In addition, Conditions of Approval are included to revise the lighting plan to reduce light and glare spilling onto the adjacent residences by relocating vadous light fixtures. R:~P D O~2002\0241612 Linfield',Staff Report PC-l.doc 9 Desiqn Guidelines Section 3.0 of the Master Plan document establishes Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines for the project site. The Design and Landscape Guidelines provide a defined parameter of building materials and design concepts permitted for futura development. Many of the elements required in the Design and Landscape Guidelines are similar to those found in the City Wide Design Guidelines, however specific guidelines for educational facilities are not included in the City Wide Design Guidelines. The proposed Design Guidelines are specifically for a campus facility. A common design theme will be implemented by the following techniques: a. One and two story buildings with long roof lines to raduce building scale, b, Building orientation to provide open space plazas, courtyards and view corridors, c. Take advantage of the natural setting such as the lake and stream features, d. Building entry points will be enhanced via vertical elements and accent materials. e. Entry nodes at vehicle entry locations and special paving at key intersections, f. Pedestrian entry nodes to transition vehicular points into campus plazas and courtyards. g. Monument signage at the main entrance on Pauba Road h. Window and door types to consider lighting and seasons for placement and orientation, i. Building entry features are required to be enhanced to show importance, j. Skylights and clearstory elements for interior lighting, k. Building materials to include wood, concrete block or metal (for maintenance buildings), I. Built up flat roofs and pitched roofs of composite shingles, tile or metal, m. Finished materials such as stone, or pre-cast concrete, n. Entry canopies and vertical columns for arcades o. Surface treatments (see color and material board) p. Bollard lighting at walkways q. Decorative pole lighting at courtyards, plazas and walkways, and A fencing and wall plan has been provided by the applicant (exhibit 3.3.5). Fencing types include, chain link, wrought iron, painted wood, or split faced block. The chain link fencing on the east and west sides of the project site will ramain. The fencing on the eastern portion of the site will include additional shrubs and trees to soften the view from the adjacent residences, primarily at student drop-off locations. In other locations along Pauba Road, the chain link fencing will be used in combination with wrought iron and scraened by plantings and vines. Screen walls will be provided where screening is necessary such as the maintenance buildings. Development Plan The development plan includes phase A-1 of the Maser Plan for a 38,358 square foot, two-story high school building and a 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. Staff has reviewed the proposed development plan and has determined the proposed project is consistent RAP D OX2002~2-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 10 with the PDO development standards and Master Plan and Design Guidelines because the location of the proposed use is consistent with the Master Plan and includes architecture elements as required in the design guidelines such as vertical elements, distinct roof lines, plazas, courtyards, outdoor seating, arcades and columns. The landscape plan and species proposed are consistent with the conceptual landscape plan within the Master Plan. Environmental Determination Staff prepared an Initial study and determined that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment with regards to biological resources, cultural resources, noise and traffic unless mitigated. Staff has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan as summarized below, will satisfactorily comply with the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Any impacts will be mitigated to levels less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures. The Linfield School Master Plan Environmental Im =act/Mitigation Summary Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Responsible Party Biological Resources Potential The project developer shall acquire the Prior to the Department removal of necessary permits from federal and Issuance of a of Public California state agencies, including U.S. Army grading permit Works and gnatcatcher, Corps of Engineers, Regional Water the Planning Quino Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Department checkempot Wildlife Service and California butterfly, and Department Fish and Game Stephen's kangaroo rat habitat An environmental resource area has Upon approval of Planning Development of been set aside for preservation and will the Mast Plan Department land containing not be developed and PDO riparian document and woodlands Zone Change Development of The project developer shall acquire the Prior to issuance Department land containing necessary permits from federal and of a grading of Public wetlands as state agencies, including U.S. Army permit Works and identified by Corps of Engineers, Regional Water the Planning state and Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Department federal Wildlife Service and California regulations Department Fish and Game Noise Exposure of All outdoor events and public gatherings Planning staff will Planning persons to or must be complete prior to 10:00 P.M. verify compliance Department generation of on an on-going and Code noise levels in basis via Code Enforcement excess of Enforcement standards R:~P D O~2002~02~612 Linfiel&Staff Report PC.t.doc Il Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Responsible Party established in the local general plan or noise ordinance Cultural Resources Potentially During initial grading and ground Prior to the Department cause a disturbance activities, a qualified culturalissuance of a of Public substantial resoumes monitor shall be present and building permit Works and adverse shall have the authority to stop and Planning change in the redirect ground disturbance activities to Department significance of evaluate the significance of any cultural an resources exposed. archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5 Could directly During all grading activities, unless Prior to the Department or indirectly determined unnecessary by the monitor, issuance of a of Public destroy a a qualified paleontological monitor shall grading permit Works and unique be present and shall have the authority Planning paleontolgical to stop and redirect grading activities to Department resource or site evaluate the significance of any or unique paleontolgical resources exposed during geological the grading activity. feature Transportation Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Prior to the Public Works Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to issuance of the and Planning include dedication of half-width street first building Department right-of-way, installation of half-width permit street improvements 720' west of Linfield Way to the West Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street Potential to right-of-way, installation of half-width increase the street improvements along the North overall traffic Boundary frontage, paving, curb and volume and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage congestion at facilities, signing and striping, utilities key (including but not limited to water and intersections sewer). R:~P D O~2002\02~612 lJnfield~S~aff Report PC-1 .doc 12 impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Responsible Party Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of- way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Future traffic studies may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. A school zone and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the ; school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include and warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by the developer. Payment of Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program FINDINGS Staff has made the following findings of approval, which are reflected in the attached resolutions: Zoning Amendment Staff has reviewed the proposed zoning amendment and recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to approve a zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) for the project site. To recommend approval of the Zone Change, the following findings must be made: 1. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map. The proposed change of zone is consistent with the Genera/Plan of the City of Temecula because the primary uses will not change and the proposed residential portion of the project has been determined to be a secondary use supporting the primary uses. R:XP D OX2002\02-06l 2 Linficld~taff Report PC-l.doc 13 The proposed use is in conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of the elements of the General Plan. The proposed change of zone conforms to the General Plan and will remain compatible with the surrounding land uses as there is existing institutional uses to the south and west of the project site and residential to the north, east and south of the subject site. Therefore, the proposed amendment will result in compatible development, which is a goal of the General Plan. Conditional Use Permit The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, because the proposed PDO meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the Development Code. The nature of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community, because the proposed PDO is consistent with the land uses surrounding the project site, which includes residential and educational facilities. The applicant has submitted traffic reports and staff has concluded that the 26 additional residences will not have a negative impact, therefore additional improvements will not be required. The proposed conditional use permit 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, because the proposed uses are similar or function similar to the surrounding uses in the immediate area, which include schools and single-family residences. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood, because the project site maintains vast amounts of open space and is designed to compliment the natural environmental setting, while establishing clearly defined areas of education and recreation uses with the use of landscaping and fencing. In addition, if approved, the project will maintain its own set of development standards to be approved and adopted by the City Council, which will govem parking standards, loading areas, fences, walls, buffer areas and landscaping. Development Plan 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 because the project includes a PDO, which allows for a flexibility in uses and development standards and it has been determined that the development plan application is consistent with the General Plan, PDO, state law and all applicable city ordinances. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare because the project prevides enhanced opportunities for student facilities and the project has been designed in compliance with the overall master plan, which provides public improvements to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the persons in the area. R:~ D O~200'2\02-0612 Linficld~Staff Report PC-l.doc 14 CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the project as proposed is consistent with the General Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, an Ordinance approve the Zone Change Amendment, a Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit and a Resolution approving a Development Plan for phase A-I. R:~ D O~2002\02~612 Linfiela~Staff Report PC-l.doc 15 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 VICINITY MAP R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfielcl~Staff Repo~ PC-l.doc CITY OF TEMECULA Site EXHIBIT B - GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION - (PI) Public Institutional o~ooo c~,~'ooo ~O000000~O0000 ~O0000000000000 ~O00000~ EXHIBIT C - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - PDO-7 CASE NO. - PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 R~P D O~002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Reporl PC-l.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT- D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 MASTER PLAN SITE PLAN R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT- E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAN R:~P D O',2002~02-0612 Unfletd~Staff Report PC-l.doc 53 CITY OF TEMECULA STUDENT LOADING ZONE '\ PHASE 1 CLASSt~OOM ~- 1199 ADMINISTRA DON LAKE CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 SITE PLAN PHASE A-1 R:~P D O~002\02~)612 Linfield~Staff Repo~ PC-1 .doc 54 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - G PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL IsT FLOOR PLAN R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Unfielo~Slaff Repod PC-l.doc CITY OFTEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL 2f~o FLOOR PLAN R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Unfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 56 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ADMINISTRATION FLOOR PLAN R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfleld~Staff Repod PC-1 .doc 57 CITY OF TEMECULA l! !t.- I?',H HI I1-f "" ' ' I hHHI ~ hHHI W I-IHs-II hHHII L[II I-IHHII 1.~H-t ...... I ............. 4--14-L ....... LJJ_J ......... I_Jl III / I IH / /lit II I II/ I FIHHI HI HHHI Iii, HHHI I~1 ~ItLII~ ................ __ k__ '%_._ k__ k__ k .... -- .,~itlllllllllilllrllllllflllllll~tlllllllllll~lllllllllllllltlllllll~ / I [ --.- -~it1111111111111illllllllltlt~lllllill I I I I i--T-T~I---i I/| | --JL ~ ~ I1~ I xll H I Jill/ CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL ELEVATION R:~° D O~2002XD2-0612 Unfield~taff Reporl PC-1 .doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02~)612 EXHIBIT - K PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ADMINISTRATION ELEVATION R:~P 0 0~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc CITY OF TEMECULA STUDENT LOADING ZONE PHASE 1 CLASSROOM ADMINIS TRA NON CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - L PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 PHASE ~1LANDSCAPEPLAN R:~ D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-1 ,doc ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PDO-7 TEXT R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~CC Staff Report-1 .doc 12 LINFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.22.180 Title Sections 17.22.180 through 17.22.188 shall be known as "PDO-7" (Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District). 17.22.181 Purpose and Intent The Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-7) is intended to create a unique mixed-use area within the city, blending educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities in a comprehensive master plan that builds upon the existing campus development. PDO-7 allows for the introduction of compatible housing opportunities within the conventional zoning district and serves to implement the objectives of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan. Supplemental development standards have been provided to recognize the transition between the existing campus facilities and the new development areas, to promote compatibility with the surrounding land uses, and to insure the long term design quality of the Linfield Christian School PDO District. 17.22.184 Relationship with the Development Code and Citywide Design Guidelines The List of permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22.186.B. Except as modified by the provisions of Section 17.22.188, the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. Where this PDO is silent, the development standards of the Public Institutional (PI) district in the Development Code shall apply (Section 17.12). 2. The development standards in the Development Code that would apply to the Medium Density Residential District, and are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete, for any proposed residential housing to be located in Planning Area 2 of PDO-7. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. 3. The Master Plan and Design Guidelines approved as a part of the Linfield Christian School Master Plan shall apply to all components of this PDO. RAP D 0x2002~02-0612 LinfieMxPDO text. doc06/lO/2003 - 1 - 17.22.186 Use Regulations The list of permitted land uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22,186.B. PDO-7 contains three different Planning Areas as shown in Exhibit 17.22.186.A. The three Planning Areas are identified as follows: Planning Area 1: Educational/Institutional: identified as (El) in Table 17.22.186.B. Planning Area 1 is further separated into two sub-areas: Planning Area lA is the main Linfield Christian School Campus, and Planning Area lB is the existing Elementary School Campus. · Planning Area 2: Educational/Residential: identified as (ER) in Table 17.22.186. B; and, · Planning Area 3: Public/Institutional: identified as (PI) in Table 17.22.186.B. Where indicated with the letter "P" the use shall be a permitted use. A letter "C" indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Where indicated with a "-", the use is prohibited within the Planning Area. A Description of Use Area 3 (Pi) Art Gallery Auditorium P P P P C C B Reserved C Christmas tree lots Chumhes, Temples, religious institutions Colleges and Universities Communications and microwave installations (1) Community Health Clinics Community Center Conference Center Congregate care housing Congregate living health facility Construction trailer (temporary) Convalescent homes D Day care center P C C P C C P C C C P C P P P P Day care health center C C C P P C P E Reserved C C C P P P P P P P RAP D 0~,2002x02-0612 LinfielaSP DO text. docO6/l OF2003 2 Food services (for campus and special events) P P P G Garages, public parking C C Golf courses C P Golf college or sports training facility C P Government offices P p Government services P p Group home H Helipad or heliport C C Hospital C C I Reserved J Reserved K Reserved L Library p p p M Maintenance facility (accessory to primary use P C P only) Modular classrooms (used as interim classroom P p space) Museum p p p N Reserved O Reserved P Parks and recreation areas P p p Performing arts, theaters and places of public P C assembly Police/sheriff station P C Post office P Public utilities C C C Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting studios P p Recording studios P p Religious facilities C C C Residential - single family detached, school P P P superintendent or dean's home, caretaker home, (accessory to private school use only) R : Xt~ D OX2002X02-0612 LinfieldXP DO text. doc06/l O/2003 3 Residential- single-family attached or duplex P housing for school faculty Residential- multiple family housing for school P faculty Residential-senior housing C C Residential- student dorms C C C S Schools, public (elementary, jr. high, high school) P P P Schools, private P C C Skilled nursing facility C C C TSp°rts and recreation facilities P p p Trade or vocational schools C C C U Utility offices and service yards C C C V Reserved W Reserved X Reserved Y Reserved Z Reserved NOTES: (1) Subject to Section 17.40 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Legend: P= Permitted by right in the district C= Permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the district - = Use is prohibited in the district (El)= Educational/Institutionah PlanningAreas 1Aand lB (ER) = Educational/Residential: Planning Area 2 (PI) = Public/institutionah Planning Area 3 RAP D 0~2002xD2-0612 LinfieldXPDO text. doc06/l O/2003 4 LINFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNING AREA MAP Rancho Vista Road Pauba Road GreenTree Lane LEGEND: Planning Area lA Planning Area lB Planning Area 2 Planning Area 3 56.89 acres Educational/Institutional (El) 4.78 acres Educational/Institutional (El) 9.81 acres Educational/Residential (ER) 22.29 acres Public/Institutional (PI) EXHIBIT 17.22.186.A R:XP D OX2002xO2-0612 Linfiela'xPDO text. doc06/l O/2003 5 17.22.188 Supplemental Development Standards Permitted and conditionally permitted uses within PDO-7 shall comply with the development standards of the underlying Public/Institutional zoning district except as modified or augmented by the standards contained in this section. A. General All new development occurring within Planning Areas lA and lB shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan, provided that modifications of up to 20% of the estimated square footage of the individual or combined structures may be approved by the Planning Director. Minor modifications to the site location or number of new facilities may also be approved by the Planning Director. Major modifications to the overall scale, intensity or intended land uses within the Planning Areas shall be referred to the Planning Commission for approval. All new development deemed to be in compliance with the Linfield Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be subject to the Administrative Review process, pursuant to Section 17.05,020 of the Temecula Development Code. Development proposals for faculty housing units within Planning Area 2 of PDO-7 shall be subject to the development standards of the Medium Density Residential (M) zoning district, and will require review and approval of a Development Plan by the Planning Commission. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. B. Setbacks Landscape setbacks along the Pauba Road and Rancho Vista Road street frontages shall be an average of twenty (20) feet, except for Planning Area lB which shall be a minimum of five (5) feet, due to the presence of the existing Elementary School parking lot. The overall average front setback along either roadway shall be no les than 20 feet. 2. Sidewalks, pedestrian paths, paving, driveways and wrought iron or chain link fencing are permitted to be located within the landscaped setback area. C. Building Height Structures within Planning Area 1 shall not exceed two stories, or forty-five (45) feet in height. Architectural projections such as mansards, towers and other design elements shall be permitted to extend an additional ten (10) feet above the height of the building. Structures designed as split-level in order to accommodate the existing site grades are permitted up to a height of sixty (60) feet as measured from the lowest grade. Any structures over forty five (45) feet in height shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest property line, and a minimum of 250 feet from the property line of any single-family residential structure. RAP D 0~2002~92-0612 Linfield~P DO text. doc06/l O~2003 6 2. Single family residential and multi-family residential structures shall not exceed two stories, or a maximum of thirty (30) feet in height. D. Parking Parking requirements for assembly facilities within Planning Area 1 shall be considered as shared parking in conjunction with the standard spaces required under the Development Code for school parking. This determination applies to those assembly or special event facilities primarily used by the student population and faculty during the school day, or those facilities conducting events after school or in the evening hours when regular school parking is available. In order to provide sufficient onsite parking in the case of a special event on campus, and to prevent potential overflow parking on surrounding public streets, temporary, special event parking may be provided on designated outdoor play courts in Planning Area 1. Such temporary parking areas shall be clearly identified, and cease operation at the conclusion of the special event. E. Landscaping and Fencing 1. Landscaping within parking lot areas shall be consistent with Section 17.24.050.H of the Temecula Development Code, with the following exceptions: Landscaped planters shall not be required within the interior of parking lots except for at the ends of each row of parking spaces, due to the need to insure clear visibility in parking areas for campus security purposes. Required trees within the parking lot area shall be limited to the islands at the end of the parking rows, and within the landscaped areas at the perimeter of the parking lot. Trees shall be minimum fifteen-gallon containers, and may be spaced in a liner fashion around the perimeter or clustered. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of 1 tree for every 4 required parking spaces. Due to the extensive amount of existing mature trees within the District, and the internal nature of the parking lots within the landscaped setting, existing trees immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. co Parking lot landscaping standards shall only apply to new or substantially redeveloped parking lot areas within the District. Fencing for school facilities and outdoor recreation areas shall be exempt from the fence height requirements of Section 17.12.050 of the Public/Institutional District of the Temecula Development Code. Acceptable fencing materials include finished wrought iron or tubular steel, chain link, vinyl and decorative masonry. R : ~P D 0X2002~02-0612 Linfield~P DO text. doc06/l O/2003 7 ATrACHMENT NO. 9 MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-l.doc 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 10 LETTERS OF SUPPORT R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\CC Staff Report-1 .doc 14 Paul & Cecilia Shampay 41764 Corte Lara Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 676-3697 / CeCi2~nctimes.net May 21,2003 Mr. Donald Hazen, Principal Planner Mr. David Hogan, Principal Planner Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Linfield Christian School MASTER PLAN The Master Plan proposal for Linfield Christian School is on the agenda for the Temecula Planning Commission meeting this evening. This letter is to explain our compelling support of this Master Plan for the development of the Linfield campus. Our daughters have attended Linfield since 1985, when the Elementary portion of the school first began. Our youngest daughter, Becky, is in her Junior Year at Linfield High School. In looking over all of the improvements that are laid out in the Master Plan, we are very excited for the proposed changes to the school. Linfield has, in the past, taken the resources that they have available and created a very strong program for academics and athletics, and this can only broaden that ability. The proposed enhancements in the areas of fine arts, library, dining, and technology, and the addition of classrooms, will give the school increased college preparatory infiuence. The outdoor amphitheater will expand their drama department. The most exciting thing for us is the proposed changes to the athletic facilities. Our daughter Becky plays Varsity Volleyball and Softball and played basketball in middle school. Linfield has always had a wonderful sports program, but is lacking in the resources to implement many of their sports. The changes and additions, including athletic fields, track facilities, swimming pool, tennis courts, lighting, etc., would allow Linfield to expand their sports and training programs. This will enable them to expand/adjoin their academic college prep with collegiate sports prep. The improvements that relate to the precise grading plan, street improvements, road, and security fencing are something that will not only benefit the school but the general public. The benefits that our daughters have had at Linfield are immeasurable. They have grown so much spiritually, intellectually and athletically. They talk together about how fortunate they are to have gone to such a wonderful school, and thank us for allowing them that opportunity. Although our youngest will be graduating next year, we have high hopes that our grandchildren will attend Linfield some day. We are praying that the committee with see the benefits that this plan has to offer to future scholars and athletes, who desire a Christian college prep environment, and a devoted staff. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Paul & Cecilia Shampay Linfield Christian School Parents Ma~ 19 03 04:48p PDC,TEMECULR~OFFICE 909-S95~5597 ~'~"~ PROJECTDESIGN CONSULTANTS May 19, 2003 City of Temecula PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Planning Commission Regarding: LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTERPLAN Dear Commissioners: As a resident of Temecula, I would like to take this opportunity to give my support for the approval of the Linfleld School Master Plan. The Master Plan as proposed is an opportunity for the City of Temecula to enhance one of it's often overlooked assets. The Master Plan before you is the cornerstone of the campus development that staffed with the Minor CUP approved by the City in June 2002. This plan will create uniformity in the land use of this property and maintain it's compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. The design will allow for the cohesive development of this property and emphasize the natural characteristics of the campus. As you may know, the Linfield campus is also used by a number of non-affiliated youth organizations. These organizations will also bener~ from the future development of the campus. Your approval of the Master Plan sets forth a comprehensive program to guide the future expansion and development of the Linfield School and the continuation of a tradition the City of Temecula can be proud of. 29974 Corte Tolano Temecula, CA 92591 43460 Ridge Park Drive, Suite 170 Temecula, California 92590 909-695-5596 Tel 909-695-5597 Fax www. p r o jeer desi§n.com C:tDOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS~IA YS~4Y DOCUMENTS~LINFIELD PC MTG.DOC Ma~ 20 03 04:18p Gosch 909-303-6900 May 20, 2003 City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Planning Commission Regarding: Linfleld Christian School Master Plan Dear Conunissioners: As residents and business owners in Temecula, we would like to express our support for the approval of the Limeield Christian School Master Plan. As we see it, this is nothing but a great opportunity for the City of Temecula. The school fulfils the need of many families and is an important draw to the community. In fact, it was the Linfield Christian School that brought our family to the city. Linfield also serves a number of non-affiliated youth orglmi?a~ious. These organizations will also benefit from the future development of the campus. As you are well aware of, new local schools are desperately needed for the growing community. Linfield is in desperate need of expansion and improvement of its facilities to handle that same growth. Everyone wins if you vote to approve Linfield's Master Plan. Thank you. Sincerely, Mr. & Mrs. Marc Gosch 30964 Peseado Drive Temecula, CA 92492 Via Fax Mr. Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman Planning Commission Temecula City Hall 43200 Business Park Dr. P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Re: Planning Application PA02-0612 PA01-0653 Linfield Dear Mr. Chiniaeff, I am in support of Linfield's Application/Master Plan. As you know, Linfield is an integral part of Temecula, and one of the reasons the town is such a special place. By adopting the proposed Master Plan, Linfield will have a blueprint for its carefully planned expansion into the future. This expansion will allow the school to continue to improve its academics and become an even better neighbor to the community. Please support the Linfield Master Plan. Thank you, James Kevin Fergus P.O. Box 2533 Fallbrook, CA 92088-2533 I'd B~9G-ICL 09L~ sngaa~ so~eE dI~:21 CO O8 Re~ ITEM 13 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL _ CITY ATTORNEY / _.'~._ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~ CITY MANAGER ~..-~'¢~/ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City M a n a g e r/Cit/_y,C~/n c il Debbie Ubnoske'7, Director of Planning August 26, 2003 Harveston Specific Plan Amendment (Planning Application No. PA03-0249) PREPARED BY: David Hogan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Make a Determination of Consistency with a previously Certified Environmental Impact Report. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE, AND FULLY INTEGRATE WITHIN, TWO OUT- PARCELS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0249) 3. Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THC: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO INCLUDE TWO OUT-PARCELS WITHIN THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Harveston Specific Plan on August 14, 2001. Throughout the process, the fate of the two out-parcels that were not owned by Lennar Communities was a concern. To protect the rights of the property owners and ensure land use compatibility, the two out-parcels were zoned Low Medium Density Residential. The total size of the two out-parcels is approximately 3.8 acres. The current location of the out-parcels and their relationship to the approved Specific Plan are shown on Attachment No. 5. The Planning Commission considered this item on August 6, 2003 and recommended that the City Council adopt these minor changes. R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 1 This specific plan amendment will provide for the incorporation of the two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan. This request would accomplish the following: 1. Amend the Official Zoning Map to show the out-parcels as part of Specific Plan 13; 2. Add the out-parcels to portions of Planning Areas 1, 8 and 12 (and to the Ynez Road); 3. Modify all the Harveston Specific Plan exhibits to not show the out-parcels; and, Modify the planning area descriptions to include the additional acreages and remove all references to out-parcels. The proposed inclusion of the out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan will not change the total build-out potential for the Specific Plan. The primary change is that the total acreage of the Specific Plan will increase to approximately 549.5 acres. The original Harveston Specific Plan encompassed 545.7 acres. The amendment will add small amounts of acreage into three planning areas, as well as into the Ynez Road right-of-way, as shown below. Planning Area 1 - Community Park Planning Area 8 - Low-Medium Density Residential Planning Area 12 - Service Commercial Ynez Road Right-of-Way TOTAL ADDITIONAL ACREAGE +1.5AC +0.8AC +0.5AC +1.0AC +3.8AC No increases to the total number of residential units and commercial square footage within the Specific Plan are proposed. The proposed Specific Plan Land Use and Official City Zoning Map exhibits are shown in Attachment Nos. 7 and 8. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City Council Certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Harveston Project on August 14, 2001. The FEIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program evaluated the impacts of an additional 1,921 residential units and approximately 1.96 million square feet of service commercial land uses and included the rezoning of two out-parcels to Low Medium Density Residential. The FEIR included Statements of Overriding Consideration for short-term, long-term, and cumulative air quality impacts. To evaluate the impacts associated with the proposed change to the Harveston Specific Plan, the current build-out potential was compared with the build-out potential after the out-parcels are incorporated in the Specific Plan. Despite the inclusion of an additional 3.8 acres, no increases to the total number of residential units and commercial square footage within the Specific Plan are proposed. As a result of this information, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that a finding of consistency with a previously Certified FEIR be made. A detailed analysis of the project changes is shown in Attachment 9. FISCAL IMPACT: None. R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 2 ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Proposed Council Resolution Proposed Council Ordinance PC Resolution 2003-047 PC Staff Report from August 6, 2003 Meeting Minutes from the August 6, 2003 Planning Commission Current Zoning Map Current Specific Plan Land Use Map Proposed Zoning Map Proposed Specific Plan Land Use Map EIR Consistency Analysis R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Han~eston\Staff Report CC.doc 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE, AND FULLY INTEGRATE WITHIN, TWO OUT- PARCELS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0249) WHEREAS, Lennar Communities filed Planning Application No. PA03-0249 (the "Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on August 6, 2003, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, the City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on August 26, 2003, at a duly not[ced public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby amends the Harveston Specific Plan by incorporating parcels identified as 910-110-003 and 007, into all the text and exhibits within the Specific Plan, including but not limited to, the Planning Area discussions for Planning Areas 1, 8, and 12, and further directs staff to incorporate all appropriate and necessary changes. In taking this action, the City Council has reviewed the information provided in the staff report and hereby makes a determination the inclusion of these two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan does not increase the impacts that were assessed or the mitigation measures that were established with the previously Certified Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program. As a result, the City Council hereby makes a finding of consistency with the previously Certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of August 2003. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.dcc 5 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. 03- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of ., 2003, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS None NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 6 ATFACHMENT NO. 2 PROPOSED COUNCIL ORDINANCE R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 7 ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO INCLUDE 'rwo OUT-PARCELS WITHIN THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby amends the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula for parcels identified with Assessor's Parcel Numbers 910-120-003 and 910-120-007, by changing the zoning designation from Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Specific Plan (SP-13). Section 2. The City Council has reviewed the information provided in the staff report and hereby makes a determination the inclusion of these two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan does not increase the impacts that were assessed or the mitigation measures that were established with the previously Certified Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program. As a result, the City Council hereby makes a finding of consistency with the previously Certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Section 3. 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 26th day of August 2003 ATTEST: Jeff Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 8 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. 03-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the day of ,2003, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 H~trveston\Staff Report CC.doc 9 ATrACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-047 R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 10 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-047 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADD 'I'WO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN AND INCORPORATE TWO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE APPROPRIATE TEXT AND EXHIBITS OF SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0249) WHEREAS, Lennar Communities filed Planning Application No. PA03-0249 (the "Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on August 6, 2003, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Specific Plan Amendment. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council amend the Harveston Specific Plan to incorporate parcels identified as 910-110-003 and 007, in ali the text and exhibits with the Specific Plan, including the Planning Area discussions for Planning Areas 1, 8, and 12, substantially in the form contained in Exhibit A. Section 2. Zone Chanqe. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council amend the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula for parcels identified as 910-110-003 and 910-110-007, substantially in the form contained in Exhibit B. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission has reviewed the information provided and hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Temecula make a finding of consistency with the previously Certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) based upon the information contained in the staff report, the Final EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report Ce.doc 11 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 6th day of August 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-047 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th day of August 2003, by the following vote: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerrerio, Olhasso, Telesio, NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chinieaff, Matthewson ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\S P A'C.003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 12 A'I-rACHMENT NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM AUGUST 6, 2003 MEETING R:\S P A~003\PA03~0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 13 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION August 6, 2003 Planning Application No. PA03-0249 (Zone Change and Specific Plan Amendment) Prepared By: David Hogan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULATO ADD TWO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN AND INCORPORATE TWO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE APPROPRIATE TEXT AND EXHIBITS OF SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0249) APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Lennar Communities REPRESENTATIVE: Matthew Fagan PROPOSAL: To add two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan and amend the Official Zoning Map LOCATION: North of the intersection of Ynez Road and Equity Drive within the Harveston Specific Plan EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: Service Commercial, Low Medium Density Residential and Open Space PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: Service Commercial, Low Medium Density Residential and Open Space EXISTING ZONING: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: SP-13 South: SP-13 East: SP-13 West: SP-13 PROPOSED ZONING: SP-13 R:\S P At2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\STAFFRPT PC.doc 1 EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant BACKGROUND The City Council adopted the Harveston Specific Plan on August 14, 2001. The project included a general plan amendment, development agreement, and environmental impact report. Throughout the process, the fate of the two out-parcels that were not owned by Lennar Communities was a concern. To protect the rights of the property owners and ensure land use compatibility, the two out- parcels were zoned Low Medium Density Residential. The total size of the two out-parcels is approximately 3.8 acres. The current location of the out-parcels and their relationship to the approved Specific Plan are shown on Attachment No. 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project will provide for the incorporation of two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan. To accomplish this, the following actions are being proposed: 1. Amend the Harveston Specific Plan to add the out-parcels into adjacent planning areas, 2. Amend the Zoning Map to include the out-parcels into the Specific Plan; and, Make a determination of consistency between this amended project and the Certified Final EIR. The proposed future zoning and the Specific Plan Land Use maps are shown in Attachment Nos. 4 and 5, respectively. No changes are proposed for the small area shown on Attachment 4 that was previously zoned Light Industrial. ANALYSIS The proposed inclusion of the out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan will not change the total build-out potential for the Specific Plan. The amendment will add small amounts of acreage into three planning areas as well as into the Ynez Road right-of-way as shown below. Planning Area I - Community Park Planning Area 8 - Low-Medium Density Residential Planning Area 12 - Service Commercial Ynez Road Right-of-Way TOTAL ADDITIONAL ACREAGE + 1.5 AC + 0.8 AC + 0.5 AC + 1.0 AC + 3.8 AC In almost all cases, the changes to the contents Harveston Specific Plan will Involve removing references to, and discussions of, the out-parcels. The remaining changes to plan will relate to the sizes of Planning Areas 1, 8, and 12 after the additional acreages are added. No substantive changes to the Harveston Specific Plan will occur as a result of this amendment. R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\STAFFRPT PC.doc 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The City Council Certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Harveston Project on August 14, 2001. The FEIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program evaluated the impacts of an additional 1,921 residential units and approximately 1.96 million square feet of service commercial land uses and included the rezoning of two out-parcels to Low Medium Density Residential. The FEIR included Statements of Overriding Consideration for short-term, long-term, and cumulative air quality impacts. To evaluate the impacts associated with the proposed change to the Harveston Specific Plan, staff compared the current build-out potential with the build-out potential after the out-pamels are incorporated in the Specific Plan. The primary change is that the total acreage of the Specific Plan will increase to approximately 549.5 acres. The original Harveston Specific Plan encompassed 545.7 acres. However, despite the inclusion of an additional 3.8 acres, no changes to the total number of residential units and commercial square footage are being proposed. This means that the total intensity of the land uses within the approved Specific Plan and the potential environmental impacts as described in the EI R will not change. In reality, the actual number of total residential units in this area will decrease slightly based upon the inclusion of the out-pamels into the specific plan. A detailed analysis of the project changes is shown in Attachment 8. As a result of this information, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that a finding of consistency with a previously certified EIR be made. Attachments 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. PC Resolution - Blue Page 4 Draft Council Resolution - Blue Page 7 Draft Council Ordinance - Blue Page 10 Current Zoning Map- Blue Page 13 Current Specific Plan Land Use Map - Blue Page 14 Proposed Zoning Map - Blue Page 15 Proposed Specific Plan Land Use Map - Blue Page 16 EIR Consistency Analysis - Blue Page 17 R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\STAFFRPT PC.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 6, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION R:\S P A~003~PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 14 Mr. David Silver, 20 Rivo Alto Canal, Long Beach, Manager of Hastings Partners, Inc. st~d.- that he is also available for questions. ~ At this time, the public hearing was closed~ MOTION: Commissi~ff's recommendations ~tion was seconded by C~I with the exception of mmissioners Chiniaeff and Mathewson who were absent. ,,,ew,,e,,,s DRAFT Planninq Application No. PA03-0249 To add two out-parcels into the Harveston Specific Plan and amend the Official Zoninq Map located north of the intersection of Ynez Road and Equity Drive within the Harveston Specific Plan, David Hoqan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-047 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADD TWO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN AND INCORPORATE 'I'~NO OUT-PARCELS INTO THE APPROPRIATE TEXT AND EXHIBITS OF SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0249) Principal Planner Hogan provided an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: That Lennar Communities has acquired the two out-parcels and would like to incorporate them into Harveston Specific Plan; by amending the Harveston Specific Plan to add the out-parcels into adjacent planning areas; amend the Zoning Map; and make a determination of consistency between the amended project and the Certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and That staff has reviewed and conducted an analysis (included in the staff report) that the environmental impact to the project fits within the guidelines of the original certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). At this time, the public hearing was opened. Matthew Fagan, 42011 Avenida Vista Cadera, stated that he is available for questions. At this time, the public hearing was closed. R:\PC Minutes 03AUG06.doc 4 DRAFT MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff's recommendation to the City Council. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioners Chiniaeff and Mathewson who were absent. 6 Planning Application No. PA03-0254 A request for a one-year Extension of Time Tentative Parcel Map 29643 to subdivide 4.72 acres of vacant industrial land into parcels located on the west side of Business Park Drive approximately Business Park Drive/Rancho Way intersection1 Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planr the RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. Plan) pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental C Act; )ment 6.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-048 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMM CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNI NO. PA03-0254, A REQUEST FOR A ONI OF TIME (THE FIRST ONE-YEAR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. ACRES OF VACANT LAND INTO THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) ON THE WEST SIDE OF APPROXIMATELY 600 PARK DRIVFJRANCHO ASSESSOR'S PARCEL N~ OF THE APPLICATION EXTENSION OF TIME) FOR TO SUBDIVIDE 4.72 (3) PARCELS WITHIN GENERALLY LOCATED PARK DRIVE OF THE BUSINESS ~N AND KNOWN AS Associate Planner Thornsley provide noting the following: overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), That the Tentative conjunction with a that the applicant i Map No. 29643 was first approved on May 3, 2000, in )ment Plan (PA99-0478) to build three industrial buildings and g for a one-year extension of time. In response to Comn (COA# 3), Director Attorney to Telesio's query regarding updating the indemnification condition Planning Ubnoske explained that amendment is a request by the City guage. At this time, ' )ublic was opened. Dennis ~g, 1530 Consumer Circle, Corona, Applicants Representative, stated that he is ~y questions. __ Commissioner OIhasso moved to approve the item with staff's recommendations and to the Conditions of Approval (as requested in the staff report). The motion was R:\PC Minutes 03AUG06.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 CURRENT ZONING MAP R:\S P A~2003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 15 Harveston ! J EIR Let~nar \ SPF~CIFIC PLAN #13 LIGHT~_ INDUSTRIAL LOW MEDIUM / / ,Source: USGS Murrie~ CaI~omia 7.5 Qmd and CJ. ty o£ Temecula Dcw-elopment Code I N.TS May2003 Existing Zoning A'I-I'ACHMENT NO. 7 CURRENT SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 16 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PROPOSED ZONING MAP R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 17 Harves~on EIR Lennar Communities \ SPECIFIC PLAN #13 LIGHT~ INDUSTRIAL /-! 1 / / / / / / ./ Sourcex USGS Murrieta California 7.5 Quad 2nd Cie' of Temeenla Development Code We~ ~ N. TS May2003 Proposed Zoning A'I-rACHMENT NO. 9 PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 18 ATrACHMENT NO. 10 EIR CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report Ce.doc 19 FINAL EIR CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The following tables display the total development potential for the area of the Harveston Specific Plan and the Out-parcels. As indicated, the anticipated number of dwelling units and commercial square footage is equal to or less than the amounts described in the Final Environmental Impact Report. RESIDENTIAL LAND USES (dwelling units) Current Situation Future Situation with Proposed Changes Harveston Specific Plan 1,921 1,921 Out-Parcels (at target density) 17 0 Total Estimated Dwetling Units 1,938 1,921 Cumulative Project Change ~ -17 COMMERCIAL LAND USES (square feet) Current Situation Future Situation with Proposed Changes Harveston Specific Plan 1,960,200 1,960,200 Out-Parcels 0 0 Total Estimated Commercial Sq. Ft. 1,960,200 1,960,200 Cumulative Project Change ~ 0 NOTE: The out-parcels are currently zoned Low Medium Density Residential and commercial land uses are not allowed in this zone. R:\S P A~003\PA03-0249 Harveston\Staff Report CC.doc 20 ITEM 14 APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY DiR.OF FINANCE CiTY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police August 26, 2003 Participation In The Riverside County District Attomey's Office Gang Task Force RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE GANG TASK FORCE BACKGROUND: Over the past year homicide rates in California have jumped 11% and other violent crime is on the rise. Prominent commentators and law enforcement leaders, such as Los Angeles Police Chief Bratton, have attributed this dramatic increase to gangs. As a result of this increase, the Riverside County District Attorney's Office is proposing the formation of a Riverside County Gang Task Force. Rod Pacheco, Chief Deputy Distdct Attorney, has prepared the attached information and will be available at the City Council meeting for questions and answers. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost for such for such a position is approximately $150,000. This cost would not be born exclusively by Riverside County because the coordinator must work closely with city governments. Focusing the many and varied resources of cities will greatly increase the ability of the task force to effectively and comprehensively target gangs within those cities. Consequently, it is envisioned that the participating cities provide matching funds on a per capita basis for one half the cost of the position. It is expected that the City's share would be less than $5,000 per year. Funds are available in the Police Department budget should Council approve this resolution. ATTACHMENT: Resolution Memorandum Gang Proposal RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DISTRICT A'I-rORNEY'S OFFICE GANG TASK FORCE WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula supports the Riverside County District Attorney's office proposal for a gang coordinator and agrees to participate in the program; WHEREAS, with rising homicide rates of 11%, gangs frequently contribute to the problem; WHEREAS, intervention by a youth accountability team has demonstrated success in working with at-risk youth; WHEREAS, there is a need to collaborate and coordinate the efforts of agencies within Riverside County; WHEREAS, participating cities would fund a portion of a gang coordinator position thereby achieving an efficiency in numbers while serving the greater Riverside County area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, that we support the District Attorney's proposal to establish a gang coordinator for the greater Riverside County area. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26~ day of August, 2003. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos 2003/Resos 03-__ I 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. 03- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the city of Temecula at a regular n~eeting held on the 26th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNClLMEMBERS: COUNClLMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2003/Resos 03-~ 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Rod Pacheco, Chief-Deputy District Attorney, District Attorney's Office PREPARED BY: Rod Pacheco, Chief-Deputy District Attorney, District Attorney's Office DATE: August 19, 2003 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2003- , Approving Participation In The Riverside County District Attorney's Office Gang Task Force RECOMMENDATION: That the Council adopt Resolution No. 2003- , approving the City of Temecula's participation in the Riverside County District Attorney's Office Gang Task Force. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Over the past year homicide rates in California have jumped 1'/% and other violent crime is on the rise. Prominent commentators and law enforcement leaders, such as Los Angeles Police Chief Bratton, have attributed this dramatic increase to gangs. Gangs have an indirect, but significant, deleterious effect on the economic and social conditions in a neighborhood. Any coordination or strategy must encompass this aspect as well. Consequently, because the gang violence problem exists on several levels our response must be coordinated on several levels. Unfortunately, these three approaches typically do not directly serve the larger community most effected by the gangs themselves. A solution to the challenge we face is one that has been used in a different context. Some cities, in attracting large retailers to their community, create a "red team". This team is a local taskforce of one representative from each city department who collaborate to reach a common goal more efficiently and effectively. The red team is the perfect concept to incorporate all three gang strategies. Given the dynamics of gangs, their impact on our community, the extensive and innumerable resources in place, and the need to closely coordinate with government entities a gang coordinator is a necessity. Agenda Item Such coordinator would identify all current resources available on a local, state and federal level. Dissemination of this information to all other parties is also critical. The coordination of those resources and providing the focus for them in particular geographic areas would also be a primary responsibility of the gang coordinator. For example, the east side of Riverside and its gang problem could be targeted by all available resources on the three approaches over a period of time. Once ended those combined resources would then be focused on other impacted areas within our county. Since the District Attorney's Office is, in a sense, the "hub of the wheel" for all three strategies the position of gang coordinator should be placed in the District Attorney's Office. The experience and stature requires a Senior Deputy District Attorney (IVS) position be funded. Representatives from numerous cities have already been briefed and have expressed support for the proposal and funding arrangements. Those cities include Riverside, Corona, Hemet, Moreno Valley, Perris, and Norco. In conclusion, a comprehensive, unified approach to the gang problem is clearly needed in Riverside County. With almost 8,000 active gang members in over 200 gangs our county is negatively impacted on economic, social and public safety levels. Combining and focusing our countless and present resources on this problem will we be able to begin solving it. A gang coordinator would be that important first step. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost for such for such a position is approximately $150,000. This cost would not be born exclusively by Riverside County because the coordinator must work closely with city governments. Focusing the many and varied resources of cities will greatly increase the ability of the task force to effectively and comprehensively target gangs within those cities. Consequently, it is envisioned that the participating cities provide matching funds on a per capita basis for one half the cost of the position. Agenda Item __ DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE RIVERSIDE COUNTY GANG PROPOSAL In Riverside County, law enforcement has identified at least 233 separate criminal street gangs. The active gang members who comprise these terrorist groups totals 7,952. Not included in this total are the friends and associates who commonly assist the gangs in committing serious and violent crimes. These gangs range from the "East Side Rivas" in the city of Riverside with 500+ active members to the "South Side Indio" gang with 140 members. They also include the "Corona Varrio Locos' in Corona with 138 members and "Edgemont Locos" in Moreno Valley with 100-120. These are but a few examples of the gangs that terrorize communities within Riverside County. Over the past year homicide rates in California have jumped 11% and other violent crime is on the rise. Prominent commentators and law enforcement leaders, such as Los Angeles Police Chief Bratton, have attributed this dramatic increase to gangs. Our county has taken innumerable and diverse steps to attack this ever-growing problem. Countless resources are expended on prevention, intervention, and suppression amounting to millions of dollars. While efforts and expenditures are being made across the entire spectrum there appears to be little, if any, coordination. Nowhere is there found even a listing of all the current resources available, nor even are the unique efforts of individuals, nonprofits, private or public entities comprehensively identified. Consequently, efforts, financial resources, and virtue are not focused collaboratively and duplication is the norm rather than the exception. In the current gang violence context the strategies that are deemed essential to combat the problem are prevention, intervention, and suppression. Prevention attacks the problem by reaching out to children who may be exposed to gang activity before that exposure. Its approach is based on education and for example involves after school activities. Intervention is an approach that targets older children who are currently exposed to gang activity and are exhibiting signs of being at risk. It is best exemplified by the Youth Accountability Team (YAT) currently operating in Riverside County schools. Suppression is the traditional and targets existing gang members who are actively committing crimes. Law enforcement is the resource implementing this approach. Consequently, because the gang violence problem exists on several levels our response must be coordinated on several levels. Unfortunately, these three approaches typically do not directly serve the larger community most effected by the gangs themselves. Gangs have an indirect, but significant, deleterious effect on the economic and social conditions in a neighborhood. Any coordination or strategy must encompass this aspect as well. A solution to the challenge we face is one that has been used in a different context. Some cities, in attracting large retailers to their community, create a "red team". This team is a local taskforce of one representative from each city department who collaborate to reach a common goal more efficiently and effectively. The red team is the perfect concept to incorporate all three gang strategies. Given the dynamics of gangs, their impact on our community, the extensive and innumerable resources in place, and the need to closely coordinate with government entities a gang coordinator is a necessity. Such coordinator would identify all current resources available on a local, state and federal level. Dissemination of this information to all other parties is also critical. The coordination of those resources and providing the focus for them in particular geographic areas would also be a primary responsibility of the gang coordinator. For example, the east side of Riverside and its gang problem could be targeted by all available resources on the three approaches over a period of time. Once ended those combined resources would then be focused on other impacted areas within our county. Since the District Attorney's Office is, in a sense, the "hub of the wheel" for all three strategies the position of gang coordinator should be placed in the District Attorney's Office. The experience and stature requires a Senior Deputy District Attorney (IVS) position be funded. The cost for such for such a position is approximately $150,000. This cost should not be bom exclusively by Riverside County because the coordinator must work closely with city governments. Focusing the many and varied resources of cities will greatly increase the ability of the task force to effectively and comprehensively target gangs within those cities. Consequently, it is recommended that the participating cities provide matching funds for one half the cost of the position. Such contribution would be divided by the cities on a per capita basis. Representatives from numerous cities have already been briefed and have expressed support for the proposal and funding arrangements. Those cities include Riverside, Corona, Hemet, Moreno Valley, Perris, and Nomo. In conclusion, a comprehensive, unified approach to the gang problem is clearly needed in Riverside County. With almost 8,000 active gang members in over 200 gangs our county is negatively impacted on economic, social and public safety levels. Combining and focusing our countless and present resources on this problem we will be able to begin solving it. A gang coordinator would be that important first step. ITEM 15 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINAN~,.~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 2003 Consideration of Adoption of Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition in Eminent Domain of Certain Real Properties for public purposes RECOMMENDATION: In an effort to continue the City's negotiations with the property owners, it is recommended to continue the hearing to consider the adoption of resolutions of necessity pursuant to the provisions of the Eminent Domain Law for the acquisition by eminent domain of the real property interests from August 26, 2003 to September 16, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. at the City of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590: ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAI~J~¥i~'I~ CITY MANAGER (-/-~/ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Herman Parker, Director of Community ServicerS. August 26, 2003 Cable, Video and Telecommunications Ordinance PREPARED BY: Phyllis L. Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 2003- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGULATING CABLE, VIDEO, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND AMEN DING IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 5.12 OF TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE 2. Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING FEES FOR TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING CABLE TELEVISION AND OPEN VIDEO SYSTEM FRANCHISES, AND REGISTRATION FEES FOR OTHER VIDEO PROVIDERS DISCUSSION: Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code regulates the provision of cable services within the City of Temecula. The Chapter was adopted shortly after City incorporation in December 1989. Since that date, the federal and state laws governing cable providers and services, as well as other telecommunications services, have changed significantly. Along with these legal and legislative changes, the industry has experienced dramatic technological changes. R:~ZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 cc revised cable ordinance 82103.DOC Prior to incorporation, the County of Riverside approved a cable franchise transfer to Inland Valley Cablevision for the provision of cable services in the area that would later incorporate as the City of Temecula. That franchise agreement has subsequently been transferred to successor providers, the current provider being Adelphia. The franchise agreement expires on January 9, 2004 and staff is beginning the franchise renewal negotiations process with Adelphia. After reviewing the City's existing Ordinance, our cable franchise attorney with Richards, Watson and Gershon, Bill Rudell, has recommended that the first step the City should take in the negotiations process is the adoption of a new cable, video and telecommunications services Ordinance, completely amending the existing Ordinance. This recommendation is made in order to be in compliance with current state and federal laws, and to keep abreast of current technologies and trends. Some of the most noteworthy changes in the proposed Ordinance are: 1) Updated language consistent with current state and federal law, 2) Inclusion of other telecommunications service providers, 3) Expanded requirements for an initial franchise application, 4) Defined application requirements a franchise renewal or transfer, 5) Enhanced consumer protection and service standards, 6) Established penalties and procedures to enforce penalties for non-compliance with consumer service standards, 7) Required parental control options, and 8) Established control over windows of time for construction in the public rights-of-way. A companion Resolution, defining certain deposits as required by the Ordinance should be considered at the same time as the Ordinance. These deposits are intended to cover costs associated with processing new applications, transfers and/or changes of control of both cable television and open video system franchises and registration fees for other video providers offering services within the City. Adoption of the new Ordinance and Resolution will provide a framework not only for the current cable franchise agreement renewal negotiations, but also for other telecommunications services that may be provided to City residents in the future. Copies of the proposed Ordinance and Resolution have been provided to Adelphia, Verizon and other interested utility providers for their review and comments. Verizon submitted its objections to the ordinance on August 11,2003, the day before the City Council was scheduled to introduce the regulatory ordinance. Assistant City Attorney, Bill Rudell, reviewed those objections. Mr. Rudell submitted to City staff an analysis that addressed each of Verizon's objections, all but one of which related to Article 5 of the ordinance, which is entitled "Use of Public Rights-of-Way." The Public Works Director, the Director of Community Services, and Mr. Rudell conferred on August 20, 2003, to discuss Verizon's objections. No modifications were made to Section 5.12.160(A)(1)(b), Section 5.12.160(A)(1)(d), Section 5.12.160(B)(5), Section 5.12.160(B)(6), or Section 5.12.160(C). These remain as set forth in the attached ordinance because they are deemed to be necessary for the City's management of its public rights-of-way. Modifications were, however, made to Section 5.12.160(A)(1)(c), Section 5.12.160(A)(3), Section 5.12.160(B)(3), Section 5.12.160(B)(7), and the penalty provision set forth in Article 7, Section 5.12.180(A). These modifications were deemed to be reasonable and consistent with the City's continuing authority to regulate the use of its public rights-of-way. The original text, followed by the R:~ZIGLERG~P-EPORTx082603 cc ~evised cable ordinance 82103.DOC revised text, of each of these five provisions is set forth as follows: (1) Section 5.12.160(A)(1)¢c) ORIGINAL TEXT: A requirement that utility and other service providers occupying the public rights-of-way submit annually to the City a map, which may be in a uniform electronic-data format to be specified by the City, that shows the location of their respective facilities in the public rights-of-way. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an updated annual map need not be provided unless there are changes to the location of the service previder's facilities in the public rights-of-way. REVISED TEXT: A requirement that utility and other service providers occupying the public rights-of-way submit annually to the City a map, which may be in an electronic-data format maintained in the ordinary course of business, that shows the location of their respective facilities in the public rights-of-way. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an updated annual map need not be provided unless there are changes to the location of the service provider's facilities in the public rights-of-way. (2) Section 5.12.160(A)(3) ORIGINAL TEXT: Based upon the City's projected plans for street construction or renovation projects, the City Manager is authorized to establish on a quarterly basis one or more construction time periods or '~Nindows" for the installation of facilities within the public rights-of-way. Cable system operators, telephone corporations, and other utility service providers that submit applications for permits to construct facilities after a predetermined date may be required to delay such construction until the next quarterly '~Nindow" that is established by the City. REVISED TEXT: Based upon the City's projected plans for street construction or renovation projects, the City Manager is authorized to establish on a quarterly basis one or more construction time periods or "windows" for the installation of facilities within arterial or collector streets, or where City rehabilitation or maintenance activities within the public rights-of-way will be affected. Cable system operators, telephone corporations, and other utility service providers that submit applications for permits to construct facilities after a predetermined date may be required to delay such construction until the next quarterly "window" that is established by the City. (3) Section 5.12.160(B)(3) ORIGINAL TEXT: The maintenance of all above-ground facilities in good condition, including compliance with the City's ordinances regarding graff~ti removal. In this regard, a utility or other service provider may be required to affix to its above-ground facilities a coded label or marker that identifies the specific facility and sets forth a telephone number that may be called to report any damage, destruction, or graffiti vandalism involving that facility. REVISED TEXT: The maintenance of all above-greund facilities in good condition, including compliance with the City's ordinances regarding graffiti removal. (4) Section 5.12.160(B)(7) ORIGINAL TEXT: The specification of colors of above-ground facilities reasonably requested by the City to ensure that these facilities blend with the surrounding environment to the maximum extent possible. REVISED TEXT: The specification of colors, as are available from the manufacturer used by the service provider, of above-ground facilities reasonably requested by the City to ensure that these facilities blend with the surrounding environment to the maximum extent possible. R:~ZIGLERG\REPORT~082603 cc revised cable ordinance g2103.DOC (5) Article 7, Section 5.12.180(A) ORIGINAL TEXT: Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided for in Chapter 1.20 of Title 1 of this Code. REVISED TEXT: Unless precluded by applicable law, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided for in Chapter 1.20 of Title 1 of this Code. City staff is recommending that the City Council introduce the regulatory ordinance, as modified, at its meeting on August 26, 2003. Mr. Rudell will be in attendance at that meeting to respond to any questions that the City Councilmembers may have. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact related to the adoption of this Ordinance. The Resolution establishes fees and deposits required to begin negotiations for a franchise agreement or renewal. Attachments: Proposed Telecommunications Ordinance Proposed Telecommunications Fee Resolution R:XZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 cc revised cable ordinance 82103.DOC Barbara Smith Sent: To: Subject: Jim OGrady Wednesday, August 13, 2003 2:37 PM Barbara Smith FW: City of Temecula Telecommunications Ordinance and Resolution Barb, Hope this helps Jim ..... Original Message ..... From: al.sabsevitz@verizon.com [mailto:al.sabsevitz@verizon.com] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:33 PM TO: Phyllis Ruse Cc: Jim OGrady; Shawn Nelson Subject: Re: City of Temecula Telecommunications Ordinance and Resolution Sorry for the delay. Our staff expert just submitted comments on the proposed Telecommunications Ordinance. I plan to be at the City Council meeting tomorrow evening in case there are any questions. Thank you for the opportunity to review the ordinance. -- A1 Sabsevitz Verizon External Affairs ..... Forwarded by A1 D. Sabsevitz/EMPL/CA/Verizon on 08/11/2003 02:22 PM David L. Mielke To: A1 D. Sabsevitz/EMPL/CA/Verizon 08/11/2003 02:02 cc: Bill H. Warren/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, Jim P. PM Greene/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, John C. Viereck/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, LaVerne G. Davis/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, Lawrence A. Valdivieso/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, Mike P. Riley/EMPL/CA/Verizon@VZNotes, david.mielke@verizon.com, richard.stewart@verizon.com Subject: Re: City of Temecula Telecommunications Ordinance and Resolution (Document link: A1 D. Sabsevitz) Al, I have the following concerns regarding the ordinance. Article 5.12.160 (A) (1) (b) - A requirement to provide a written statement describing the efforts made to obtain the right to use excess capacity exceeds the cities authority to manage the right-of-way as a decision whether to issue a permit based on such information is unlawful in that it attempts to manage how a telecommunication provider Drovisions its services and dictates that a provider must lease facilities rather than building and owning such facilities. Article 5.12.160(A) (1) (c) - The requirement to provide mapping information in an electronic-data format to be specified by the City should be change to an electronic-data format as maintained in the ordinary course of business as a provider will not maintain different formats for each city that requests data of this nature. Article 5.12.160(A)(1)(d) - This requirement should be deleted for the reason as outlined in Article 5.12.160(b) above. In addition, it provides the City with the unfettered discretion to adopt requirements that are unrelated to the management of the right-of-way which was determined to be unlawful by the courts in the Qwest v. Auburn and Qwest v Berkeley decisions. Furthermore, to the extent that such requirement does not apply to all entities, including the City, that utilize the ROW is unreasonable and unlawfully violates Section 7901.1(b) of the California Public Utility Code. Article 5.12.160(A)(3) - A requirement of this nature imposes a barrier to entry to both provision telecommunication services and to maintain the provisioning of such services as may be required of Verizon as the carrier of last resort. As a carrier of last resort, Verizon has limitations on the time in which it can provision services that are requested throughout the city. If a new customer moves into the city, or an existing customer needs the likes of additional capacity or a private network Verizon cannot be required to delay the provisioning of such services until the next "window". Article 5.12.160(B) (3) - A requirement to identify the owner of the above ground facilities is unreasonable, unnecessary and would impose significant unnecessary costs on telecommunication providers. This requirement is unnecessary as the City currently knows the owner of a facility through the construction permitting process and the associated mapping requirements. It would also be confusing as it would necessitate for poles and other facilities to have the names and numbers of all the providers that occupy the facility creating an unsightly object. Furthermore this requirement seems to have been made without discussing the extent of the problem with the facility based providers. Article 5.12.160(B)(5) - The requirement to limit the number of above ground facilities that can be installed in a GeograDhical area should be deleted as a requirement of this nature is discriminatory and an unlawful barrier to entry as it will require new entrants to incur greater costs for the provisioning of facilities than that is required of existing providers. Furthermore a requirement of this nature will discourage technological enhancements and the ability of the citizens of Temeculah to receive advanced telecommunications services due to the additional cost of underGroundinG such facilities. Furthermore, to the extent that such requirement does not apply to all entities, including the City, that utilize the ROW is unreasonable and unlawfully violates Section 7901.1(b) of the California Public Utility Code. Article 5.12.160(B) (6) - The requirement for limitations upon the dimensions or volume of above ground facilities should be deleted as such requirements are driven by the manufacturers specifications and the number of customers which are necessary for Verizon to provide service. Any restrictions on the dimensions or volume will impact Verizon's ability to provision advanced telecommunication services to the citizens of Temecula. Article 5.12.160(B) (7) - The requirement for the specification of colors of above-ground facilities should be modified by adding "as are available from the manufacturer as utilized by the service provider" after "colors". This change is necessary as each manufacturer of above Ground facilities has a limited selection of available cabinet/facility colors and if a cabinet/facility is painted over the warranty becomes void. Article 5.12.160(C) - This section should be deleted as the requirement is unnecessary because state law along with Verizon's tariff's specifically outline requirements for undergroundinG of above Ground facilities and the party that is responsible for such costs. Article 5.12.180(A) - This section should be deleted as such penalties with respect to telecommunication providers has been determined to be an unlawful barrier to entry in violation of Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1934, as revised by numerous courts including Qwest v. Auburn. ( ATT v. Dallas, ATT v. Austin, Prince George County v. Bell Atlantic, X/O & SBC v. Maryland Heights, MO.) David Mielke 972-718-3435 - Phone 972-719-7948 - Fax david.mielke@verizon.com RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING FEES FOR TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING CABLE TELEVISION AND OPEN VIDEO SYSTEM FRANCHISES, AND REGISTRATION FEES FOR OTHER VIDEO PROVIDERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following fees apply to applications submitted to the City that are related to transactions involving cable television franchises and open video system franchises, as referenced in Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. TRANSACTIONS RELATED TO CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISES 1. Application fee deposit payable by any person requesting an initial franchise for a cable television system: $25,000 2. Renewal application fee deposit payable by the franchisee of a cable television system for all anticipated costs to be incurred by the City in reviewing and processing the franchisee's renewal application: $20,000 3. Deposit payable by the franchisee of a cable television system for review and processing expenses to be incurred by the City in connection with any proposed transfer or change in control of the franchise: $2,500 B. TRANSACTIONS RELATED TO OPEN VIDEO SYSTEM FRANCHISES 1. Application fee deposit payable by any person requesting an initial agreement or franchise to construct and operate an open video system: $20,000 2. Renewal application fee deposit payable by an authorized video system operator for all anticipated costs to be incurred by the City in reviewing and processing the video system operator's renewal application: $20,000 737972-1 3. Deposit payable by an authorized open video system operator for review and processing expenses to be incurred by the City in connection with any proposed transfer or change in control of the open video system: $2,500 Section 2. The following fees apply to the filing with the City of a registration form by a video provider, as required under Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code: REGISTRATION FEE PAYABLE BY VIDEO PROVIDERS Registration fee to cover the reasonable costs incurred by the City in reviewing and processing the registration form required of all video providers under Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code: $100 Section 3. The City Council finds and determines that the new fees established by this resolution are in an amount that is reasonably necessary to recover the costs and expenses to be incurred by the City in reviewing and processing the documents for which those fees are imposed or are authorized to be imposed. Section 4. The new fees set forth in this resolution will become effective upon the effective date of Ordinance No. 2003- ., which ordinance amends in its entirety Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Municipal Code. Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. 2003. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this __ day of ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney 737972-1 ORDiNANCE NO. AN ORDiNANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGULATiNG CABLE, VIDEO, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND AMENDiNG iN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 5.12 OF TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAiN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. repealed in its entirety. Chapter 5.12 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code is Section 2. The Temecula Municipal Code is amended by adding to Title 5 a new Chapter 5.12 to read as follows: "CABLE, VIDEO, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS 5.12.010 Title This ordinance is known and may be cited as the "Cable, Video, and Telecommunications Service Providers Ordinance" of the City of Temecula. 5.12.020 Purpose and Intent A. The City Council finds and determines as follows: 1. The development of cable, video, and telecommunications services and systems may provide significant benefits for, and have substantial impacts upon, the residents of the City. 2. Because of the complex and rapidly changing technology associated with cable, video, and telecommunications services and systems, the public convenience, safety, and general welfare can best be served by the City's exercise of its regulatory powers. 3. This chapter adopts provisions that authorize the City to regulate cable, video, and telecommunications service providers to the extent authorized by federal and state law, including but not limited to the federal Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, the federal Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, applicable regulations of the Federal Communications Commission, and applicable California statutes and regulations. RAZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 1 4. The cable, video, and telecommunications services that are addressed in this chapter include services provided by cable television systems, open video systems, master antenna television systems, satellite master antenna television systems, direct broadcast satellite systems, multichannel multipoint distribution systems, local multipoint distribution systems, and other providers of video programming, whatever their technology, as well as voice and data services provided by telephone corporations. B. The purpose and intent of this ordinance is to provide for the attainment of the following objectives: 1. To enable the City to discharge its public trust in a manner consistent with rapidly evolving federal and state regulatory policies, industry competition, and technological development. 2. To authorize and to manage reasonable access to the City's public rights-of-way and public property for cable, video, and telecommunications purposes on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis. 3. To obtain fair and reasonable compensation for the City and its residents for authorizing the private use of the public rights-of-way and public property. 4. To promote competition in cable, video, and telecommunications services, minimize unnecessary local regulation of cable, video, and telecommunications service providers, and encourage the delivery of advanced and competitive cable, video, and telecommunications services on the broadest possible basis to local government and to the businesses, institutions, and residents of the City. 5. To establish clear local guidelines, standards, and time frames for the exercise of local authority with respect to the regulation of cable, video, and telecommunications service providers. 6. To encourage the deployment of advanced cable, video, and telecommunications infrastructure that satisfies local needs, delivers enhanced services, and provides informed consumer choices in an evolving cable, video, and telecommunications marketplace. 7. To maintain and to enhance public, educational, and governmental programming opportunities that will enable local government to communicate with its residents and to provide them with alternate means of disseminating information. 5.12.030 Defined Terms and Phrases Various terms and phrases used in this ordinance are defined below in Section 5.12.170. RAZIGLERG\REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 2 5.12.035 Suspension and Waiver of Application Fee Deposits A. With regard to any application fee deposit for an initial franchise, or for the renewal of a franchise, or for the transfer or change in control of a franchise that is authorized by this Chapter 5.12, the City Manager may suspend that application fee deposit in accordance with this section. B. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, will review all written information submitted by the applicant or franchisee in support of its contention that applicable law prohibits imposition of the application fee deposit provided for by this Chapter 5.12. Ifa determination is made that applicable law supports the contention of the applicant or franchisee, then the City Manager may suspend the imposition of the application fee deposit; provided, however, that such suspension must be ratified by the City Council within 30 days after the City Manager's determination and, if ratified, the application fee deposit will be deemed to have been waived." ARTICLE 2. CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEMS 5.12.040 Authority and Findings A. In accordance with applicable federal and state law, the City is authorized to grant one or more nonexclusive franchises to construct, reconstruct, operate, and maintain cable television systems within the City limits. B. The City Council finds that the development of cable television services may provide significant benefits for, and substantial impacts upon, the residents of the City. Because of the complex and rapidly changing technology associated with cable television, the City Council further finds that the public convenience, safety, and general welfare can best be served by establishing regulatory powers to be exercised by the City. This Article 2 is intended to specify the means for providing to the public the best possible cable television services, and every franchise issued in accordance with this Article 2 is intended to achieve this primary objective. It is the further intent of this Article 2 to adopt regulatory provisions that will enable the City to regulate cable television services to the maximum extent authorized by federal and state law. 5.12.050 Franchise Terms and Conditions A. Franchise Purposes A franchise granted by the City under the provisions of this Article 2 may authorize the Grantee to do the following: 1. To engage in the business of providing cable television services that are authorized by law and that the Grantee elects to provide to its subscribers within the designated franchise service area. RSZIGLERG\REPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 3 2. To erect, install, construct, repair, rebuild, reconstruct, replace, maintain, and retain, cable lines, related electronic equipment, supporting structures, appurtenances, and other property in connection with the operation of the cable system in, on, over, under, upon, along and across streets and public rights-of-way within the designated franchise service area. 3. To maintain and operate the franchise properties for the origination, reception, transmission, amplification, and distribution of television and radio signals, and for the delivery of cable services and such other services as may be authorized by law. B. Franchise Required It is unlawful for any person to construct, install, or operate a cable television system within any street or public way in the City without first obtaining a franchise under the provisions of this Article 2. C. Term of the Franchise 1. A franchise granted under this Article 2 will be for the term specified in the franchise agreement, commencing upon the effective date of the resolution adopted by the City Council that authorizes the franchise. 2. A franchise granted under this Article 2 may be renewed upon application by the Grantee in accordance with the then-applicable provisions of state and federal law and this Article 2. D. Franchise Service Area A franchise is effective within the territorial limits of the City, and within any area added to the City during the term of the franchise, unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting the franchise or in the franchise agreement. E. Federal or State Jurisdiction This Article 2 will be construed in a manner consistent with all applicable federal and state laws, and it applies to all franchises granted or renewed after the effective date of this chapter, to the extent authorized by applicable law. F. Franchise Non-Transferable 1. Grantee may not sell, transfer, lease, assign, sublet, or dispose of, in whole or in part, either by forced or involuntary sale, or by ordinary sale, contract, consolidation, or otherwise, the franchise or any of the rights or privileges therein granted, without the prior written consent of the City Council, which consent may not be unreasonably denied or delayed. Any attempt to sell, transfer, lease, assign, or otherwise dispose of the franchise without the written consent of the City Council is null and void. The granting of a security interest in any assets of the Grantee, or any mortgage or other hypothecation, will not be RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 4 deemed a transfer for the purposes of this subsection. A transfer to a person or entity owned or controlled by or under common ownership or control of Grantee shall not be deemed a transfer for the purposes of this subsection. 2. The requirements of subsection (1) apply to any change in control of Grantee. The word "control" as used herein is not limited to the ownership of major stockholder or partnership interests, but includes actual working control in whatever manner exercised. If Grantee is a partnership or a corporation, prior authorization of the City Council is required where ownership or control of 25 percent or more of the partnership interests or of the voting stock of Grantee, or any company in the tier of companies controlling the Grantee, whether directly or indirectly, is acquired by a person or a group of persons acting in concert, none of whom, individually or collectively, owns or controls those partnership interests or that voting stock of the Grantee, or Grantee's upper tier of controlling companies, as of the effective date of the franchise. 3. Unless precluded by federal law, Grantee must give prior written notice to the City of any proposed forcclosure or judicial sale of all or a substantial part of the Grantee's franchise property. That notification will be considered by the City as notice that a change in control of ownership of the franchise will take place, and the provisions of this paragraph that require the prior written consent of the City Council to that change in control of ownership will apply. 4. For the purpose of determining whether it will consent to an acquisition, transfer, or change in control, the City may inquire about the qualifications of the prospective transferee or controlling party, and Grantee must assist the City in that inquiry. In seeking the City's consent to any change of ownership or control, Grantee or the proposed transferee, or both, must complete Federal Communications Commission Form 394 or its equivalent. This application must be submitted to the City not less than 120 days prior to the proposed date of transfer. The transferee must establish that it possesses the legal, financial, and technical capability to remedy all then-existing defaults and deficiencies, and, during the remaining term of the franchise, to operate and maintain the cable system and to comply with all franchise requirements. If the legal, financial, and technical qualifications of the proposed transferee are determined to be satisfactory, then the City will consent to the transfer of the franchise. 5. Any financial institution holding a pledge of the Grantee's assets to secure the advance of money for the construction or operation of the franchise property has the right to notify the City that it, or a designee satisfactory to the City, will take control of and operate the cable television system upon Grantee's default in its financial obligations. Further, that financial institution must also submit a plan for such operation within 90 days after assuming control. The plan must insure continued service and compliance with all franchise requirements during the period that the financial institution will exercise control over the system. The financial institution may not exercise control over the system for a period exceeding one year unless authorized by the City, in its sole discretion, and during that period of time it will have the right to petition the City to transfer the franchise to another Grantee. RSZIGLERGXREPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 5 6. Unless prohibited by applicable law, Grantee must reimburse the City for the City's reasonable review and processing expenses incurred in connection with any transfer or change in control of the franchise. These expenses may include, without limitation, costs of administrative review, financial, legal, and technical evaluation of the proposed transferee, consultants (including technical and legal experts and all costs incurred by these experts), notice and publication costs, and document preparation expenses. The total mount of these reimbursable expenses may be subject to maximum limits that are specified in the franchise agreement between the City and the Grantee. No reimbursement may be offset against any franchise fee payable to the City during the term of the franchise. G. Geographical Coverage 1. Unless otherwise provided in the franchise agreement, Grantee must design, construct, and maintain the cable television system to have the capability to pass every dwelling unit and commercial building in the franchise service area, subject to any service- area line extension requirements or territorial restrictions set forth in the franchise agreement. 2. After service has been established by activating trunk or distribution cables for any service area, Grantee must provide standard installations to any requesting subscriber within that activated part of the service area within seven days from the date of request, or such longer time as may be requested by the subscriber, provided that the Grantee is able to secure on reasonable terms and conditions all rights-of-way and permits necessary to extend service to that subscriber within that period. Standard installations are defined as installations that are located up to 125 feet from the existing distribution system and do not require trenching to serve. H. Nonexclusive Franchise Every franchise granted is nonexclusive. The City specifically reserves the right to grant, at any time, such additional franchises for a cable television system that it deems appropriate, subject to applicable state and federal law. If an additional franchise is proposed to be granted to a subsequent Grantee, a noticed public hearing must first be held if required by the provisions of Govemment Code § 53066.3. I. Multiple Franchises 1. The City may grant any number of franchises, subject to applicable state and federal law. The City may limit the number of franchises granted, based upon, but not necessarily limited to, the requirements of applicable law and the following specific local considerations: a. The capacity of the public rights-of-way to accommodate multiple cables in addition to the cables, conduits, and pipes of the existing utility systems, such as electrical power, telephone, gas, and sewerage. b. The benefits that may accrue to subscribers as a result of cable system competition, such as lower rates and improved service. RSZIGLERGhU~EPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 6 c. The disadvantages that may result from cable system competition, such as the requirement for multiple pedestals on residents' property, and the disruption arising from numerous excavations within the public rights-of-way. 2. The City may require that any new Grantee be responsible for its own underground trenching and the associated costs if, in the City's opinion, the rights- of-way in any particular area cannot reasonably accommodate additional cables. 5.12.060 Franchise Applications and Renewal A. Filing of Applications Any person desiring an initial franchise for a cable television system must file an application with the City. An application fee deposit in an amount established by resolution of the City Council must accompany the application. That application fee deposit will cover all anticipated costs associated with reviewing and processing the application, including without limitation costs of administrative review, financial, legal, and technical evaluation of the applicant, consultants (including technical and legal experts and all costs incurred by those experts), notice and publication requirements, and document preparation expenses. If actual costs exceed the application fee deposit, the applicant must pay the difference to the City within 30 days following receipt of an itemized statement of those costs. If actual costs are less than the application fee deposit, the remaining balance will be refunded to the applicant. B. Applications - Contents An application for an initial franchise for a cable television system must contain, as applicable: 1. A statement describing the proposed franchise service area and an explanation whether this proposed service area is, or will be, part of a larger regional cluster of franchise service areas. 2. A resume of the applicant's prior history, including the applicant's experience and expertise in the cable television industry. 3. A list of the partners, general and limited, of the applicant, ifa partnership, or the percentage of stock owned or controlled by each stockholder, if a closely-held corporation. If the applicant is a publicly-owned partnership or corporation, each owner of 10 percent or more of the partnership interests, or of the issued and outstanding capital stock, must be identified. If the applicant is a limited liability company, the following information must be provided: the address of its principal executive office; the name and business or residence address of each member and of each holder of an economic interest in the limited liability company, together with the contribution and the share in profits and losses of each member and holder of an economic interest; the name and business or residence address of any manager or managers and the chief executive officer, if any, appointed or elected in accordance with the articles of organization or operating agreement. RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 7 4. A list of officers, directors, and managing employees of the applicant, and a description of the background and qualifications of each such person. 5. A statement specifying the number of people employed by the applicant, whether on a full-time or part-time basis. 6. The names and addresses of any parent or subsidiary of the applicant, or any other business entity owning or controlling applicant in whole or in part, or that is owned or controlled in whole or in part by the applicant. 7. Financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles that demonstrate the applicant's financial ability to: a. Construct, operate, maintain and remove any new physical plant that is proposed to be constructed in the City. governmental access requirements. Comply with the City's public, educational, and c. Comply with the City's requirement that franchise fees be paid on the applicant's gross revenues derived from the operation of the cable system to provide cable services. 8. An accurate map showing the location of any existing telecommunications facilities in the City that the applicant intends to use, to purchase, or to lease. 9. A description of the cable services and any other services that will be offered by the applicant using existing or proposed facilities. 10. The proposed construction and service schedule, the proposed rate structure for cable services, and the proposed commitment to provide public, educational, and governmental access capacity, services, facilities, and equipment. 11. Any additional information that the City deems to be reasonably necessary to evaluate the applicant's qualifications. C. Consideration of Initial Applications 1. Upon receipt of an application for an initial franchise, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee must prepare a report and make recommendations to the City Council concerning that application. 2. A public hearing will be noticed prior to any initial franchise grant, at a time and date approved by the City Council. Within 30 days after the close of the hearing, the City Council will make a decision, based upon the documents and testimony received at the hearing, whether the franchise should be granted, and, if granted, subject to what R:~ZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 8 conditions. The City Council may grant one or more franchises, or may decline to grant any franchise. D. Franchise Renewal Franchise renewals will be processed in accordance with then-applicable law and with the renewal terms, if any, of the franchise agreement. The City and Grantee, by mutual consent, may enter into renewal negotiations at any time during the term of the franchise. Unless prohibited by applicable law, a renewal application fee deposit in an amount established by resolution of the City Council must accompany the renewal application or the renewal request. That renewal application fee deposit will cover all anticipated costs associated with reviewing and processing the renewal application, including the review of Grantee's prior compliance with the franchise, the ascertainment of the community's cable-related needs and interests, the engagement of technical and legal consultants, and expenses related to negotiations and document preparation. If actual costs exceed the renewal application fee deposit, the Grantee must pay the difference to the City within 30 days following receipt of an itemized statement of those costs. If actual costs are less than the renewal application fee deposit, the remaining balance will be refunded to the Grantee. No renewal application fee may be offset against any franchise fee payable to the City during the term of the franchise. The City Council may authorize the renewal of a cable television franchise agreement by resolution. 5.12.070 Contents of Cable Television Franchise Agreements A. The provisions of a franchise agreement for the operation of a cable television system may relate to or include, without limitation, the following subject matters: 1. The geographical area, duration, and nonexclusive nature of the franchise. 2. The applicable franchise fee to be paid to the City, including the percentage amount, the method of computation, and the time for payment. 3. Requirements relating to compliance with and implementation of state and federal laws and regulations pertaining to the operation of the cable television system. 4. Requirements relating to the construction, upgrade, or rebuild of the cable television system, as well as the provision of special services, such as outlets for public buildings, emergency alert capability, and parental control devices. 5. Requirements relating to the maintenance of a performance bond, a security fund, a letter of credit, or similar assurances to secure the performance of the Grantee's obligations under the franchise agreement. 6. Requirements relating to comprehensive liability insurance, workers' compensation insurance, and indemnification. R:~ZIGLERGXREPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 9 7. Requirements relating to consumer protection and customer service standards, which requirements may include, without limitation, compliance with the statutes, rules and regulations set forth below in Section 5.12.080 of this Article 2. 8. Requirements relating to the Grantee's support of local cable usage, including the provision of public, educational, and governmental access channels, the coverage of public meetings and special events, and financial support for the required access channels. 9. Requirements relating to the Grantee's obligation to provide an institutional network, and channel capacity on that institutional network for educational or governmental use, subject to the City's rules and procedures for the use of such channel capacity and for compatibility with any telecommunications network that has been or may be developed by the City. 10. Requirements relating to construction, operation, and maintenance of the cable television system within the City's streets and public rights-of-way, including compliance with all applicable building codes and permit requirements of the City, the abandonment, removal, or relocation of facilities, and compliance with FCC technical standards. 11. Requirements relating to recordkeeping, accounting procedures, reporting, periodic audits, performance reviews, the inspection of Grantee's books and records, and reimbursement for technical audits and franchise fee audits under specified circumstances. 12. Acts or omissions constituting material breaches of or defaults under the franchise agreement, and the applicable penalties or remedies for such breaches or defaults, including fines, penalties, liquidated damages, suspension, revocation, and termination. 13. Requirements relating to the sale, assignment, or other transfer or change in control of the franchise. 14. The Grantee's obligation to maintain continuity of service and to authorize, under certain specified circumstances, the City's operation and management of the cable system. 15. Such additional requirements, conditions, policies, and procedures as may be mutually agreed upon by the parties to the franchise agreement and that will, in the judgment of City staff and the City Council, best serve the public interest and protect the public health, welfare, and safety. B. If there is any conflict or inconsistency between the provisions of a franchise agreement authorized by the City Council and provisions of this Article 2, the provisions of the franchise agreement will control. R:~ZIGLERG~REPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 1 0 5.12.080 Consumer Protection and Service Standards A. Operational Standards. 1. Grantee must maintain the necessary facilities, equipment, and personnel to comply with the following consumer protection and service standards under normal operating conditions: a. Sufficient toll-free telephone line capacity during normal business hours to ensure that telephone calls are answered promptly. Telephone answer time by a customer service representative, including wait time, may not exceed 30 seconds when the connection is made. If the call needs to be transferred, transfer time must not exceed 30 seconds. percent of the time, measured quarterly. A caller must receive a busy signal less than three c. Emergency toll-free telephone line capacity on a 24-hour basis, including weekends and holidays. After normal business hours, the telephone calls may be answered by a service or an automated response system, including an answering machine. Calls received after normal business hours must be responded to by a trained company representative on the next business day. d. A conveniently-located local business and service or payment office open during normal business hours at least eight hours daily on weekdays, and at least four hours weekly on evenings or weekends, and adequately staffed with trained customer service representatives to accept subscriber payments and to respond to service requests, inquiries, and complaints. e. An emergency system maintenance and repair staff, capable of responding to and repairing major system malfunctions on a 24-hour per day basis. f. A trained installation staffmust provide service to any subscriber requiring a standard installation within seven days after receipt of a request, or such longer time as may be requested by the subscriber, in all areas where trunk and feeder cable have been activated. g. The Grantee must schedule, within a specified four- hour time period Monday through Saturday (legal holidays excluded), all appointments with subscribers for installation of service, service calls, and other activities at the subscriber's location. The Grantee may schedule installation and service calls outside of normal business hours for the convenience of the subscriber. The Grantee may not cancel an appointment with a subscriber after the close of business on the business day prior to the scheduled appointment. If a Grantee representative is delayed in keeping an appointment with a subscriber and will not be able to honor the scheduled appointment, the subscriber must be contacted prior to the time of the scheduled appointment, and the appointment must be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time that is convenient for the subscriber. The Grantee must tmdertake appropriate quality control measures to ensure that the customer is satisfied with the work. RSZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC1 1 h. Subscribers who have experienced a late or a missed appointment due to the fault of the Grantee will receive either a free installation or a $20 credit. i. Upon a subscriber's request, the Grantee will arrange for pickup or replacement of converters or other equipment provided by the Grantee at the subscriber's address within 14 days after the request is made if the subscriber is mobility- limited. 2. Under normal operating conditions, the standards of subparagraphs (a), (c), (f) and (g) above must be met not less than ninety percent of the time, measured on a quarterly basis. B. Service Standards 1. The Grant6e will render efficient service, make repairs promptly, and interrupt service only for good cause and for the shortest time possible. Except in emergency situations, scheduled interruptions wilI occur during a period of minimum use of the cable system, preferably between midnight and 6:00 a.m. Unless the scheduled interruption lasts for no more than two hours and occurs between midnight and 6:00 a.m. (in which event 24ohours prior notice must be given to the City), 48-hours prior notice must be given to subscribers. 2. The Grantee will maintain a repair force of technicians who will respond to subscriber requests for service within the following time frames: a. For a system outage: Within two hours, including weekends, after receiving subscriber calls or requests for service that by number identify a system outage of sound or picture on one or more channels, affecting five or more subscribers to the system. b. For an isolated outage: Within 24 hours, including weekends, after receiving requests for service identifying an isolated outage of sound or picture on one or more channels. c. For inferior signal quality: No later than the following business day, excluding Sundays and holidays, after a request for service identifying a problem concerning picture or sound quality. 3. The Grantee will be deemed to have responded to a request for service under the provisions of this paragraph (B) when a technician arrives at the service location and begins work on the problem if the problem cannot be corrected remotely. Ifa subscriber is not home when the technician arrives, the technician must leave written notification of arrival. 4. The Grantee may not charge for the repair or replacement of defective or malfunctioning equipment provided by the Grantee to subscribers, unless the defect or malfunction was caused by the subscriber. R:~ZIGLERG\REPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 12 5. The Grantee must determine the nature of the problem within 24 hours after commencing work and resolve all cable system related problems within three business days, unless technically infeasible. C. Billing and Information Standards. 1. Subscriber bills must be clear, concise, and understandable. Bills must be fully itemized, with itemizations including, but not limited to, basic and premium service charges and equipment charges. Bills also must clearly delineate all activity during the billing period, including optional charges, rebates, and credits. 2. The first billing to a subscriber after a new installation or service change must be prorated based upon when the new or changed service commenced. Subscribers must not be charged a late fee or otherwise penalized for any failure attributable to the Grantee, including the failure to timely or correctly bill the subscriber. 3. In case of a billing dispute, the Grantee must respond in writing to a written complaint from a subscriber within 30 days after receiving the complaint at the office specified on the billing statement for receiving that complaint. 4. Upon request by a subscriber, credits or refunds must be provided by Grantee to subscribers who experience an outage, interruption, or discoimection of service of four or more consecutive hours, provided that such loss of service is neither caused by the subscriber nor attributable to scheduled repairs, maintenance, or construction in circumstances where Grantee has provided advance written notice to subscriber, and the loss of service does not exceed the time period specified by Grantee. For subscribers terminating service, credits or refunds must be issued promptly, but no later than 30 days after the return of any Grantee-supplied equipment. 5. The Grantee must provide written information on each of the following matters at the time of the installation of service, at least annually to all subscribers, and at any time upon request: a. Products and services offered. b. Prices and options for programming services and conditions of subscription to programming and other services. c. Installation and service maintenance policies. d. Instructions on the use of the cable service. Channel positions of programming carried on the system. f. Billing and complaint procedures, including the address and telephone number of the City's office designated for dealing with cable-related issues. RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC13 g. Consumer protection and service standards and penalties for noncompliance. 6. Subscribers must be notified in writing of any changes in rates, programming services, or channel positions as soon as possible. Notice must be given to subscribers a minimum of 30 days in advance of those changes if the change is within the control of the Grantee. In addition, Grantee will endeavor to notify Grantor of those changes at least five working days before subscribers are notified. 7. The Grantee must maintain a public file containing all written notices provided to subscribers under these consumer protection and service standards and all published promotional offers made by Grantee to subscribers. These documents must be maintained for a minimum period of two years. D. Verification of Compliance with Standards. 1. Upon 30 days prior written notice, the City may require the Grantee to provide a written report demonstrating its compliance with any of the consumer service standards specified in this section. The Grantee must provide sufficient documentation to enable the City to verify compliance. 2. A repeated and verifiable pattern of noncompliance with the consumer protection and service standards of this section, after the Grantee's receipt of written notice and an opportunity to cure, may be deemed a material breach of the franchise agreement. E. Subscriber Complaints and Disputes. 1. The Grantee must establish written procedures for receiving, acting upon, and resolving subscriber complaints without intervention by the City. The written procedures must prescribe the manner in which a subscriber may submit a complaint, either orally or in writing, specifying the subscriber's grounds for dissatisfaction. The Grantee must file a copy of these procedures with the City. These procedures must include a requirement consistent with Section 5.12.080(C)(3). 2. Upon request, and subject to applicable law protecting subscriber privacy rights, the City has the right to review the Grantee's response to subscriber complaints. 3. All subscribers have the right to continue receiving service so long as their financial and other obligations to the Grantee are honored. If the Grantee elects to rebuild, modify, or sell the system, or if the City gives notice of intent to terminate or not to renew the franchise, the Grantee must act to ensure that all subscribers receive service while the franchise remains in force. 4. Upon a change of control of the Grantee, or ifa new operator acquires the cable system, the original Grantee must cooperate with the City, the new Grantee, or the new operator in maintaining continuity of service to all subscribers. During that transition period, the Grantee is entitled to the revenues derived from its operation of the cable system. RSZIGLERG~EPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC14 F. Disconnection and Downgrades. 1. A subscriber may terminate or downgrade service at any time, and the Grantee must promptly comply with the subscriber's request within seven days or at any later time requested by the subscriber. No period of notice prior to voluntary termination or downgrade of service may be required of subscribers. Grantee will impose no charges for the voluntary termination of all services unless a visit to the subscriber's premises is required to remove a converter box or other equipment or property owned by Grantee. Grantee may, in accordance with applicable law, charge a fee to downgrade service ifa service call is required. 2. The Grantee may disconnect a subscriber's service in compliance with paragraphs (i), (j), and (k)of Section 53088.2 of the California Government Code. If service is disconnected for nonpayment of past due fees or charges, the Grantee must promptly reinstate service upon payment in full by the subscriber of all such fees and charges, including late charges. 3. Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (2) above, the Grantee may immediately disconnect service to a subscriber if the subscriber is damaging or destroying the Grantee's cable system or equipment. 4. The Grantee may also disconnect service to a subscriber when service causes signal leakage exceeding federal limits. If service is disconnected, the Grantee will immediately resume service without charge upon the satisfactory correction of the signal leakage problem if the signal leakage problem is attributable to the Grantee. 5. The Grantee may also disconnect service in cases where customers are stealing service or have made threats of physical violence upon Grantee's personnel. 6. Upon termination of service to a subscriber, the Grantee will endeavor to remove its equipment from the subscriber's premises within 30 days. G. Changes in Service. Except as otherwise provided by federal or state law, subscribers must not be required to pay any additional fee or charge, other than the regular service fee, in order to receive the services selected. No charge may be imposed for any service or equipment that the subscriber has not affirmatively selected. Payment of the regular monthly bill will not by itself constitute an affirmative selection. H. Deposits. Grantee may require a reasonable, nondiscriminatory deposit on equipment provided to subscribers. Such deposits must be placed in an interest- beating account. The deposit must be returned, with interest earned to the date of repayment, within 30 days after the equipment is returned to the Grantee. I. Parental Control Option. Grantee must provide parental control devices at no charge to all subscribers who desire to block the video or audio portion of any pay channels providing adult programming that the subscriber finds objectionable. For other programming, such devices will be provided at a reasonable charge to the subscriber. RSZIGLERGXREPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 15 J. Additional Requirements. 1. All officers, agents, and employees of the Grantee, or of its contractors or subcontractors, who, in the normal course of work come into contact with members of the public, or who require entry onto subscribers' premises, must display a photo- identification card. The Grantee must account for all identification cards at all times. All vehicles of the Grantee or its subcontractors must be clearly identified as vehicles engaged in providing services for the Grantee. 2. In addition to the consumer protection and service standards specified in this Section 5.12.080, the Grantee must comply with all applicable consumer protection and service standards that are imposed upon cable operators by the following: a. Federal statutes, and the rules, regulations, and orders of the Federal Communications Commission, including the following: (i) The provisions of Section 76.630 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as it now exists or may later be amended, which relate to compatibility with consumer electronics equipment. (ii) The provisions of Section 551 of Title 47, United States Code, as it now exists or may later be amended, which relate to the protection of subscriber privacy. b. The provisions of Califomia Government Code Sections 53054, et seq., entitled the "Cable Television and Video Provider Customer Service and Information Act." c. The provisions of California Government Code Section 53088, et sea., entitled the "Video Customer Service Act." d. The provisions of California Civil Code Section 1722(b)(1)-(6), which relate to service or repair transactions between cable television companies and their subscribers. e. The provisions of Califomia Penal Code Section 637.5, which relate to subscribers' rights to privacy protection. 3. If there is any conflict or inconsistency between a consumer protection and service standard specified in this Section 5.12.080, and a standard set forth in the statutes, rules, regulations, and orders that are referenced above in subsection (2), then the standard that is specified in this Section 5.12.080 will apply to the extent authorized by applicable law. K. Penalties for Noncompliance. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this paragraph is to authorize monetary penalties for the violation of the customer service standards established by this section RSZ1GLERG\REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC1 6 in a manner consistent with the Video Customer Service Act (Government Code Sections 53088 et seq.) and pursuant to the City's inherent police powers. The imposition of penalties authorized by this paragraph (K) will not prevent the City or any other affected party from exercising any other remedy to the extent permitted by law. 2. Administration and Appeals. a. The City Manager or the City Manager's designee is authorized to administer this paragraph (K). Decisions by the City Manager to assess monetary penalties against the Grantee must be in writing and must contain findings supporting the decisions. Decisions by the City Manager are final, unless appealed to the City Council. b. If the Grantee or any interested person is aggrieved by a decision of the City Manager, the aggrieved party may, within 10 days of the written decision, appeal that decision in writing to the City Council. The appeal letter must be accompanied by the fee established by the City Council for processing the appeal. The City Council may affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the City Manager. c. Schedule of Penalties. The following schedule of monetary penalties may be assessed against the Grantee for the material breach of the provisions of the customer service standards set forth in this section, provided that the breach is within the reasonable control of the Grantee: (i) For a first material breach: the maximum penalty is $200 for each day of material breach, but not to exceed a cumulative total of $600 for each occurrence of the material breach. (ii) For a second material breach of the same nature within a 12-month period for which the City has provided notice and a penalty has been assessed, the maximum penalty is $400 for each day of the material breach, but not to exceed a cumulative total of $1200 for each occurrence of the material breach. (iii) For a third or further material breach of the same nature within a 12-month period for which the City has provided notice and a penalty has been assessed, the maximum penalty is $1000 for each day of the material breach, but not to exceed a cumulative total of $3000 for each occurrence of the material breach. (iv) The maximum penalties referenced above may be increased by any additional amount authorized by state law. d. Judicial Remedy. This paragraph does not preclude any affected party from pursuing any judicial remedy available to that party without regard to this paragraph (K). e. Notification of Breach. The City must give the Grantee written notice of any alleged breach of the consumer service standards and allow the Grantee at least 30 days, or such longer time as may be reasonably necessary to cure, from receipt of the notice to remedy the specified breach. For the purpose of assessing penalties, a RSZIGLERGhREPOR~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 17 material breach is deemed to have occurred for each day, following the expiration of the period for cure specified herein, that any breach has not been remedied by the Grantee, irrespective of the number of subscribers affected. f. Limitations. With respect to any Grantee that operates under a franchise or license agreement with the City, any monetary penalties assessed under this paragraph (K) must be reduced dollar for dollar to the extent that any liquidated damage or penalty provision of the franchise or license agreement imposes a monetary obligation on the Grantee for the same customer service failure, and no other monetary damages may be assessed for that customer service failure. ARTICLE 3. OPEN VIDEO SYSTEMS 5.12.090 Applicability The provisions of this Article 3 apply to an open video system operator, as defined below in Section 5.12.170, that intends to deliver video programming to consumers in the City over an open video system. 5.12.100 Application Required A. Before commencing the delive~ of video programming services to consumers in the City over an open video system, the open video system operator must file an application with the City. That application must include or be accompanied by the following, as applicable: 1. The identity of the applicant, including all affiliates of the applicant. 2. Copies of FCC Form 1275, all "Notices of Intent" filed under 47 CFR 76.1503(b)(1), and the Order of the FCC, all of which relate to certification of the applicant to operate an open video system in the City in accordance with Section 653(a)(1) of the Communications Act and the FCC's rules. 3. The area or areas of the City that the applicant desires to serve. 4. A description of the open video system services that will be offered by the applicant over its existing or proposed facilities. 5. A description of the transmission medium that will be used by the applicant to deliver the open video system services. 6. Information in sufficient detail to establish the applicant's technical qualifications, experience, and expertise regarding the ownership and operation of the open video system described in the application. 7. Financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles that demonstrate the applicant's financial ability to: RSZIGLERG\REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC1 8 a. Construct, operate, maintain and remove any new physical plant that is proposed to be constructed in the City. b. Comply with the City's public, educational, and governmental access requirements as specified below in Section 5.12.120(B)(4). c. Comply with the City's requirement that gross revenue fees be paid in the maximum amount authorized under federal law, as specified below in Section 5.12.120(B)(2). 8. An accurate map showing the location of any existing telecommunications facilities in the City that the applicant intends to use, to purchase, or to lease. 9. If the applicant's operation of the open video system will require the construction of new physical plant and facilities in the City, the following additional information must be provided: ao A preliminary construction schedule and completion dates. b. Preliminary engineering plans, specifications, and a network map of any new facilities to be constructed in the City, in sufficient detail to identify: (i) The location and route requested for the applicant's proposed facilities. (ii) The locations, if any, for interconnection with the facilities of other telecommunications service providers. (iii) The specific structures, improvements, facilities, and obstructions, if any, that the applicant proposes to add, remove, or relocate on a temporary or permanent basis. c. The applicant's statement that, in constructing any new physical plant, the applicant will comply with all applicable ordinances, rules, and regulations of the City, including the payment of all required permit and processing fees. 10. The information and documentation that is required to be submitted to the City by a video provider, as specified below in paragraph (B) of Section 5.12.140. 11. Such additional information as may be requested by the City Manager. 12. An application fee deposit in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. R:XZIGLERG~REPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC 1 9 B. If any item of information specified above in paragraph (A) is determined under paramount federal or state law to be unlawful, the City Manager is authorized to waive the requirement that such information be included in the application. 5.12.110 Review of the Application Within 30 days after receipt of an application filed under Section 5.12.100 that is deemed to be complete, the City Manager will give written notice to the applicant of the City's intent to negotiate an agreement setting forth the terms and conditions under which the operation of the proposed open video system will be authorized by the City. The commencement of those negotiations will be on a date that is mutually acceptable to the City and to the applicant. 5.12.120 Agreement Required A. No video programming services may be provided in the City by an open video system operator tmless the operator and the City have executed a written agreement, which may be designated as a franchise, setting forth the terms and conditions under which the operation of the proposed open video system will be authorized by the City. That agreement may be authorized and approved by resolution of the City Council. B. The agreement between the City and the open video system operator may contain provisions that relate to the following subject matters, to the extent that such provisions and subject matters are not preempted by federal law or regulations: 1. The nature, scope, and duration of the agreement, including provisions for its renewal or extension. 2. The obligation of the open video system operator to pay to the City, at specified times and in lieu of the franchise fees permitted under Section 622 of the Communications Act, fees on the gross revenue received by the operator, as authorized by 47 CFR 76.1511, in accordance with the following standards and procedures: a. The amount of the fees on the gross revenue will be the maximum amount authorized by Section 653(c)2)(B) of the Communications Act, which is the rate imposed by the City on the existing franchised cable operator. b. The term "gross revenue" means (i) all gross revenue received by an open video system operator or its affiliates, including all revenue received from subscribers and all carriage revenue received from unaffiliated video programming providers; and (ii) all advertising revenue received by the operator or its affiliates in connection with the provision of video programming, where such revenue is included in the calculation of the cable franchise fee paid to the City by the incumbent franchised cable operator. The term "gross revenue" does not include revenue, such as subscriber or advertising revenue, collected by unaffiliated video programming providers. 3. The obligation of the open video system operator to comply with requirements relating to information collection and recordkeeping, accounting procedures, R:~ZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC20 reporting, periodic audits, and inspection of records in order to ensure the accuracy of the fees on the gross revenue that are required to be paid as specified above in Subsection (2). 4. The obligation of the open video system operator to meet the City's requirements with respect to public, educational, and governmental access channel capacity, services, facilities, and equipment, as provided for in 47 CFR 76.1505. In this regard, the following standards and procedures are applicable: a. The open video system operator is subject to the same public, educational, and governmental access requirements that apply within the cable television franchise service area with which its system overlaps. b. The open video system operator must ensure that all subscribers receive all public, educational, and governmental access channels within the franchise service area in which the City's subscribers are located. c. The open video system operator may negotiate with the City to establish the operator's obligations with respect to public, educational, and governmental access channel capacity, services, facilities, and equipment. These negotiations may include the City's franchised cable operator if the City, the open video system operator, and the franchised cable operator so desire. d. If the open video system operator and the City are unable to reach an agreement regarding the operator's obligations with respect to public, educational, and governmental access channel capacity, services, facilities, and equipment within the City's jurisdiction, then the following obligations will be imposed: (i) The open video system operator must satisfy the same public, educational, and governmental access obligations as the City's franchised cable operator by providing the same amount of channel capacity for public, educational, and governmental access and by matching the City's franchised cable operator's annual financial contributions in support of public, educational, and governmental access services, facilities, and equipment that are actually used by the City. For in-kind contributions, such as cameras or production studios, the open video system operator may satisfy its statutory obligation by negotiating mutually agreeable terms with the City's franchised cable operator, so that public, educational, and governmental access services to the City are improved or increased. If such terms cannot be agreed upon, the open video system operator must pay to the City the monetary equivalent of the franchised cable operator's depreciated in-kind contribution, or, in the case of facilities, the annual amortization value. Any matching contributions provided by the open video system operator must be used to fund activities arising under Section 611 of the Communications Act. (ii) The City will impose upon the open video system operator the same rules and procedures that it imposes upon the franchised cable operator with regard to the open video system operator's use of channel capacity designated for public, educational, and govemmental access use when that capacity is not being used for such purposes. RSZIGLERG\REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC2 1 e. The City's franchised cable operator is required under federal law to permit the open video system operator to connect with its public, educational, and governmental access channel feeds. The open video system operator and the franchised cable operator may decide how to accomplish this connection, taking into consideration the physical and technical characteristics of the cable and the open video systems involved. If the franchised cable operator and the open video system operator cannot agree on how to accomplish the connection, the City has the fight to decide. The City may require that the connection occur on City-owned property or on public rights-of-way. f. All costs of connection to the franchised cable operator's public, educational, and governmental access channel feed must be borne by the open video system operator. These costs will be counted towards the open video system operator's matching financial contributions set forth above in subparagraph (d)(i). g. The City will not impose upon the open video system operator any public, educational, or governmental access obligations that are greater than those imposed upon the incumbent franchised cable operator. h. If there is no incumbent franchised cable operator, the provisions of 47 CFR 76.1505(d)(6) will be applicable in determining the obligations of the open video system operator. i. The open video system operator must adjust its system to comply with new public, educational, and access obligations imposed on the City's incumbent franchised cable operator following a renewal of the cable television franchise; provided, however, that the open video system operator will not be required to displace other programmers using its open video system to accommodate public, educational, and governmental access channels. The open video system operator must comply with such new public, educational, and governmental access obligations whenever additional capacity is or becomes available, whether it is due to increased channel capacity or to decreased demand for channel capacity. 5. If the City and the open video system operator cannot agree on the application of the FCC's rules regarding the open video system operator's obligations to provide public, educational, and governmental access under the provisions of subsection (4) set forth above, then either party may file a complaint with the FCC in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures set forth in 47 CFR 76.1514. No agreement will be executed by the City until the dispute has been finally resolved. 6. If the open video system operator intends to maintain an institutional network, as defined in Section 61 l(f) of the Communications Act, the City will require that educational and governmental access channels be designated on that institutional network to the same extent that those channels are designated on the institutional network of the City's franchised cable operator. R:XZIGLERGXREPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC22 7. The authority of an open video system operator to exercise editorial control over any public, educational, or governmental use of channel capacity will be restricted in accordance with the provisions of 47 CFR 76.1505(0. 8. The obligation of the open video system operator to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations relating to customer service standards, including those specified in Section 5.12.080 of Article 2 of this chapter. 9. If new physical plant is proposed to be constructed within the City, the obligation of the open video system operator to comply with the following rights-of- way use and management responsibilities that are also imposed by the City upon other cable television and telecommunications service providers in a nondiscriminatory and competitively neutral manner: a. Compliance with all applicable City codes, including applications for excavation, encroachment, and construction permits and the payment of all required permit and inspection fees. b. The coordination of construction activities. c. Compliance with established standards and procedures for constructing lines across private property. do Compliance with all applicable insurance and indemnification requirements. streets. The repair and resurfacing of construction-damaged f. Compliance with all public safety requirements that are applicable to cable television and telecommunications service providers using public property or public rights-of-way. 10. Acts or omissions constituting breaches or defaults of the agreement, and the applicable penalties, liquidated damages, and other remedies, including fines or the suspension, revocation, or termination of the agreement. open video system. 11. Requirements relating to the sale, assignment, or transfer of the 12. Requirements relating to the open video system operator's compliance with and implementation of state and federal laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to the operation of the open video system. 13. Such additional requirements, conditions, terms, policies, and procedures as may be mutually agreed upon by the City and the open video system operator and RSZIGLERGXREPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC23 that will, in the judgment of the City Council, best serve the public interest and protect the public health, welfare, and safety. ARTICLE 4. OTHER VIDEO AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES AND SYSTEMS 5.12.130. Other Multichannel Video Programming Distributors The term "cable system," as defined in federal law and as set forth in Section 5.12.170 below, does not include a facility that serves subscribers without using any public fights-of-way. Consequently, the categories of multichannel video programming identified below are not deemed to be "cable systems" and are therefore exempt from the City's franchise requirements and from certain other local regulatory provisions authorized by federal law, provided that their distribution or transmission facilities do not involve the use of the City's public rights-of-way. A. Multichannel multipoint distribution service ("MMDS"), also known as "wireless cable," which typically involves the transmission by an FCC-licensed operator of numerous broadcast stations from a central location using line-of-sight technology. B. Local multipoint distribution service ("LMDS"), another form of over- the-air wireless video service for which licenses are auctioned by the FCC, and which offers video programming, telephony, and data networking services. C. Direct broadcast satellite ("DBS"), also referred to as "direct-to-home satellite services," which involves the distribution or broadcasting of programming or services by satellite directly to the subscriber's premises without the use of ground receiving or distribution equipment, except at the subscriber's premises or in the uplink process to the satellite. Local regulation of direct-to-home satellite services is further proscribed by the following federal statutory provisions: 1. 47 U.S.C. § 303(v) confers upon the FCC exclusive jurisdiction to regulate the provision of direct-to-home satellite services. 2. Section 602 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 states that a provider of direct-to-home satellite service is exempt from the collection or remittance, or both, of any tax or fee imposed by any local taxing jurisdiction on direct-to-home satellite service. The terms "tax" and "fee" are defined by federal statute to mean any local sales tax, local use tax, local intangible tax, local income tax, business license tax, utility tax, privilege tax, gross receipts tax, excise tax, franchise fees, local telecommunications tax, or any other tax, license, or fee that is imposed for the privilege of doing business, regulating, or raising revenue for a local taxing jurisdiction. 5.12.140 Video Providers - Registration; Customer Service Standards A. Unless the customer protection and customer service obligations of a video provider, as that term is defined in Section 5.12.170, are specified in a franchise, license, RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC24 lease, or similar written agreement with the City, a video provider must comply with all applicable provisions of the following state statutes: 1. The Cable Television and Video Customer Service and Information Act (Government Code §§ 53054, et sea.) §§ 53088, et seq.) 2. The Video Customer Service Act (Government Code B. All video providers that are operating in the City on the effective date of this ordinance, or that intend to operate in the City after its effective date, must register with the City; .provided, however, that this registration requirement is not applicable to any video provider that has executed a franchise, license, lease or similar written agreement with the City. The registration form must include or be accompanied by the following: numbers. 1. The video provider's name, address, and local telephone 2. The names of the officers of the video provider. 3. A copy of the video provider's written policies and procedures relating to customer service standards and the handling of customer complaints, as required by Government Code §§ 53054, et seq. These customer service standards must include, without limitation, standards regarding the following: a. Installation, disconnection, service and repair obligations, employee identification, and service call response time and scheduling. bo Customer service telephone and office hours. Procedures for billing, charges, refunds, and credits. Procedures for termination of service. Notice of the deletion of a programming service, the changing of channel assignments, or an increase in rates. Complaint procedures and procedures for bill dispute resolution. g. The video provider's written acknowledgment of its obligation under Government Code §53055.1 to provide to new customers a notice describing the customer service standards specified above in subparagraphs (a) through (f) at the time of installation or when service is initiated. The notice must also include, in addition to all of the information described above in subparagraphs (a) through (f), all of the following: (i) A listing of the services offered by the video provider that clearly describes all levels of service and the rates for each level of service. RSZIGLERG\REPORI~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC25 (ii) The telephone number or numbers through which customers may subscribe to, change, or terminate service, request customer service, or seek general or billing information. (iii) A description of the rights and remedies that the video provider may make available to its customers if the video provider does not materially meet its customer service standards. h. The video provider's written commitment to distribute annually to its employees and customers, and to the City, a notice describing the customer service standards specified above in subparagraphs (a) through (f). This annual notice must include the report of the video provider on its performance in meeting its customer service standards, as required by Government Code §53055.2. Subject to the written notice and cure provisions of Government Code §53056(b), a video provider that fails to distribute the annual notice required by Government Code §53055.1 will be assessed a monetary penalty in the sum of $500 for each year in which the annual notice is not distributed to all of its customers. 4. Unless a video provider is exempt under federal law from its payment, a registration fee in an amount established by resolution of the City Council to cover the reasonable costs incurred by the City in reviewing and processing the registration form. 5. In addition to the registration fee specified above in subsection (4), the written commitment of the video provider to pay to the City, when due, all costs and expenses reasonably incurred by the City in resolving any disputes between the video provider and its subscribers, which dispute resolution is mandated by Government Code §53088.2(0). C. The customer service obligations imposed upon video providers by the Video Customer Service Act (Government Code §53088 et seq.) consist of the following: 1. Every video provider must render reasonably efficient service, make repairs promptly, and interrupt service only as necessary. 2. All video provider personnel contacting subscribers or potential subscribers outside the office of the provider must be clearly identified as associated with the video provider. 3. At the time of installation, and annually thereafter, all video providers must provide to all customers a written notice of the programming offered, the prices for that programming, the provider's installation and customer service policies, and the name, address, and telephone number of the City's office that is designated for receiving complaints. 4. All video providers must have knowledgeable, qualified company representatives available to respond to customer telephone inquiries Monday through Friday, excluding holidays, during normal business hours. RSZ1GLERGLREPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC26 5. All video providers must provide to customers a toll-free or local telephone number for installation, service, and complaint calls. These calls must be answered promptly by the video providers. 6. All video providers must render bills that are accurate and understandable. 7. All video providers must respond promptly to a complete outage in a customer's service. The response must occur within 24 hours of the reporting of that outage to the provider, except in those situations beyond the reasonable control of the video provider. A video provider will be deemed to respond to a complete outage when a company representative arrives at the outage location within 24 hours and begins to resolve the problem. 8. All video providers must provide a minimum of 30 days' written notice before increasing rates or deleting channels. All video providers must make every reasonable effort to submit the notice to the City in advance of its distribution to customers. The 30-day notice is waived if the increases in rates or deletion of channels are outside the control of the video provider. In those cases, the video provider must make reasonable efforts to provide customers with as much notice as possible. 9. All video providers must allow every residential customer who pays his or her bill directly to the video provider at least 15 days from the date the bill for services is mailed to the customer, to pay the listed charges unless otherwise agreed to pursuant to a residential rental agreement establishing tenancy. Customer payments must be posted promptly. No video provider may terminate residential service for nonpayment of a delinquent account unless the video provider furnishes notice of the delinquency and impending termination at least 15 days prior to the proposed termination. The notice must be mailed, postage prepaid, to the customer to whom the service is billed. Notice must not be mailed until the 16th day after the date the bill for services was mailed to the customer. The notice of delinquency and impending termination may be part of a billing statement. No video provider may assess a late fee any earlier than the 22nd day after the bill for service has been mailed. 10. Every notice of termination of service pursuant to the preceding subsection (9) must include all of the following information: The name and address of the customer whose account is delinquent. b. The amount of the delinquency. The date by which payment is required in order to avoid termination of service. d. The telephone number of a representative of the video provider who can provide additional information and handle complaints or initiate an investigation concerning the service and charges in question. Service may only be terminated on days in which the customer can reach a representative of the video provider either in person or by telephone. RSZIGLERGXREPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC27 11. Any service terminated without good cause must be restored without charge for the service restoration. Good cause includes, but is not limited to, failure to pay, payment by check for which there are insufficient funds, theft of service, abuse of equipment or system personnel, or other similar subscriber actions. 12. All video providers must issue requested refund checks promptly, but no later than 45 days following the resolution of any dispute, and following the return of the equipment supplied by the video provider, if service is terminated. 13. All video providers must issue security or customer deposit refund checks promptly, but no later than 45 days following the termination of service, less any deductions permitted by law. 14. Video providers must not disclose the name and address of a subscriber for commercial gain to be used in mailing lists or for other commercial purposes not reasonably related to the conduct of the businesses of the video providers or their affiliates, unless the video providers have provided to the subscriber a notice, separate or included in any other customer notice, that clearly and conspicuously describes the subscriber's ability to prohibit that disclosure. Video providers must provide an address and telephone number for a local subscriber to use without toll charge to prevent disclosure of the subscriber's name and address. D. As authorized by Government Code §53088(q), the following schedule of penalties is adopted. These penalties may be imposed for the material breach by a video provider of the consumer protection and service standards that are set forth above in paragraph (C), provided that the breach is within the reasonable control of the video provider. These penalties are in addition to any other remedies authorized by this article or by any other law, and the City has discretion to elect the remedy that it will apply. The imposition of penalties authorized by this paragraph (D) will not prevent the City or any other affected party from exercising any other remedy to the extent permitted by law, including but not limited to any judicial remedy as provided below in subsection (2). 1. Schedule of Penalties. a. For a first material breach: the maximum penalty is $200 for each day of material breach, but not to exceed a cumulative total of $600 for each occurrence of material breach, irrespective of the number of customers affected. b. For a second material breach of the same nature for which a monetary penalty was previously assessed within the preceding 12-month period: the maximum penalty is $400 per day, not to exceed a cumulative total of $1,200 for each occurrence of the material breach, irrespective of the number of customers affected. c. For a third or further material breach of the same nature for which a monetary penalty was previously assessed within the preceding 12-month period: the maximum penalty is $1,000 per day, not to exceed a cumulative total of $3,000 for each occurrence of the material breach, irrespective of the number of customers affected. RSZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC28 d. The maximum penalties referenced above may be increased by any additional amount authorized by state law. 2. Judicial Remedies Not Affected. The imposition of penalties in accordance with the provisions of subsection (1) above does not preclude any affected party from pursuing any judicial remedy that is available to that party. 3. Administration, Notice, and Appeal. a. The City Manager or the City Manager's designee is authorized to administer this paragraph (D). Decisions by the City Manager to assess penalties against a video provider must be in writing and must contain findings supporting the decisions. Decisions by the City Manager are final, unless appealed to the City Council. b. If the video provider or any interested person is aggrieved by a decision of the City Manager, the aggrieved party may, within 10 days of the written decision, appeal that decision in writing to the City Council. The appeal letter must be accompanied by the fee established by the City Council for processing the appeal. The City Council may affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the City Manager. c. The imposition of monetary penalties under subsection (1) above is subject to the following requirements and limitations: (i) The City must give the video provider written notice of any alleged material breach and must allow the video provider at least 30 days from receipt of that notice to remedy the breach. (ii) For the purpose of assessing monetary penalties, a material breach will be deemed to have occurred for each day following the expiration of the period for cure specified in subparagraph (i) above that the material breach has not been remedied by the video provider, irrespective of the number of customers affected. 5.12.150. Telecommunications Service Provided By Telephone Corporations A. The City Council finds and determines as follows: 1. The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 preempts and declares invalid all state rules that restrict entry or limit competition in both local and long- distance telephone service. 2. The Califomia Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") is primarily responsible for the implementation of local telephone competition, and it issues certificates of public convenience and necessity to new entrants that are qualified to provide competitive local telephone exchange services and related telecommunications service, whether using their own facilities or the facilities or services provided by other authorized telephone corporations. R:~ZIGLERG\REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC29 3. Section 234(a) of the Califomia Public Utilities Code defines a "telephone corporation" as "every corporation or person owning, controlling, operating, or managing any telephone line for compensation within this state." 4. Section 616 of the California Public Utilities Code provides that a telephone corporation "may condemn any property necessary for the construction and maintenance of its telephone line." 5. Section 2902 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes municipal corporations to retain their powers of control to supervise and regulate the relationships between a public utility and the general public in matters affecting the health, convenience, and safety of the general public, including matters such as the use and repair of public streets by any public utility and the location of the poles, wires, mains, or conduits of any public utility on, under, or above any public streets. 6. Section 7901 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes telephone and telegraph corporations to construct telephone or telegraph lines along and upon any public road or highway, along or across any of the waters or lands within this state, and to erect poles, posts, piers, or abutments for supporting the insulators, wires, and other necessary fixtures of their lines, in such maimer and at such points as not to incommode the public use of the road or highway or interrupt the navigation of the waters. 7. Section 7901.1 of the California Public Utilities Code confirms the right of municipalities to exercise reasonable control as to the time, place, and manner in which roads, highways, and waterways are accessed, which control must be applied to all entities in an equivalent manner. Nothing in Section 7901.1 adds to or subtracts from any existing authority that municipalities have with respect to the imposition of fees. 8. Section 50030 of the California Government Code provides that any permit fee imposed by a city for the placement, installation, repair, or upgrading of telecommunications facilities, such as lines, poles, or antennas, by a telephone corporation that has obtained all required authorizations from the CPUC and the FCC to provide telecommunications services, must not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the service for which the fee is charged, and must not be levied for general revenue purposes. B. In recognition of and in compliance with the statutory authorizations and requirements set forth above in paragraph (A), the following regulatory provisions are applicable to a telephone corporation that desires to provide telecommunications service by means of facilities that are proposed to be constructed within the City's public rights- of-way: 1. The telephone corporation must apply for and obtain, as may be applicable, an excavation permit, an encroachment permit, or a building permit ("ministerial permit.") 2. In addition to the information required by this Code in connection with an application for a ministerial permit, a telephone corporation must submit to the City the following supplemental information: RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC30 a. A copy of the certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the CPUC to the applicant, and a copy of the CPUC decision that authorizes the applicant to provide the telecommunications service for which the facilities are proposed to be constructed in the City's public rights-of-way. Any applicant that, prior to 1996, provided telecommunications service under administratively equivalent documentation issued by the CPUC may submit copies of that documentation in lieu of a certificate of public convenience and necessity. b. If the applicant has obtained from the CPUC a certificate of public convenience and necessity to operate as a "competitive local carrier," the following additional requirements are applicable: (i) As required by Decision No. 95-12-057 of the CPUC, the applicant must establish that it has timely filed with the City a quarterly report that describes the type of construction and the location of each construction project proposed to be undertaken in the City during the calendar quarter in which the application is filed, so that the City can coordinate multiple projects, as may be necessary. (ii) If the applicant's proposed construction project will extend beyond the utility rights-of-way into undisturbed areas or other rights-of-way, the applicant must establish that it has filed a petition with the CPUC to amend its certificate of public convenience and necessity and that the proposed construction project has been subjected to a full-scale environmental analysis by the CPUC, as required by Decision No. 95-12-057 of the CPUC. (iii) The applicant must inform the City whether its proposed construction project will be subject to any of the mitigation measures specified in the Negative Declaration ["Competitive Local Carriers (CLCs) Projects for Local Exchange Communication Service throughout California"] or to the Mitigation Monitoring Plan adopted in connection with Decision No. 95-12-057 of the CPUC. The City's issuance of a ministerial permit will be conditioned upon the applicant's compliance with all applicable mitigation measures and monitoring requirements imposed by the CPUC upon telephone corporations that are designated as "competitive local carriers." C. The City reserves all rights that it now possesses or may later acquire with respect to the regulation of any cable or telecommunications service that is provided, or proposed to be provided, by a telephone corporation. These reserved rights may relate, without limitation, to the imposition of reasonable conditions in addition to or different from those set forth in this section, the exaction of a fee or other form of consideration or compensation for use of public rights-of-way, and related matters; provided, however, that such regulatory rights and authority must be consistent with federal and state law that is applicable to cable or telecommunications services provided by telephone corporations. RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC3 1 ARTICLE 5. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY 5.12.160 Findings; Policies and Procedures A. The City Council finds and determines that numerous and repetitive excavations in the public fights-of-way diminish the useful life of the surface pavement and generally cause adverse negative impacts for local residents, local businesses, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The City Council further finds and determines that the utility substructure in the public rights-of-way is subject to potential adverse negative impacts as a consequence of new economic and regulatory policies that foster increased competition between various utility service providers, including telephone corporations, and between other service providers, such as cable system operators. In order to mitigate these potential adverse negative impacts, the following policies are adopted: 1. The City Manager is directed to develop and to implement public rights-of-way policies and procedures that incorporate, to the extent reasonably feasible and consistent with all applicable laws and regulations, the following requirements that are intended to encourage the shared use by utility and other service providers of existing facilities in the public rights-of-way: a. A requirement that utility and other service providers requesting permits review information provided by the City that identifies the location of facilities, such as underground conduits, that are available for shared use, and the owners of those facilities. b. A requirement that utility and other service providers requesting permits submit a written statement that describes in reasonable detail the efforts made to obtain from other utility service providers the right to use excess capacity within existing facilities, and to thereby avoid the construction of new facilities. c. A requirement that utility and other service providers occupying the public rights-of-way submit annually to the City a map, which may be in an electronic-data format maintained in the ordinary course of business, that shows the location of their respective facilities in the public rights-of-way. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an updated annual map need not be provided unless them are changes to the location of the service provider's facilities in the public rights-of-way. d. Any additional requirements that will encourage utility and other service providers to share excess capacity within previously-constructed facilities and to coordinate the construction of new facilities in order to minimize the number of excavations in the public rights-of-way. 2. The City Manager is directed to ensure that all utility and other service providers, including telephone corporations and cable system operators, comply with all local design, construction, maintenance and safety standards that are consistent with state and federal laws and regulations and that are contained within, or are related to, any permit that authorizes the construction of facilities within the public rights-of-way, including all applicable insurance provisions. RAZIGLERGh'~EPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC32 3. Based upon the City's projected plans for street construction or renovation projects, the City Manager is authorized to establish on a quarterly basis one or more construction time periods or "windows" for the installation of facilities within arterial or collector streets, or where City rehabilitation or maintenance activities within the public rights- of-way will be affected. Cable system operators, telephone corporations, and other utility service providers that submit applications for permits to construct facilities after a predetermined date may be required to delay such construction until the next quarterly "window" that is established by the City. B. The City Council finds and determines that the installation in the public rights-of-way of numerous above-ground facilities by utility service providers, including telephone corporations, and other service providers may create safety hazards and adverse visual impacts. Consequently, the Public Works Department is authorized to impose reasonable conditions in order to mitigate those potential adverse impacts that may result, whether on an individual or a cumulative basis, from permitted above-ground facilities. Those conditions may include or relate to, without limitation, the following: 1. Prior to issuance of the requisite permits, all above-ground facilities proposed to be installed by a utility or other service provider in the public rights-of-way must be clearly delineated on the plans when they are submitted for the City's review. 2. The design and installation by qualified professionals of landscaping and barriers to minimize public view of above-ground facilities whose location has been approved by the City. 3. The maintenance of all above-ground facilities in good condition, including compliance with the City's ordinances regarding graffiti removal. 4. The placement of above-ground facilities, such as overhead drops, as close as possible to other utility drops, consistent with all applicable electrical codes. 5. Reasonable limitations upon the number of above-ground facilities that may be installed within a designated geographical area. 6. Reasonable limitations upon the dimensions or volume, or both, of above-ground facilities. 7. The specification of colors, as are available from the manufacturer used by the service provider, of above-ground facilities reasonably requested by the City to ensure that these facilities blend with the surrounding environment to the maximum extent possible. 8. Such additional conditions regulating the time, place, and manner of installations of above-ground facilities as will reasonably mitigate potential safety hazards and adverse visual impacts attributable to these facilities. C. The City reserves all rights that it now possesses or may later acquire to adopt and implement City-wide requirements for the undergrounding of above-ground RS. Z1GLERG~.EPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC33 facilities, or any portion thereof, in a competitively neutral and non-discriminatory manner. To the extent authorized by law, all utility and other service providers will be required to comply with those requirements at their sole expense. ARTICLE 6. DEFINITIONS 5.12.170 Defined Terms and Phrases A. The words, terms, phrases, and their derivations set forth in this ordinance have the meanings set forth below. Words used in the present tense include the future tense, and words in the singular include the plural number. "Cable service" means the one-way transmission to subscribers of video programming, or other programming services, and subscriber interaction, if any, that is required for the selection or use of that video programming or other programming service. For the purposes of this definition, "video programming" means programming provided by, or generally considered comparable to programming provided by, a television broadcast station; and "other programming service" means information that a cable system operator makes available to all subscribers generally. "Cable system," or "cable communications system" or "cable television system," means a facility, consisting of a set of closed transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is designed to provide cable service that includes video programming and that is provided to multiple subscribers within a community. The term "cable system" does not include: (i) a facility that serves only to retransmit the television signals of one or more television broadcast stations; (ii) a facility that serves subscribers without using any public right-of-way; (iii) a facility of a common carrier that is subject, in whole or in part, to the provisions of Title II of the Communications Act, except that such facility will be considered a cable system (other than for purposes specified in Section 621(c) of the Communications Act) to the extent such facility is used in the transmission of video programming directly to subscribers, unless the extent of such use is solely to provide interactive on-demand services; (iv) an open video system that complies with Section 653 of the Communications Act; or (v) any facilities of an electric utility that are used solely for operating its electric utility system. RSZIGLERG~REPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC34 "Cable system operator" means any person or group of persons: (i) who provides cable service over a cable system and directly or through one or mom affiliates owns a significant interest in that cable system; or (ii) who otherwise controls or is responsible for, through any arrangement, the management and operation of that cable system. "City" means the City of Temecula as represented by its City Council or by any delegate acting within the scope of its delegated authority. "__ CFR" means the Code of Federal Regulations. Thus, the citation of "47 CFR 80.1" refers to Title 47, part 80, section 1, of the Code of Federal Regulations. "Communications Act" means the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. §§ 153, et seq.), as amended by the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996. "FCC" or "Federal Communications Commission" means the federal administrative agency, or any lawful successor, that is authorized to regulate telecommunications services and telecommunications service providers on a national level. "Franchise" means an initial authorization, or the renewal of an initial authorization, granted by the City Council, whether such authorization is designated as a franchise, agreement, permit, license, resolution, contract, certificate, or otherwise, that authorizes the construction or operation of a cable system or an open video system. "Franchise fee" means any fee or assessment of any kind that is authorized by state or federal law to be imposed by the City on a Grantee as compensation in the nature of rent for the Grantee's use of the public rights-of-way. The term "franchise fee" does not include: (i) Any tax, fee, or assessment of general applicability (including any such tax, fee, or assessment imposed on both utilities and cable operators or their services, but not including a tax, fee, or assessment which is unduly discriminatory against cable operators or cable subscribers); (ii) Capital costs that are required by the franchise to be incurred by a Grantee for public, educational, or governmental access facilities; (iii) Requirements or charges that are incidental to the award or enforcement of the franchise, including payments for bonds, security funds, letters of credit, insurance, indemnification, penalties, or liquidated damages; or RSZIGLERGhREPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC35 (iv) Any fee imposed under Title 17, United States Code. "Franchise service area" or "service area" means the entire geographic area of the City as it is now constituted, or may in the future be constituted, unless otherwise specified in the ordinance or resolution granting a franchise, or in a franchise agreement. "Grantee" means any person that is awarded a franchise in accordance with this chapter, and that person's lawful successor, transferee, or assignee. "Multicharmel video programming distributor" or "video programming distributor" means a person such as, but not limited to, a cable system operator, an open video system operator, a multichannel multipoint distribution service, a direct broadcast satellite service, or a television receive-only satellite program distributor, who makes available multiple channels of video programming for purchase by subscribers or customers. "Open video system" means a facility consisting of a set of transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is designed to provide cable service, including video programming, and that is provided to multiple subscribers within the City, provided that the FCC has certified that such system is authorized to operate in the City and complies with 47 CFR 1500 et se~t., entitled "Open Video Systems." "Open video system operator" means any person or group of persons who provides cable service over an open video system and directly or through one or more affiliates owns a significant interest in that open video system, or otherwise controls or is responsible for the management and operation of that open video system. "Person" means an individual, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint stock company, trust, corporation, or governmental entity. "Public, educational or government access facilities" or "PEG access facilities," means the total of the following: (i) Channel capacity designated for noncommercial public, educational, or government use; and (ii) Facilities and equipment for the use of that channel capacity. "Subscriber" or "customer" or "consumer" means any person who, for any purpose, subscribes to the services provided by a multichannel video programming distributor and who pays the charges for those services. "Street" or "public right-of-way" means each of the following that has been dedicated to the public and maintained under public authority or by others and is located within the City limits: streets, roadways, highways, avenues, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, easements, rights- of-way, and similar public property that the City from time to time authorizes to be included within the definition of a street. R:~Z1GLERG\REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC36 "Telecommunications" means the transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received. "Telecommunications equipment" means equipment, other than customer premises equipment, used by a telecommunications service provider to provide telecommunications service, including software that is integral to that equipment. "Telecommunications service" means the offering of telecommunications directly to the public for a fee, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the equipment or facilities that are used. "Telecommunications service provider" means any provider of telecommunications service. " U.S.C. § "means the United States Code. Thus, the citation of "47 U.S.C. § 153" refers to Title 47, section 153, of the United States Code. "Video programming provider" means any person or group of persons who has the right under the federal copyright laws to select and to contract for the carriage of specific video programming on a cable system or an open video system. "Video provider" means any person, company, or service that provides one or more channels of video programming to a residence, including a home, multi-family dwelling complex, congregate-living complex, condominium, apartment, or mobilehome, where some fee is paid for that service, whether directly or as included in dues or rental charges, and whether or not public rights-of-way are used in the delivery of that video programming. A "video provider" includes, without limitation, providers of cable television service, open video system service, master antenna television, satellite master antenna television, direct broadcast satellite, multipoint distribution services, and other providers of video programming, whatever their technology. B. Unless otherwise expressly stated, words, terms, and phrases not defined in this ordinance will be given their meaning as used in Title 47 of the United States Code, as amended, and, if not defined in that Code, their meaning as used in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations. ARTICLE 7. VIOLATIONS; SEVERABILITY 5.12.180 Violations; Enforcement A. Unless precluded by applicable law, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided for in Chapter 1.20 of Title 1 of this Code. B. The misdemeanor penalty specified above in paragraph (A) is not applicable to a violation of any provision of this ordinance for which another sanction or penalty RSZIGLERG~REPORT~082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC37 may be imposed under any franchise, license, lease, or similar written agreement between the City and a multichannel video programming distributor or telecommunications service provider. C. The City may initiate a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin any violation of this ordinance. 5.12.190 Severability If any provision of this ordinance is determined by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by any federal or state agency having jurisdiction over its subject matter, to be invalid and in conflict with any paramount federal or state law or regulation now or hereafter in effect, or is determined by that court or agency to require modification in order to conform to the requirements of that paramount law or regulation, then that provision will be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent part of this ordinance, and such determination will not affect the validity and enforceability of any other provisions. If that paramount federal or state law or regulation is subsequently repealed or amended so that the provision of this ordinance determined to be invalid or subject to modification is no longer in conflict with that law or regulation, then that provision will again become effective and will thereafter be binding on the City and any affected cable or telecommunications service provider; provided, however, that the City must give the affected cable or telecommunications service provider 30 days written notice of that change before requiring compliance with that provision, or such longer period of time as may be reasonably required for the cable or telecommunications service provider to comply with that provision. Section 3. In adopting this ordinance, it is the intent of the City Council that Section 5.12.080, entitled "Consumer Protection and Service Standards," will apply to all franchised video programming distributors, including Century-TCI California, L.P., dba Adelphia Cable Communications. To the extent that any consumer protection and service standard referenced in Resolution No. 96-35 is inconsistent or in conflict with any provision of Section 5.12.080 of this ordinance, said standard in Resolution No. 96-35 is hereby repealed and superseded. Similarly, to the extent that any consumer protection and service standard set forth in the Non-Exclusive License dated January 10, 1989, is inconsistent or in conflict with any provision of Section 5.12.080 of this ordinance, said standard in the Non-Exclusive License is hereby superseded. Section 4. Following the City Council's adoption of this ordinance, the City Clerk is directed to provide a copy by certified mail to the franchised cable operator, Century- TCI California, L.P., dba Adelphia Cable Communications. Upon the expiration of 90 days following the transmittal of this ordinance to Century-TCI California, L.P., dba Adelphia Cable Communications, the provisions of Section 5.12.080 relating to consumer protection and service standards will apply to the operation of the cable television system within the franchise service area under the Non-Exclusive License referenced above in Section 3. The authority for this action by the City is derived from the following sources: A. 47 Code of Federal Regulations 76.309, entitled "Customer Service Obligations," which provides in relevant part as follows: RSZIGLERG\REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC38 A cable franchise authority may enfome the customer service standards set forth in paragraph (c) of this section against cable operators. The franchise authority must provide affected cable operators ninety (90) days written notice of its intent to enforce the standards." "(b) Nothing in this rule should be construed to prevent or prohibit: (3) Any State or any franchising authority from enacting or enforcing any consumer protection law, to the extent not specifically preempted herein; or (4) The establishment or enforcement of any State or municipal law or regulation concerning customer service that imposes customer service requirements that exceed, or address matters not addressed by the standards set forth in paragraph (c) of this section." B. California Government Code Section 53088 et seq., entitled the "Video Customer Service Act." Section 53088.2(p) of this Act provides as follows: Nothing in this division limits the power of a city, county, or city and county or video provider to adopt and enforce service standards and consumer protection standards which exceed those established in this division." Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and to cause this ordinance to be published as required by law. of PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ,2003. day ATTEST: MAYOR SUSAN JONES, CMC CITY CLERK RSZIGLERG~REPORTX082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC39 [SE ] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA SS I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on ,2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: SUSAN JONES, CMC CITY CLERK R:XZIGLERGXREPORTx082603 CC cable ordinance. DOC40 ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY l- DIRECTOR Of FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER ~ I ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Herman Parker, Director of Community Servic~~ August26,2003 Cable Franchise Renewal Committee Appointment PREPARED BY: Phyllis L. Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council appoint one member from the Council to serve on the negotiation team for renewal of the cable franchise with Adelphia. DISCUSSION: Prior to incorporation, the County of Riverside approved an original cable television franchise agreement for the provision of cable services in the area that would later incorporate as the City of Temecula. That franchise agreement has subsequently been transferred to successor providers, the current provider being Adelphia. The franchise agreement expires on January 9, 2004 and staff is beginning the franchise renewal negotiations process with Adelphia. Staff recommends that the City negotiation team include a City Council member, an Assistant City Attorney, City Manager's office representative and other key staff. The negotiation team will meet to assess the franchisee's performance, determine the community's cable services needs, and establish the City's negotiation deal points. The team will meet several times with the Adelphia team to reach agreement on the deal points and finalize the franchise agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with the appointment of a member of the Council to the cable negotiation team. The franchisee will need to deposit fees in accordance with a Resolution adopted by the Council to cover administrative costs associated with the renewal process. R:~J~USEP~AGENDAS\cable subcommittee appointment.doc DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FI~A,~'CE CITY MANAGER L.-,~,,5'! TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police . August 26, 2003 Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enforcement and miscellaneous activity occurring during July 2003. The Police Department responded to 46 "priority one" calls for service during the month of July, with an average response time of approximately 5.5 minutes. A total of 4,310 calls for police service were generated in the City of Temecula during the month. During July, the Temecula Police Department's Town Center Storefront Served a total of 125 customers. Forty-four sets of fingerprints were taken, 39 people filed police reports and seven people had citations signed off. 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. During July, the POP Teams continued assisting the Investigations Bureau by completing a complex, two-month investigation into an organized identity theft ring that had been operating in Temecula. The investigation concluded with the arrests of six individuals for criminal conspiracy, fraud, fraudulent use of a credit card, burglary, theft and the possession of a controlled substance. Based on this investigation, detectives were able to clear about 60 outstanding burglary and theft cases. Apart from the aforementioned arrests, the POP Team also made seven misdemeanor arrests for various crimes. They also issued seven citations for various traffic violations. 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. Dudng July, the Old Town Storefront served 276 customers. Forty-two sets of fingerprints were taken, 31 reports were written, and 29 citations were signed off. The traffic team reported that during the month of July there were 831 citations issued for hazardous violations, 195 citations were issued for non-hazardous violations and 195 parking citations were issued. During the month there were 19 injury traffic collisions, 86 non-injury collisions were reported and 14 drivers were arrested for DUI. In other citation summary information, the Monthly Departmental Report- Police Department Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in 105 citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. The SLAP program (Stop Light Abuse Program) resulted in 353 citations being issued during July. During the month of July, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Mall handled a total of 136 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 three felony and 14 misdemeanor cases. Officers McEIvain and Rupe continued to provide training to security staff during the month. The mall officers continued to work to prevent vehicle theft and vehicle burglaries. There were two vehicle thefts and three vehicle burglaries reported during the month of July. Our five school resource officers have remained active during July by teaching and assisting at Safety Town and summer school sessions. The school resource officers conducted many counseling sessions with students. A total of 10 investigations/reports were conducted/written by the school resource officers during July. The JOLT program (Juvenile Offender Law Enforcement Program) continues to be a success in part through its Youth Court program. Officer Sherry Adams conducted the 116th 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 Adams also worked with "at risk" juveniles throughout the month and also conducted counseling sessions with their parents. She assisted the Riverside County District Attorney's Office and Probation Department by providing training during home visits with incorrigible/at risk juveniles during the month of July. During the month of July, the Special Enforcement Tf~am (SET Team) made eight felony arrests and 11 misdemeanor arrests, primarily for narcotics violations. The SET Team also recovered quantities of methamphetamine during their enforcement activities. This team continues to work street level narcotics and specialty patrol within the city on a proactive basis. 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 381 hours of service in July. Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance and telephone answering duties. Community Action Patrol (CAP) Program volunteers have continued 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 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 141 hours of service to the community during the month of July. 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 and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 111 hours specifically on patrol in Temecula during July. The Temecula Citizen Corps Program continued to take shape and develop during the month of July. The executive body, or the TCC Council; moved their bi-weekly meetings from the administrative offices of the Promenade Mall to the American Red Cross building. The council is comprised of representatives from the police and fire departments, the City, a local business, the Monthly Departmental Report- Police Department Temecula Valley Unified School District, the American Red Cross, and a local citizen at large. Volunteers from the Temecula Citizen Corps participated in the 4~h of July Parade and manned an informational booth at the Community Recreational Center, handing out brochures, recruiting additional volunteers and educating the public on disaster awareness and preparation. Most of the volunteer leadership positions have now been filled, and the program is progressing well toward meeting the goals provided by members of the city council. Plans for a large open house ceremony in conjunction with a mini-safety expo to take place at the Promenade Mall on August 23'd were also finalized in July. Monthly Departmental Report - Police Department TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC~ CITY MANAG ER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCit~ncil Debbie Ubnoske'~-Director of Planning August 28, 2003, Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department in the month of July 2003. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 6_.~2 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations and 8 applications for public hearings during the month of July. The new public hearing cases are as follows: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1 ZONE CHANGE 1 DAYCARE LARGE 1 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 1 Status of Major Proiects Recently Approved Projects O'Hern Industrial Building - A Development Plan to construct a 18,810 square foot industrial building on 1.28 acres, located at 42108 Roick Drive. Planning Commission approved this project on July 2, 2003. Zevo Drive Condos - A Development Plan to construct 2 industrial condominium facilities totaling approximately 91,337 square feet on 3.5 acres located on the north side of Zevo Drive. The Planning Commission approved this item on July 16, 2003. R:~4ONTHLY.RP'F~2003~JuIy 2003 Report.doc 1 Grace Presbyterian Church - A Conditional Use Permit to construct a church facility in two phases. The site is located at the southwest corner of Calle Medusa and Nicholas Road. The P~anning Commission recommended approval of this project on June 18th. The City Council approved this project on July 22, 2003. Margarita Canyon - A request for the first extension of time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 28627 located west of Interstate 15 and south of Old Town Front Street, submitted by Margarita Canyon, LLC. The application was submitted on February 21,2003. The item was scheduled for a DRC meeting on April 24, 2003. The project was approved at the July 24, 2003, Director's Hearing meeting. Sigma Industrial Complex - A Development Plan to construct 6 detached industrial buildings totaling approximately 83,000 square feet on 5 acres located on the north side of Zevo Drive, submitted December 23, 2002. Staff took the project to Planning Commission on July 2, 2003 with a recommendation of continuance for redesign. Planning Commission concurred with staff that the project requires additional enhancements. The Planning Commission approved this item August 6, 2003. Projects Under Review Commercial Pasco del Sol Pad "C" is an Administrative Development Plan to construct a 7,368 square foot commercial building on Pad "C" within the existing, 11.98 acres, Villages @Paseo del Sol shopping center on the north side of Highway 79 South. Jim Grant, of Del Sol Investments, submitted the application on June11,2003. Revised plans were submitted July 17, 2003. Plans are currently under review for approval. Staff awaits a response from the applicant. Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints - A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to construct, and operate a 24,119 square foot single story church located on the north side of Pauba Road, approximately 170 linear feet west of the centedine of Corte Villoso. A DRC was held on February 13, 2003. A Community Meeting was subsequently held in the Council Chambers, on March 17, 2003. Staff noted a number of concerns, which were voiced by the neighbors, which were then summarily sent to each attendee. A revised traffic study was submitted on August 13, 2003 and a second community meeting is tentatively scheduled for September 11,2003. Baily's Front Street- A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to establish a dining establishment and to construct a 9,234 square foot building on .35 acres located on the west side of Old Town Front Street and north of First Street; Wait Allen submitted this project on June 5, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on July7, 2003. Staff is awaiting submittal of revised plans. Monkey Feet - A Minor Conditional Use Permit proposal to establish a computer network service and Internet access facility. The site is located at 27911 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 103. A second request for information and revisions was sent to the applicant June 10, 2003. No change in status. Staff is waiting for the requested information. The applicant has indicated that the required information will be submitted by August 15, 2003. Overland Self Storage Facility - Conditional Use Permit to construct a 124,496 square foot, one story, self-storage mini warehousing facility 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 R:\MONTHLY. RP'i-'2003\July 2003 Report.doc 2 one-story 3,000 square foot office and caretaker's dwelling unit located at front of site. The applicant/owner has revised the architectural elevation plans for staff review. Revised plans have been re-submitted and staff has continued to note discrepancies. A meeting with the applicant was held on August 14, 2003. The applicant is to resubmit plans that address all of the Staff comments. Redhawk Car Wash ~ A Conditional Use Permit proposal to build a self-service car wash located approximately 500 feet west of Redhawk Parkway on the south side of Via Rio Temecula. A DRC was held April 15, 2003. The applicant has resubmitted the required information. The project has been scheduled for August 21,2003 Director's Hearing. Staff is recommending approval. St. Catherine's expansion - A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to establish an educational/community meeting room, and construct a 2,301 square foot office addition and a 10,902 square foot classroom building on an 8.43-acre site located at 41875 C Street. Staff has scheduled the item for the September 17, 2003, Planning Commission meeting. Tentative Parcel Map 30849 - A request to subdivide 2.61 gross acres of commercially zoned property into 2 lots. The project was deemed incomplete on November 8, 2002. Revised plans were resubmitted on December 18, 2002. The applicant has been advised by Public Works that a parcel map with a waiver of the final map is highly recommended. However, the applicant has not yet decided. The applicant's engineer was contacted the first week in July. He continues to confer with property owner Jefferson Avenue Inn - A revised Development Plan to construct, establish and operate a 3- story, 56-unit hotel complex totaling 31,600 square feet on a 1.35 acre site. The site is located approximately 200 feet east of Jefferson Avenue and 200 feet north of Winchester Road. A DRC meeting was held on May 22, 2003. The applicant submitted revised plans on June 30th 2003. Affected Departments have provided comments to the applicant. Staff is awaiting submittal of all revised plans and materials. Winchester Pavilion -A Development Plan to construct, operate and establish a 15,156 square foot commercial building on 1.15 acres, located at 41720 Winchester Road, west of Enterprise Circle South and east of Enterprise Circle West. The project was submitted on March 27, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on May 15, 2003 and plans need revisions. A DRC letter was mailed to the applicant on May 15, 2003. As of August 12, 2003, the applicant has not resubmitted. Rancho Pueblo Professional Center - A Development Plan to design and construct a mixed-use professional center with 6 buildings for medical office, restaurant, and other uses with a total of 110,197 square feet of floor area, on 14.5 acres. The project is located on the north side of Highway 79 South, east of Avenida de Missiones, and the future Rancho Pueblo Road. Malkoff & Associates, of Villa Park, submitted the application on April 25, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on June 5, 2003. The proposal did not meet the development criteria for PDO-6 and is undergoing revisions by the applicant. Revised plans were received June 23, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on July 17, 2003. This project is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission August 20, 2003. Roripaugh Town Center- A Development Plan to design and construct approximately 171,200 square feet of commercial development that should include four major tenant buildings, six smaller freestanding buildings and inline shops on 20.2 acres. R:~tONTHLY.RPT"~?.003",July 2003 Report.doc 3 The project is located on the northeast corner of Nicholas Road and Winchester Road. Matthew Fagan Consulting Services submitted the application on July 24, 2003. This project is scheduled for DRC on August 28,2003. Bridgeport Map - A request to divide 14.48 acres into an 8 lot commercial subdivision, located on the north side of SR79 South east of Avenida de Missiones (east of the Rancho Community Church project). Mr. Orley Weaver, with Bridgeport Builders, submitted this project on September 16, 2002. The project was deemed incomplete and inconsistent with the General Plan's requirement for this property to develop as a unified site. This project was on hold while the applicant worked with several commercial users to submit a comprehensive development plan for the entire site. A revised map was submitted June 26, 2003 and will proceed with the Rancho Pueblo Professional Center. This project is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission August 20, 2003. Temecula Super Storage - A Conditional Use Permit to design, construct, and operate a mini- storage facility consisting of a single-story, 1,307 square foot office, three 1 -story buildings, and two 2-story buildings for a total of 109,177 square feet, on 3.9 acres. The project will be located on the north side of Highway 79 South, east of Avenida de Missiones, on the north side of the future Rancho Pueblo Road. Jordan Architects, of San Clemente, submitted the application for Bridgeport Builders, of Costa Mesa, on April 25, 2003. A DRC meeting was held June 5, 2003. Revised plans were submitted June 23, 2003 and a DRC meeting was held on July 17, 2003. This project is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Ridge Park Office Center - A Development Plan to construct, establish and operate three professional office buildings totaling 56,000 square feet. The subject site is located on the east side of Ridge Park Drive, south of Rancho California Road. A DRC meeting was held on June 19, 2003. This item has been scheduled for the August 20th Planning Commission meeting. Toyota of Temecula Car Wash -An Administrative Development Plan application to construct and operate a 1,833 square foot private car wash facility at the rear of the existing service building located at 26631 Ynez Road. The application was submitted on June 19, 2003. A letter requesting additional information and revised plans were received on July 30, 2003. Staff and other departments are currently reviewing the revised plans are due to have comments to Planning by August 19, 2003. If the plans are deemed acceptable the project will be administratively approved. Toyota of Temecula New Service Facility- A Development Plan to construct and operate a 15, 413 square foot service facility on 3.05 acres located on the east side of Motor Car Parkway, north of Solana Way. The application was submitted on July 14, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on August 14, 2003. Staff is awaiting submittal of revised plans. Vail MDC Tentative Parcel Map - A request to divide 7.56 acres into a 6 lot commercial subdivision, located on the south side of SR79 South, north of Wolf Store Road and west of Butterfield Stage Road. The application was submitted on June 30, 2003 and a DRC meeting was held on July 30, 2003. Staff is currently reviewing revised plans. An Initial Study is being prepared to address potential impacts to archeological resources. Industrial · Roick/Regency Industrial Building is a Development Plan to construct an industrial building with four suites totaling 12,407 square foot on 1.87 acres on southwest corner of Roick Drive and R:~VlONTHLY. RPT~003~July 2003 Report.doc 4 Winchester Road. James E. Horeca, submitted the application for Regency, Inc, on July 1, 2003. A Pre-DRC meeting was held on July 22, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on July 31, 2003 with the applicant. Currently, Staff is awaiting submittal of revised plans. Remington Business Center - A Development Plan to design and construct a light industrial complex consisting of 11 buildings, built in two phases, totaling 127,162 square feet, on 8.9 acres. The project is located on the south side of Remington Avenue between Winchester and Diaz Roads in the Westside Business Center. Smith Consulting Architect, of San Diego, submitted the application on April 22, 2003. A DRC meeting was held June 11,2003. Staff is preparing an Initial Study. Revised plans were received on June 30, 2003. The project is scheduled for the September 3, 2003 Planning Commission hearing. Enterprise Circle Business Park- A Development Plan to construct a 9,060 square foot office/warehouse building and an 8,898 square foot office/warehouse building on 1.87 acres located at the corner of Enterprise Circle South and Enterprise Circle West. Dean Davidson submitted the project on August 6, 2003. The item has been scheduled for a Pre-DRC meeting on August 26, 2003. Mixed Use Lago Bellagio - A Development Plan and Vesting Parcel Map to construct a 396-unit senior retirement facility building totaling 477,020 square feet, an 110,121 square foot office building and a 19,357 square foot clubhouse on 22.62 acres, located atthe corner of Pechanga Parkway and Loma Linda. A DRC meeting was held on May 22, 2003. A DRC letter was mailed out on May 27, 2003. As of July 8, 2003, the applicant had not resubmitted plans for review. Staff sent out a 30-day letter requesting exhibits. The applicant has responded to the 30-day letter and will be resubmitting plans by August 28, 2003. Linfield Christian School Master Plan - Submitted by Linfield Christian School; a Conditional Use Permit and a Planned Development Overlay 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). A DRC was held December 12, 2002, and a letter was sent out with staff comments. The applicant revised the documents on February 21, 2003. Planning Commission recommended City Council approve project on May 21,2003. The applicant requested this item be continued from the July 3, 2003 to the August 26, 2003 City Council meeting. Staff has revised the Initial Study and the item is scheduled for August 26, 2003 City Council Meeting. Villages of Old Town - Staff has been meeting with the applicant regarding the new proposal, however, no formal submittal has been received. The applicant will be proposing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that will be brought forward to City Council after it has been reviewed by staff. Residential Griffin Communities at Roripaugh Ranch - Application for Product Review and 100 detached single-family residences, which will offer four floor plans in four architectural designs. The houses are located in Planning Area 4A along Murrieta Hot Springs Rd. Staff met with the applicant on July 25, 2003. A letter requesting revisions was sent July 30, 2003. R:~MONTHLY.RPT'~2.003~July 2003 Report.doc 5 Marchand Way Development Inc - A Tentative Tract Map for condominiums (Tract 31344), to subdivide a 3.42 acre parcel into 15 detached condominiums on the southeast corner of Rancho Vista and Ynez Rd. A Director's Hearing was held July 17, 2003 and a letter requesting revisions was sent out July 21,2003. Staff is awaiting submittal of revised plans. An application for a Tentative Tract Map 30990, a request to subdivide 3 existing lots totaling 40,349 square feet into 6 single-family lots, located on the west side of Pujol Street and north of First Street. The application was submitted on May 21, 2003 and a Pre-DRC meeting was scheduled for June 10, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on July 10, 2003. As of August 12, 2003 the applicant has not resubmitted plans. Ham Residence - A request for a Certificate of Compliance for the southern portion of lot 7 of TM 8211 located on Santiago Road east of Ynez Road, submitted by Tracy Ham. The application was submitted on February 12, 2003. A Development Review Committee was held March 13, 2003. A second DRC meeting was held on April 13, 2003. Staff is awaiting revised exhibits for the project. Staff has sent out a 30-day letter requesting revised exhibits. The applicant has not responded to the letter. Staff will give final notice to applicant before closing out file. Harveston Tentative Tract Map No. 31267 - Residential Tract Map application to subdivide 5.6 acres into 62 single-famiLy residential lots, 3 private driveway lots and 8 open space lots. The site is located on the south side of Harveston Drive east of Lake View Road. The application was submitted on April 23, 2003. A DRC meeting was held May 22, 2003. A letter was mailed out to the applicant on June 23, 2003, requesting revised exhibits. Revised exhibits were submitted on July 31, 2003. Revised plans are being reviewed and comments from each department were received August 12, 2003. Naron Pacific Tentative Tract Map 30434 - A proposal for a zone change from L-1 to L-2 on 31.93 acres and Tentative Tract Map to create 30 residential lots and 4 open space lots in the Chaparral area. The applicant has provided all materials, but is now proposing a PDO for the project. The CAC needs to make a recommendation on policy for the Chaparral Area prior to further action being taken on these applications. Quiet Meadows - A proposal to subdivide 4.57 acres into 7 residential lots with one open space lot; and a proposal to change the zoning designation from L-1 to L-2. This project was submitted on July 11, 2002. The project was deemed incomplete on August 9, 2002 and December 4, 2002. Revised plans were submitted on February 3, 2003 and routed to all departments for conditions of approval. An Environmental Assessment has been completed. Based on the EA, no significant impacts have been identified. On August 12, 2003, the City Council referred the Zone Change request to the General Plan CAC for an advisory recommendation, and denied the tract map application without prejudice. Miscellaneous 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. Staff is awaiting word from the applicant as to whether they wish to revise the plan or proceed to a public hearing before the Planning Commission R:~vlONTHLY.RP'r~2.003~July 2003 ReporLdoc 6 Additionally, since the project was submitted, staff has received numerous phone calls, letters and petitions in opposition to the project from the adjacent homeowners. Staff has been meeting with the applicant to resolve design issues On August 8, 2003, the applicant resubmitted a proposal that staff is currently reviewing. V.F.W Post 4089 Relocation- A Minor Conditional Use Permit to operate the V.F.W. Post 4089 in an existing building located at 28075 Diaz Road to include a canteen area with a Type 52 Liquor License. Ronald Brennan submitted the application on July 21,2003. The application has been scheduled for the August 28, 2003, Director's Hearing. Safe Harbor Fellowship - A Minor Conditional Use Permit to operate a church in an existing industrial building located at 42327 Rio Nedo. Staff sent a letter outlining the various issues on July 15, 2003 and July 30, 2003. Staff is waiting for a response. Cingular Wireless - A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate, establish and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility with 3 antennas housed within the bulb portion of the proposed 55-foot artificial mono-palm tree located at 31575 Enfield Lane, east of Riverton Lane and north of Humboldt Court. The project was deemed incomplete in February 5, 2003. An Environmental Assessment is required per CEQA. Staff has requested additional studies in order to complete the assessment. Staff is preparing an Initial Study and has sent a letter to the applicant requesting design revisions. Landwerx/PC Gaming Arcade - A Minor Conditional Use Permit submitted by Landwerx/PC Gaming to operate an internet/arcade caf6 for entertainment of customers between the ages of 15-25 years of age. The arcade will be operated out of a business suite in a commercial center located at 27309 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 104. The project will be scheduled for Planning Commission on September 17, 2003. Meadowview Golf Course - Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to design and construct a public golf course and driving range within the Meadowview Community. The Focused EIR requires modification. The applicant has retained a new environmental consultant to complete the modifications. The submittal of the draft EIR by the applicant has been delayed. It is anticipated that the EIR will be distributed in September 2003. Roripaugh Ranch Private Recreation Facility - Located in planning area 5 of the Roripaugh Specific Plan, this recreation center includes an 8,000 square foot building, pool, spa, tennis courts and other noted facilities was submitted on February 13, 2003. The project has continued to fail the Fire Department's turnaround requirements. A resubmittal is expected shortly since the architect has met with the Fire Department. Verizon Mono-Palm Wireless Antenna - A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate, establish and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility with 3 antennas housed within the palm fronds of the proposed 40-foot artificial palm tree. The site is located on the east side of Margarita Road just north of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel north of Winchester Road on the Rancho California Water District's well site. Verizon has changed processing agents and is working on the design of an alternative location. Wireless Telecommunication - A Conditional Use Permit for a 60-foot high monopine within the Rancho California Water District Headquarters facility. Staff has informed the applicant that the proposed monopine is not an acceptable design for the area. The applicant indicated that an alternative design such as installation of the parking lot lights will be submitted. However, no R:~ONTHLY.RPT~.003~uly 2003 ReporLdoc 7 resubmittal has been received and a letter will be sent to the applicant to obtain a status on the project. Verizon has changed their consultant for the third time, which has resulted in significant delays on the project. Verizon Wireless Telecommunication Facility- 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. As of July 8, 2003, staff has not received any new plans from the applicant. Staff wil~ be sending a letter to the applicant closing out the file. Verizon has changed their consultant for the third time, which has resulted in significant delays in the project. Sprint PCS Wireless Telecommunication Facility - A Conditional Use Permit for a 70-foot high flagpole at the Carl's Jr. located at the corner of Bedford Court and SR79 South. A letter was sent to the applicant on August 4, 2003 informing the applicant that the proposed 70-foot high flagpole is not likely to be an acceptable height. The letter also requested that the applicant consider placing the flagpole at other locations on the site, indicating with balloons, the proposed height, for staff to review and photograph. Staff is awaiting a response from the applicant and to coordinate an onsite meeting. General Telephone Company- A request for a Substantial Conformance determination for the relocation of rooftop air conditioning units to the ground behind the Verizon equipment building located at 41963 Moreno Road, south of Rancho California Road between Front Street and Interstate 15. Since the rooftop ducting would remain, the proposed project includes the addition of screening for the rooftop equipment. The application was received on July22, 2003 and is currently being reviewed by staff and other departments. Small Business Assistance Mad Madeline's: The sign contractor working with the owners of this Old Town restaurant submitted new exterior paint colors and sign designs which were approved by the Old Town Local Review Board at their August meeting. The Sagebrush Center: The sign program for this commercial complex has been delayed due to the addition of new tenants. Preliminary designs are currently under development and will be submitted for review by staff in September. The Firehouse Building: Preliminary paint and sign designs are being completed for this historical Old Town building. The sign contractor working on this project plans to submit a planning application for this project in September. La Tacqueria: Staff is working with the owners of this Old Town business on a revised plan for an exterior facade improvement that includes new awnings, paint and signs. A proposal from the contractor is to be submitted to the Old Town Local Review Board in September. Temecula Olive Oil Company: With the assistance of staff, new sign designs are being developed for this business that relocated in the Old Town Tourist Retail Core area. The sign contractor is working on new elevations that will be submitted to staff in August. R:'WIONTHLY. RPT~?_003~uly 2003 Report.doc 8 Special Event Permits · Hot Summer Nights: This event, organized bythe City of Temecula Redevelopment Department, will take place on Friday nights in Old Town Temecula through August 22, 2003. · Temecula On Stage: Staff is working with the Theatre Foundation to help organize this event that will take place on August 30, 2003 in Old Town Temecula. Special Projects & Lonq Ranqe 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: Comprehensive General Plan Update -The Community Advisory Committee and Staff have completed their review of all the Draft Element except circulation. The consultant is waiting for the county to complete the process of integrating its Land Use, Circulation and Open Space plans. The following amendment requests have been received; theywill be addressed in more detail when the updated General Plan is considered. o 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 approval of a revised Circulation Element. o South Margarita Road adjacent to the Santa Gertrudis channel, across the channel from Chaparral High School. The property owner is requesting a change from Public Institutional to Professional Office. o The southeast corner of Via Lobo and Nicolas Road, and properties along the northeast edge of Meadowview. The property owner is requesting a change from Very Low Density Residential to a combination of Low Medium Density Residential and Open Space. o The southeast corner of Margarita Road and Solana Way. The property owner is requesting a change from Medium Residential to Professional Office. · Hillside Development Policy - The policies are being examined for integration into the draft- grading ordinance. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Procedures to Implement CEQA - Staff initiated project to develop local guidelines and procedure manual for processing CEQA documents, including the adoption of local exemptions. The process will also conform to the new 2003 CEQA Guidelines, and will create new templates for standard CEQA forms. Surface 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. 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'~2003~July 2003 Report.doc 9 Updating of the Old Town Specific Plan - Staff has worked with the Old Town Local Review Board and prepared a list of changes and enhancements to the plan. These proposed changes are currently being organized into an updated SP document and will be presented to the Local Review Board at a meeting in September or October. Staff has developed a draft ordinance to codify use restrictions and supplemental standards for "Cyber CafSs." This item has not yet been scheduled for public hearing. City - Project environmental reviews and permitting: o Overland Drive Extension - Staff reviewed 2nd submittal of the draft initial study / Mitigated Negative Declaration and has provided comments to Public Works. No resubmittal to date. o Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Project - Request from Public Works for Environmental Determination for this project. Previously prepared Negative Declaration may need to be modified because the project description has changed. Revised project description has not been submitted to Planning. o Paloma del Sol Supplemental EIR and Specific Plan Amendment 8.1. Amendment 8.1 has been revised and distributed for comments, which are due on August 22, 2003. Draft SEIR is scheduled to be submitted in September, 2003. o Temecula Education Complex -. The applicant has revised the Initial Study which recommends that a focused EIR be prepared. The Notice of Preparation has been issued o Winchester Road Widening Project - Request from Public Works for Environmental Determination to widen Winchester Road west of Jefferson. Staff is examining the impact of removing landscaping along both sides of Winchester Road between Jefferson and Enterprise Circle. Staff has received additional information from Public Works and has completed an Initial Study. Staff recommends a Negative Declaration be adopted. o Vail Ranch Elementary School Basketball Court Lighting Project- Staff has completed the Negative Declaration for this project and is preparing appropriate NEPA documents. This project has been placed on hold at the request of TCSD. o Update of the Citywide Design Guidelines - The City Council awarded the contract on May 13, 2003. Staff and the Planning Commissions subcommittee & met on July 7, with city consultant. A Planning Commission workshop has been scheduled for September 3, 2003, to obtain the Planning Commission's input. General Plan Amendments PA02-0260 Valley Christian Fellowship -The Community Advisory Community has reviewed the General Plan issues in the surrounding areas. Their recommendation was forwarded to City Council on June 24, 2003. The City Council directed staff to prepare a city initiated General Plan Amendment and Zone Change and a forwarded a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Staff is currently developing a Planned Development Overlay to address future development in this area. R:~IONTHLY.RPT~003~July 2003 Report.doc 10 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROV~.~e~.~'- CITY ATFORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN. Gfe~ CITY MANAGER CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manage~..v,~' August 26, 2003 Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The following are the recant highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of July 2003. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of July, the City received 3 leads and I inquiry. The leads and inquiry consisted of a medical facility, auto dealer, family style restaurant and an industrial real estate investor looking for commemial real estate property in Temecula. In the month of July, the Southwest Riverside County Alliance responded to 5 leads. Attached is a copy of their activity report. Grand Openin,q/Appreciation Event Staff attended the opening of the Musicians Workshop Community Cultural Arts & Music Education Center located in Old Town on July 9th. Scarlet Rivere, Vince Di Cola and Michael Paulo provided the entertainment. Councilmember Sam Pratt and staff attended the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Sponsor Appreciation event at Falkner Winery on July 17th. The City was recognized for its continued sponsorship of the Festival and was presented with a nica framed event poster. Media/Outreach Materials Staff wrote the City article for the August Chamber of Commerce Newsletter titled, "Aggressive 5-year Capital Improvement Program Approved." The article provides information on the number and types of projects as well as highlights of CIP projects planned for 2004-2008. In the month of July, staff worked with a photographer and graphic designer on the updated Temecula Business Brochure. The Inland Empire Regional Technology Alliance distributes, via e-mail, a high technology newsletter to over 1,700 readers on a monthly basis. Staff wrote an article on Temecula's proposed higher-education facility, which was published in the August newsletter. (see attached) Meetings Staff attended the Temecula Partners in Education Meeting on July 7th at the Temecula Valley Unified School District. Don McAuliff will handle the media communications for Temecula Partners in Education. Elections for the new Board will take place in September. Mary Williams of the Workforce Development Center will have the Business Survey update for the August 4th meeting. The committee will present the goals and accomplishments of this committee to the TVUSD Governing Board on August 5th. On July 15th, staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Government Action Committee meeting. This committee will help lane the Legislative Summit with the three local Chambers'. The Summit will be held on September 25th at Pechanga. Discussion was held on event topics and theme that best represented an EDC perspective. The Committee will make a recommendation to the EDC Board of Directors to hold a mixer and invite other government action groups to introduce the EDC Government Action Committee. The Committee will distribute their meeting minutes to local city councils, county supervisors, school district boards, and Senate and Assembly representatives. Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Board of Director's Meeting on July 17th. The EDC Board approved the execution of the Agreement between the City of Temecula and EDC. RKR Media Associates will create and manage a monthly online newsletter. EDC committee updates were given (see attached minutes). Staff provided a city update which included: Council candidate update, Adelphia Cable contract is up for renewal and the telecommunications ordinance is being reviewed, expansion of the auto mall is being considered and the environmental impact study is being prepared for the Higher Education Center. On July 17th, staff met with Jim Nadal of Westmar to discuss a proposed auto dealership. Staff met with Kirk Wright of the Garrett Group on July 17th regarding plans for French Valley Parkway and other development projects in Temecula. On July 23~, staff met with Gar Herring of Donahue Schriber regarding retail opportunities in Temecula. Staff attended the EDC Business Attraction Focus Group Meeting on July 24th. A presentation was given by Cutting Edge Marketing on Branding. The group will assist the Economic Alliance partners with ideas and direction for branding Southwest Riverside County. Staff attended a meeting with Jon Atwood on July 24th to discuss Toyota's improvement plans for their main facility on Ynez Road. On July 24th, staff met with Mike Kalind of Ocean Consulting to learn more about Temecula's economic development efforts and how we work with various partner agencies. Staff provided Mr. Kalind with a business kit and other pertinent information. Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Partner's Meeting on July 30th. The new Alliance "At A Glance" demographic piece was distributed. The Southwest Riverside County Business Resource Guide will be produced electronically. New demographic and housing information will be added to the GIS/Web site. Other discussion items included the EDC Business Attraction Advisory Committee, Connectory and the Fall "Taste of SW Riverside County" event. TOURISM Media/Outreach Materials Per the direction of staff, Group One Productions provided b-roll footage of Temecula to Fox Sports Net. They incorporated footage of wine country, hot-air ballooning, Old Town, etc. during their filming of boxing matches at Pechanga. Fox Sports Net sent a copy of their production to Group One Productions. Allen Cook will provide a copy to the City. This was great national exposure for Temecula. Fox Sports Net has permission to use Temecula footage on other shows they produce. In addition, Group One Productions provided the Wilkens Group with b-roll footage of Temecula to use in a video they are producing on the Ontario Convention Center. In July, staff spoke with Simon Kane from Black Diamond Productions in London and provided him with information on the filming segment for Old Town. Temecula will have an episode on the California Golf television show which will be shown in the international market, on United Airlines and the Travel Channel, Fox Sports, etc. Five local golf courses, a winery, hot-air balloon company, two hotels, shuttle company and the City will pay for the show. Cost for the half hour show is $20,000 and the show will run for 2 - 3 years. (see attached article) Staff met with Willie Watts of the Real Estate Network on July 9th. Mr. Watts has produced a weekly residential real estate cable show that is shown throughout Riverside County and is looking to expand to Orange County. Staff provided him with video footage highlighting our tourism climate, which he has incorporated in the show. Staff also provided him with the Temecula Tourism CD and press kit. Staff met with Laura West of Dreams Magazine on July 15th. Dreams Magazine is a new travel and entertainment magazine coming out in September which is targeted to household income levels from $35,000 + with high propensity to travel. Staff provided Ms. West with tourism literature, press kit, and CD. Staff has included the publication on its media list. The 35th Annual San Diegan publication was published in July. Temecula was mentioned on the cover and has a chapter and full-page ad in the tourist publication (see attached). The magazine reaches over 7 million readers annually. Distribution includes 1,500 newsstands, placed in San Diego's top 250 corporations, over 35,000 hotel rooms year-round, and is sold nationally in all major bookstores. The Summer/Fall San Diego Visitors Pocket Guide was published in July. This visitors guide is distributed through the San Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau at trade shows, conventions and mailed out upon request. The City has a full-page ad. (see attached) Staff provided wdtten information, press kit, photo discs to Michael Cripps of Lifescapes Magazine. In the AugustJSeptember issue there will be a weekend getaway article on Temecula. Staff also worked with the publication on producing a small color ad for the City. Meetings Staff met with Dave Johnson of Southwest Events on July 11th to discuss the upcoming Tractor Race event scheduled for October. Dave also provided staff with additional information to include in the agenda report. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Activities Report Temecula Valley Film Council Activities Report Advertising/Media Coverage TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE August4,2003 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn, Attached please find the July Monthly Activity Report as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of July at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights: in the month of July, 9 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business to Temecula. They received a business packet, which includes a copy of the City of Temecula demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Board of Directors Highlights: Special Presentation - LEAPS PROGRAM/Lake Elsinore Advanced Pump Station - Guest from EVMWD, LEAPS, SAVE SSRC attended last month's board meeting. Morrison gave an overview of the LEAPS hydroelectric power plant and transmission line project. The board will have discussion at the August board meeting. Proposed State Tourism budget cut - TVCC Board of Directors approved opposing the tourism budget cuts. Letters were sent to local legislators and city officials. The Chambers lease space has be leased to Maxim Healthcare Staffing. Committee Highlights: Tourism & Visitors Council: The August Tourism Council meeting will be held at Ponte Winery on August 7, 2003. The Convention & Visitors Bureau subcommittee met on July 24, 2003 at Pechanga Resort & Casino to start writing the CVB mission statement. At the August 28, 2003 CVB meeting we are hoping to finalize the mission statement and start the vision and goals for the CVB. The results for the Chamber restaurants/wine survey will be given to the Winegrowers Associations to review and presented at the next Tourism Council meeting. 55 restaurants were sent a survey on if and how they showcase local Temecula wineries, we received 13 responses via fax. Thus giving us a 23.6% on the surveys. · Relocation Packets: Staff is in the final stages of printing 7,500 relocation Packets. · Business Resource Guide & Membership Directory: Staff will coordinate meeting with PPG to begin the process of printing the 2004 guide. 26790 Ynez Cour~ · ~emecula, CA 92591 Phone: (909) 676-5090 · Fax: (909) 694-0201 www,temecula,org · e-rnaih info@temecula.org Education Committee: The committee will implement the "Labels Are For Soup" poster contest during the fall semester. The committee will present the outline for the Stand Up For Your Community presentation to the Executive Board of Directors. Starting in August the Education Committee will begin soliciting donations for the annual School Employee Recognition Program. The donations will be $10 gift certificates to local businesses. The received certificates will be presented to the staff at each facility during their monthly staff meeting, Ways & Means Committee: The 12th Annual Monte Carlo Extravaganza will be held September 17, 2003 at Wilson Creek Winery. The event will feature a High Rollers Club where additional gaming tables will be provided with a higher minimum bid. The Ways & Means committee is also working on the 2003 Autumn Fest Business Showcase. The events sponsors include: Title Sponsor -Community Little Book, Affiliate Sponsor - USA Federal Credit Union, and Facility Sponsor - The Promenade in Temecula. The event will be held on October 15, 2003 at the Promenade Mall. The 2003 Legislative Summit will be held on September 25, 2003 at Pechanga Resort & Casino. Possible Keynote Speakers are Elizabeth Hill, California State Legislative Analyst, and Fred Main, Vice President of the California Chamber of Commerce. The event will consist of four breakout session topics, which are Workers' Compensation, Budget/Taxation, Education, and Utilities/Transportation. For each breakout session the committee is extending an invitation to a member the Senate that chairs the appropriate committee. Local Business Promotions Committee: The Committee is working on the Business Resource DVD titled, Succeedin9 in Temecula. The DVD will feature several business owners in the area as well as business advice from Al Jaszcar with the Inland Empire Small Business Development Center. A master copy should be completed by October 15~h for viewing at the Business Showcase. The Businesses of the Month for August selected by the Education committee are the Boys & Girls Club of Southwest County and Filter Market. Mountain Lodging Unlimited was awarded the Chamber Spotlight, and Billiard's Depot Temecula is the Mystery Shopper winner for the month of August. Government Action Committee: Representatives from the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District offered a brief overview of the Lake Elsinore Advanced Pump Storage program which is a hydro-electric project being considered and would provide power during peak use times. If approved, this project would generate enough power to provide service to 500,000 residences. Senator Hollingsworth held two Workers' Compensation forums in the San Diego area and Hollingsworh urges business members to continue to send letters of concern over the increasing premiums to legislators. Membership Committee: The Membership Committee volunteers and staff had a Chamber booth at the 4th of Ju y Extravaganza t wa's a great success. Susan G. Komen was featured as the non-profit Organization for the July Ambassador Networking Breakfast. New Member Open house was well attended and guests were able to introduce themselves as well as their business. Over 400 members attended the July mixer hosted by California Grill Restaurant. There are 16 Chamber Ambassadors representing the Chamber. Ambassador training programs are held every third Tuesday of the month. Accountemps and Lavonna Lac f of Re/max are the two Business Spotlight winners for the month of July. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distributors) Activity Report: 330 visitors requests were processed from the Westway's advertising marketing piece. 50 Visitor Guides to Susan Bejeckian with TCI Marketing to distribute to the media. 100 Visitor Guides, 100 City Tri-fold Brochures and 100 Winery Brochures to Cheryl Lee with the San Vicente Inn to distribute to guests. 420 Visitor Guides to Debbie Streeler with Chaparral Antique Mall for distribution to visitors in Old Town. 75 Visitor Guides to Mick Streeter with US Brit Services for distribution to clients. 75 Visitor Guides, 100 City Tri-fold Brochures and 75 Winery Brochures to Marc Drew with Temecula Country Store for distribution to visitors in Old Town Temecula. · 20 Visitor Guides and 20 Tourism Maps to Pat Proud with ES Homestate Program for distribution to exchange students coming to Temecula, · 50 Visitor Guides, 50 Winery Brochures and 50 Tourism Maps to Joan Baumann with Point X Sports Camp for distribution to visitors. Activity Report: Tourism calls for the month of July - 2,025 Phone calls for the month of July - 3,371 Walk-ins for the month of July - 2,172 Web Page User Sessions for the month of July- 6,329 Website Tourism Survey - "How did you hear about Temecu[a" - 299 responses were received: Article - 2% Friend - 34% Link - 6% Magazine - 4% Other - 40% Radio - 2% Search - 7% TV - 5% Also, attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Local Business Promotions, Government Action, Membership and Marketing and Ways & Means committee. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (909) 676-5090. Thank you. cc: Mayor Jeff Stone Councilman Jeff Comerchero Councilman Sam Pratt Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator Mayor Pro Tern Mike Naggar Councilman Ron Roberts Shawn Nelson, City Manager Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manager TVCC Board of Directors Annual Volume Comparisons Chamber July 2002 Chamber July 2003 Percentage PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 268 228 -15% Calendar of Events 108 91 -16% Special Events 164 141 -14% General Information 978 1,269 30% TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 1,518 1,729 14% Relocation 163 169 4% Demographics 79 131 66% Chamber 882 772 -12% Miscellaneous 273 124 -55% TOTAL PHONE CALLS 2,915 2,925 0% WALK-INS Tourism 203 153 -25% Calendar of Events 126 91 -28% Special Events 52 66 27% General information 798 709 -11% Relocation 198 135 -32% Demographics 92 99 8% Chamber 566 339 -40% Miscellaneous 225 112 -50% Visitor Center Walk-ins 378 247 -35% TOTAL WALK-INS 2,638 1,951 -26% MAILINGS Tourism 152 532 250% Relocation 180 104 -42% Demographics 179 105 -41% TOTAL MAILINGS 511 741 45% E-MAIL Tourism 89 97 9% Relocation 100 105 5% Miscellaneous 174 366 110% TOTAL E-MAIL 363 568 56% WEBSITE USER SESSIONS 6,332 6,329 0% * Chamber referrals reflect faxes, walk-ins and phone calls Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Monthly Activity Report July 2003 PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals Calendar of Events Special Events General Information TOTAL TOURISM CALLS Relocation Demographics Chamber Miscellaneous TOTAL PHONE CALLS WALK-INS Tourism Calendar of Events Special Events General Information Relocation Demographics Chamber Miscellaneous TOTAL WALK-INS MAILINGS Tourism Relocation Demographics TOTAL MAILINGS E-MAIL Tourism Relocation Miscellaneous TOTAL E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS GRAND TOTALS PHONE CALLS WALK-INS MAILINGS E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS Chamber Vis, Center Year-To-Date This Month This Month Total 228 91 141 1,269 1,729 169 131 772 124 2,925 153 91 66 7O9 135 99 339 112 1,704 532 104 105 741 105 366 568 6,329 119 128 247 This Month 2,925 1,704 741 568 6,329 1,787 970 1,126 8,332 12,215 1,235 783 6,067 1,962 22,262 2,487 917 544 6,982 1,123 748 3,401 1,881 18,083 2,275 720 618 3,613 704 644 1,612 2,960 21,982 Year-To-Date 22,262 18,083 3,613 2,960 21,982 August 15, 2003 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: Activity Summary - July 2003 Business and Workforce Development Staff responded to the following 8 businesses and workforce development requests in July 2003: Date Lead Source Request Action Taken 7/14/03 Phone Client is chiropractor and looking Provided client with web addresses for SW Site Finder to relocate practice back to Calif. and EDC for site selection. Provided answers to various Seeking business and housing questions regarding local economy. Will provide info. ongoing assistance. 7/18/03 In Person Client requested meeting to Met with client and discussed EDC mission and discuss ins company's volunteer provided info on various non-profits and chambers. participation in region. Client is interest in serving on EDC action committees. 7/21/03 Phone Client lives in Florida and looking Emailed client a list of 16 contacts in various industries to buy existing winery. Client to assist. Client paid a visit to the winery and is requested various resources for pursuing ownership. loans, accountants, attorneys to assist with purchase txansaction. 7/21/03 In Person Client wants to relocate from St. Met with client, his wife and Stevie Field to provide Paul, Minn. and requested info on assistance with site location, housing, retail possible sites for lease or sale to demographics and other general information about the build a used car dealership, region. Will provide ongoing assistance. 7/24/03 In Person Client requested that EDC Met with YMCA consultant to discuss needs assessment participate in YMCA needs for development of YMCA facility in Temecula. assessment meeting. 7/24/03 ha Person Client is employed by Bear Creek Met with client to discuss his needs. His interest was to Golf Club. He is interested in a provide executive housing to potential business owners partnersinp with business that relocate to the region. Provided client with Stevie attxaction efforts. Field's contact info. Stevie will follow up. 7/24/03 Phone Client requested info on local Assisted client last year with her request to expand home professional women's group and daycare business into commercial site. Provided the other networking opportunities, requested info. Client is still working on expansion plans. 7/28/03 In Person Client looking for networking and Met with client and discussed EDC mission and volunteer opportunities to provided info on various non-profits and chambers. promote ins computer solutions Client is interest in serving on EDC action committees. business. Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary - July 2003 Page 2 of 3 Community Outreach Staff and/or directors attended the following meetings/events to promote or support economic development/community outreach: · United Way 2003 Campaign Cabinet Meeting (7/7) · TVCC Partnership in Education Committee Meeting (7/7) · Legislative Summit Planning Committee Meeting (7/8 & 7/22) · IEEP & Federal Reserve Bank Perspective Breakfast (7/9) · Murrieta Temecula Group Meeting (7/11) · Riverside County MSHCP Study Session in Lake Elsinore (7/11) · United Way Executive Board Meeting (7/15) · Workforce Development Center All-Staff Meeting (7/22) - Monthly WDC partner meeting. · United Way Campaign Coordinator Workshop - Southwest County Campaign (7/24) · Boys & Girls Club Annual Golf Tournament (7/25) - Staff volunteered to work the tourney. · Meeting with Paul O'Neal, Stevie Field and Kevin Leap of San Diego Magazine (7/30) Staff attended a meeting with Mr. Leap to discuss the possibility of a Southwest Riverside County feature article in the magazine. · Murrieta Brokers' Meeting (7/31) Business Retention Business Relations Committee Meeting (7/3) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. Administration/Organization · EDC Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Meeting (7/10) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · EDC Education Committee Meeting (7/11) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · EDC Government Action Committee Meeting (7/15) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · EDC Board of Directors Meeting (7/17) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · Administration - Staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office; coordinated EDC committee meetings; moved EDC to upstairs office in the Workforce Development Center; managed EDC website updates; mailed an EDC letter to Murrieta Mayor Richard Ostling and local elected officials to support the expansion and new development of Southwest Healthcare System facilities; submitted an EDC news article to Valley Business Journal; Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary - July 2003 Page 3 of 3 Administration/Organization {continued mailed 7 EDC membership solicitation letters; and emailed the following business development /community announcements: } UCR Connect Links Lunch - "Current Developments in US and International Accounting Standards" } MSHCP Study Session in Lake Elsinore } The California Story Fund Grant Solicitation } California Workers' Comp Flash Report > 2003 California Team Excellence Awards Program Solicitation This concludes the activity summary for July 2003. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 600-6064. Respectfully, Diane Sessions Executive Director 8u~ 18 03 09:56a Diane Sessions 908-600-6065 DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MJEETING MINUTES Thursday, July 17, 2003 - 8:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA DRAFT BOARD MEMBERS Marlene Best, City of Lake Elsinore Ken Carlisle, Guidant Corporation Maryarm Edwards, Temecula Valley Unified School Dist. Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Slan Hatter, Mimu Edwards Cannon Harter & Lewin Scott Hurst, ProjectDesign Consultants Melanie Nieman, Eastern Municipal Water District Jim O'Crmdy, City of Temecula Greg Prudhomme, Kuebler, prudhomme & Co. A1 SabsevilT, Verizon Joan Sparkman, Temecula Valley Bank Roger Ziemer, Southern California Gas Company EDC STAFF Diane Sessions Liz Yuzer MEMBERS AND GUESTS Rob Johnson, City of Murrie~a Trevor Twitchell, Merrill Lynch CALL TO ORDER o Board President Dennis Frank called the meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. He welcomed Scott Hurst to the board, who replaced Amie White as the designated board member for ProjectDesign Consultants. AGENDA Motion was made by Maryann Edwards, seconded by A1 Sabsevitz and carried unanimously to approve the agenda as mended by moving the Government Action Committee report to New Business. .MINUTES · The Board reviewed the minutes of the June 19, 2003 Board of Directors Meeting. Motion was made by Joan Sparkman, seconded by Roger Ziemer and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the June 19, 2003 Board of Directom Meeting. FINANCIAL REPORT · The Board reviewed the June 30, 2003 Financial Report that showed total monthly revenues of $17,853, total expenses of $21,784 and total cash-in-bank of $78,716. The Board further reviewed the 2002-2003 year-end financials that showed excess revenues over expenses of $10,688. Motion was made by Al Sabsevitz, seconded by Maryarm Edwards and carded unanimously to approve the June 30, 2003 Financial Report. Auc 18 03 09:57a Diane Sessions 909-600-6055 p.3 Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - July 17, 2003 Minutes- Page 2 of 4 NEW BUSINESS · Adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-01 - Bank Accounts: Motion was made by Joan Sparkman, seconded by Maryann Edwards and carded unanimously to adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-01 as presented which authorizes the following newly-elected officers as signators on corporate bank accounts at California Bank and Trust: Dennis Frank, Keith Johnson, Phil Oberhansley and Greg Prudhomme. Adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-02 - Conflict of Interest Policy: Motion was made by Joan Sparkman, seconded by Maryaun Edwards and carried unanimously to adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-02 - Conflict of Interest Policy as presented. · Adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-03 - Confidentiality Policy: Motion was made by Maryann Edwards, seconded by Ken Carlisle and carried unanimously to adopt Administrative Resolution 2003-03 - Confidentiality Policy as presented. · Approve Agreement Between the City of Temeeula and the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County: Motion was made by Maryann Edwards, seconded by Ken Carlisle and carded unanimously to approve execution of the "Agreement Between the City of Temecula and the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County" for fiscal year 2003-2004 as presented. Jim O'Grady was not present for the vote. · Approve Online Newsletter Proposal: The Board reviewed proposal #1084 dated July 2, 2003 by RKR Media Associates to create and manage a monthly online newsletter at a cost of $125 for a one- time set up fee and $49.95 per month to send up to 500 newsletters via email. Motion was made by Greg Prudhomme, seconded by Roger Ziemer and carried unanimously to approve proposal #1084 by RKR Media Associates as presented. · EDC Government Action Committee Report: Chair Ken Carlisle reported the joint chambers' Government Action Committee endorsed a legislative summit to be held on September 25 at Pechanga Resort. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce would act as the lead planning agency with other regional organizations as partners. The half-day event would include a speakers' forum with breakout sessions to encourage open dialogue with state legislators on business issues such as Worker's Compensation, state budget and taxes, transportation, energy and education. Mr. Carlisle recommended the EDC partner in the event. The Board agreed the EDC would support and participate in this summit. Mr. Carlisle also reported the EDC Government Action Committee hoped to organize a mixer and invite other government action groups throughout the region to share ideas. CONTINUING BUSINESS · EMWI) Presentation and Tour: Diane Sessions reported that Melanie Nieman ~vould host the next board meeting at their Perds facility on August 21. A short board meeting would be followed by a presentation on the brineline and a tour of the Menifee desalter plant. The Board thanked Ms. Nieman and EMWD for their hospitality. Ru~ 18 03 09:57a D~an~ S~sions 909-600-6065 Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directurs Meeting -July 17, 2003 Minutes - Page 3 of 4 Quarterly Lunch Update: Diane Sessions reported she was unable to schedule Bill Vardoulis for a presentation on the "Tunnel to Orange County" for the August quarterly luncheon. Ms. Sessions indicated she would schedule another program for August and confirm Mr. Vardoulis for a later presentation. EDC Committee Updates: Business Relations Committee: Chair Stan Hatter reported the committee was reviewing changes to the survey. He also reported that he, Diane Sessions and Dennis Frank would be meeting with representatives of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore to determine what type of survey information the committee should obtain during business visits. Mr. Hatter suggested that board members provide leads to their business colleagues for potential visits. Joan Sparkman recommended the EDC conduct a written poll on how businesses want to be solicited for survey information, which could be done at EDC quarterly luncheons. Business Attraction Advisory Committee: Diane Sessions reported that Chair Stevie Field would hold a study session on July 24 to discuss a branding and marketing campaign for Southwest Riverside County. Education Committee: Chair Maryann Edwards reported the last meeting foensed on the Legislative Summit and related issues, including education funding and school districts' loss of local control due to layers of state mandates. Permit and Planning Committee: No report available. Government Action Committee: See update under New Business. Transportation & Infrastructure Committee: Roger Ziemer reported on the study session held by the City of Lake Elsinore regarding MSHCP and its impact on the City of Lake Elsinore. Marlene Best reported the Council supported the concept of MSHCP but there was some concern over the amount of City land proposed for habitat use compared to other jurisdictions. Another concern was the loss of Measure A funds from 2009-2039 if Council does not approve the MSHCP and TUMF proposal. Negotiations would continue. The Board requested further information regarding the City of Lake Elsinore's position in order to determine the best way to support them. Utilities Updates: Telecommunications: Al Sabsevitz reported that seven public meetings were held regarding the 909 area code split. One option was to split the area code at the county line with Riverside County receiving the 951 area code and San Bemaxdino keeping 909. A second option was an overlay that would result in 10 digit dialing. Water: Melanie Nieman reported that credit ratings on water supply were lower than expected. EMWD would work with businesses to keep costs down. Ms. Nieman distributed informaton on rebates and other cost savings, as well as a flyer on fishing at Diamond Valley Lake. Gas: Roger Ziemer reported on the long-term outlook for natural gas prices. He also talked about Senate Bill 18 - Traditional Tribal Cultural Sites, a bill that would amend and broaden the current laws that protect Native American sacred places. Land proposed for development outside reservations could be deemed as culturally sensitive areas and would be protected under the mandates of SB18. Mr. Ziemer expressed concern this bill could impact all open land throughout the state and recommended a letter campaign to the bill's author, Senator Burton. Au~ 18 03 09:S?a Diane Sessions 909-600-60G5 p.5 Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Pdverside County Board of Directors Meeting- July 17, 2003 Minutes - Page 4 of 4 OPEN DISCUSSION EDC Administrative Update: The Board reviewed the June 2003 Activity Summary submitted by Diane Sessions. She distributed a copy of the letter sent to Governor Gray Davis on behalf of the EDC regarding Proposition 42 funds. Ms. Sessions also announced that the 1-15 Interregional Parmership Existing Conditions Report from SANDAG was completed and copies were available. She reported the Temecula City Council would consider the EDC funding request on July 22 and funding from Murdeta and Lake Elsinore looked positive. Riverside County had not yet responded to the funding request. Joan Sparkman suggested that Brad Hudson, Director of Riverside County EDA, be invited to a board meeting. · SWRC Economic Alliance Update: No report available. City Updates: City of Lake EIsinore - Marlene Best reported that an aerospace research and development company would be locating in the city; carp removal in Lake Elsinore continued and an oxygenation system would be installed in the lake in December or January; there would be a new retail announcement next week and a new auto dealer; Council approved funds to expand Railroad Canyon Road; and a Chamber mixer would be held next week. City ofMurri*'ta - Rob Johnson reported that improvements on Washington Avenue would begin soon and weekly meetings were seheduled to inform the community of developments. City of Temecula - Jim O'Grady reported the contract with the EDC would go before the City Council on July 22; four candidates filed papers for the City Council election; the contract with Adelphia Cable is up for renewal and the telecommunications ordinance is being reviewed; expansion of the auto mall is being considered; and the environmental impact study is being prepared for the Higher Education Center. Mr. O'Grady offered to make a presentation to the Board on the Higher Education Center. Chamber Updates: Lake Elsinore Chamber of Consmerce - No report available. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce- No report available. ADJOURNMENT At 9:30 a.m., motion was made by Maryann Edwards, seconded by Al Sabsevitz and carded unanimously to adjourn the board meeting. Respectively submitted by: Elizabeth Yuzer Phil Oberhansley Recording Secretary Board Secretary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, July 3, 2003 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Stan Harter, Mirau, Edwards, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Loft Moss, City of Murrieta Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Guests: Jim Cauhap¢ Chris Masino, CDM Group, Inc. Liz Yuzer, Economic Development Corporation Call To Order · Chair Stan Harter called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. Follow-up Action Reports · Taylor Frager Construction - Diane Sessions reported that information about the EDC was provided. · United Green Mark - Diane Sessions reported that information about the EDC was provided. · McCall's Candles - Diane Sessions reported that information about the EDC was provided. · Johnson Machinery - Diane Sessions reported that information about the EDC was provided. · The Outdoor Channel - Diane Sessions reported that Jim O'Grady followed up with Perry Massie and Mark Corcoran regarding a number of transportation issues. · Bianchi International - Alva Diaz would follow up with Lan'y Deck, CFO, regarding sidewalk and training issues. Company Contact Reports · Waterstone - Lori Moss reported that she, Rex Oliver and Rob Johnson met with Chris Kuran, owner of Waterstone in Murrieta. Waterstone manufactures high-end kitchen faucets and water filtration products. In operation for five years, they moved to Murrieta fi.om Vista nearly three years ago. Mr. Kuran indicated he chose this area because of its rapid growth, easy freeway access, support industries and also was within commuting distance fi.om his home in Fallbrook. Primary customers were high-end kitchen and bath showrooms including Standards of Excellence in Murrieta. Primary competitors were outside the United States. Mr. Kuran ranked his business as small and said that sales in the past year doubled due to a strong growth market. Principal suppliers were located in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties. Two of their employees lived in Fallbrook, four in the Temecula/Murrieta area, two in Sun City/Menifee and one in Whittier. Mr. Kuran was leasing 13,000 square feet of space and would like to expand to do their own plating and powder coating. They had no contingency plans for electrical outages. Mr. Kuran indicated he was happy doing business in SW Riverside County and would be willing to be a contact person for other companies contemplating relocating to the area. He reported they had a break-in four months ago and were pleased with the Murrieta police response. They now have an alarm system. Action Item: Chris Kuran wants the City to add new stop sign and remove the Rancho Water District water control device. Chris Kuran also requested additional information about the EDC. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - July 3, 2003 Page 2 of 3 · Business Furniture Group - Lori Moss reported that she, Rex Oliver and Rob Johnson met with Rusty Buck, owner of Business Furniture Group in Murrieta. Business Furniture Group manufactures new and refurbished office furniture and modular office walls. In operation locally for 8 years, he settled in Murrieta 4 years ago. Mr. Buck reported there were 25-30 employees depending on the number of shifts needed. The majority of employees lived in the Temecula/Murrieta area. Primary customers were businesses in San Diego and Orange Counties. Mr. Buck indicated that he receives a number of referrals fi.om brokers and design centers. Competitors were other office supply stores such as Glenny's in Temecula. He ranked his business as medium and indicated that sales in the past year were up due to growth in the area. Their principal suppliers of fabric, lumber and paint were located both on the East Coast and locally. Mr. Buck reported that he owns the 25,000-square-foot building and may look for another smaller building for expansion. He had no contingency plans for electrical outages. He also reported they had a break-in and were pleased with the Murrieta police response. He was pleased with the fast track process in Murrieta and was happy doing business in SW Riverside County. He would be willing to be a contact person for other companies contemplating relocating to this area. Action Item: Rusty Buck requested additional information about the EDC. · Lori Moss reported that a number of businesses in the Murrieta business park had reported break-ins and stolen computers prior to alarm systems being installed. Action Item: Diane Sessions would alert brokers to this issue and suggest that they encourage new businesses to install alarm systems immediately upon moving in. Goal Progress Report · Diane Sessions announced the final tally of visits and phone interviews for the fiscal year were as follows: 27 visits ~ 3 points each + 33 phone interviews ~ 1 point each = 60 visits/calls ~114 points YTD VISIT PHONE POINTS Goal 27 33 114 Actual 18 15 69 Variance - 9 -18 - 45 Discussion on New Goals & Processes for FY 03-04 · Stan Harter recommended that he meet with committee members fi.om the cities ofTemecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore to determine what survey information was needed by the cities from the retention visits. He further recommended that Dennis Frank, Diane Sessions and Stevie Field attend the meeting. A master call list would be created and committee members would be encouraged to initiate calls fi.om it. Diane Sessions reported the Lake Elsinore Chamber's EDC would make calls to Lake Elsinore businesses and would report the results to this committee. The Business Relations Committee goal for fiscal year 2003- 2004 remained at 60 surveys completed through visits and phone interviews. Members were encouraged to conduct as many visits as possible. Loft Moss committed to 24 visits and/or calls to Murrieta businesses for the new fiscal year. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - July 3, 2003 Page 3 of 3 New Committee Assignments · No new committee assignments were made. Review Business Retention Resources · The review of business retention resources was tabled until a later meeting. Survey Revisions · Rex Oliver recommended the new survey include primary questions for all businesses but to add several different addendums with questions pertinent to specific industries or issues. As industries or issues change, so would the addendum questionnaires. He fiLrther recommended that Workers' Comp issues be included as an addendum item and not as a primary survey question. It was suggested that a sample script be added to the survey to assist members during their visits. Open Discussion · Change in Meeting Time - Stan Hatter recommended the regular meeting time for the Business Relations Committee be changed to 8:00 a.m. Those members present agreed with the recommendation. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY EDUCATION COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, July 11, 2003 - 10:00 a.m. Mission Oaks National Bank 41530 Enterprise Circle South, Suite 100, Temecula, CA DRAFT Committee Members Present: Frank Casciari, California Ba~ & Trust Maryann Edwards, Temecula Valley Unified School Distr/ct Dennis Frank, University of California, Riverside Dr. Dick Giese, Mt. San Jacinto Community College Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Dr. Robin Steinback, Mt. San Jacinto Community College Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Barbara Tooker, Temecula Valley Unified School District Roger Ziemer, Southern California Gas Company Call To Order Committee Chair Maryann Edwards called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. and led introductions. Approve June 13~ 2003 Meeting Minutes Motion made by Dennis Frank, seconded by Roger Ziemer and carded unanimously to approve the June 13, 2003 meeting minutes as amended by striking verbiage in the first paragraph under Presentation on State of California Master Plan for Education that read "State Board of Education" to correctly read "California Student Assessment Review Commission". Discussion on Planning TVCC Partnership in Education Legislative Summit Diane Sessions reported that she and Alice Sullivan were co-chairs in organizing a legislative summit on education under the direction of the Partnership in Education Committee. She suggested the education event might be held in conjunction with the Temecula Chamber's Legislative Summit, a regional event planned for late September or early October. Alice Sullivan reported the Chamber recently held a planning meeting for a legislative summit. The recommended discussion topics were Workers' Compensation, state budget impacts/taxes, transportation issues, environmental requirements, and energy issues. Ms. Sullivan asked the Education Committee whether they preferred to include an education component in the regional summit or to hold a separate summit for education only. Discussion was held on the overlapping of state budget issues in many areas and agreed that a joint summit to include education was preferred over a separate event. Ms. Sullivan would advise Jimmy Moore, Chair of the Partnership in Education Committee, that a joint legislative summit was planned. Dennis Frank suggested the summit could begin with several keynote speakers followed by breakout sessions on various state budget issues. The Committee discussed keynote themes such as accountability in governance and lack of local control. EDC Education Committee Meeting Minutes - July 11, 2003 Page 2 of 2 Dr. Giese offered to contact a Senate committee chairperson in higher-education with an invitation to speak at a breakout session. Other suggestions were: 1) keeping the theme constant within every discussion topic - how businesses are affected by the state budget; and 2) open-panel discussion that would allow select individuals in the audience to ask key questions. Discussion on Recruitment of Local Business Leader to sit on State Board of Education Committee Barbara Tooker reported there was no further news on the proposed formation of the California Quality Education Model (CQEM) Commission. It was unknown what the criteria would be for an appointment on the Commission or who would make the appointments. The Commission size would be represented by region. The Education Committee agreed that no action should be taken at this time for recruitment of a local person to sit on the Commission until more details were known. Mrs. Tooker offered to obtain more information on the Commission's criteria, size, etc. Higher-Education Facility Update Dr. Giese reported the proposed higher-education facility continued to be a viable project in Temecula. Developer A.G. Kading continued to work with the City of Temecula, CSU San Marcos, Mt. San Jacinto College District and UCR with plans to open the facility in 2004. Review Previous Action Items (May/June 2003) 1. DianeSessi~nst~inquire~neducati~n/businesspartnerships~rpr~gramswithLakeE~sin~reValley and Murrieta Chambers of Commerce (similar to Temecula Chamber's Partnership in Education Committee) 2. Ron Krimper to provide list of existing education/business groups affiliated with MS, IC. 3. Sonja Wilson to provide list of existing education/business groups a.l~ftliated with LEUSD 4. Harry Shank to provide list of existing education/business groups affiliated with MFUSD. 5. Diane Sessions to provide list of existing education/business groups affiliated with TVUSD 6. Diane Sessions to contact Don Barrett to invite to sit on Committee (and to determine his role as legislative liaison for CSUSM). 7. Diane Sessions to contact Sheldon Lisker to determine his role as legislative liaison for UCR 8. Diane Sessions to contact Linda Wunderlich, Valley Business ,lournal and local newspapers for press release to advise of Barbara Tooker's appointment to the State Board of Education. 9. Committee to start recruitment ora local business leader from Southwest Riverside County to sit on the CQEM Commission. 10. Committee to strategize a campaign to educate the pubHc on the severity of removing local control from school districts and p/acing control with mu/ti-level commissions at the State Ieve/. Campaign to include placing "heat" on elected officials. New Action Items (July 2003) 1. Barbara Tooker to obtain criteria information on CQEM Commission. 2. Dr. Giese to contact a Senate chairperson in higher-education to speak at the TVCC Legislative Summit. Adiourn The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY GOVERNMENT ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING Tuesday, July 15, 2003 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Jim Cauhape Ken Carlisle, Guidant Corporation Jim O'Grady, City of Temecula Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Barbara Tookcr, Temecula Valley Unified School District Call To Order Committee Chair Ken Carlisle called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. Review of June 17~ 2003 Meeting Minutes Committee members reviewed and accepted the minutes from the June 17, 2003 meeting as presented. Review of Work Completed · Mission Statement - Ken Carlisle reported the mission statement appeared to be clearly defined and finalized under thc direction of the Committee. · Team Charter / Objectives - Committee members reviewed the Team Charter that was created during the June 17 meeting. It identified various organizational goals and strategies, boundaries, improvement targets and measures, available resources, constraints and team strategies. The Committee agreed the Charter created a distinctive plan for future activities. First Committee Activity · Temeeula Chamber Legislative Summit - Ken Carlisle reported the three local chambers' joint Government Action Committee sanctioned a regional legislative summit to be held on September 25. The Temecula Chamber would be the lead agency in organizing the event. Mr. Carlisle attended the first planning meeting and suggested the EDC Government Action Committee also participate. He provided an overview of the first planning meeting which discussed the event's objective, theme, format, discussion topics and potential speakers. The Committee agreed to help plan the event along with the Temecula Chamber and other agencies. Discussion was held on the event topics and theme that best represented an EDC perspective. The Committee agreed to recommend the following discussion topics and event platform: · Budget impacts/taxes; education; Workers' Compensation/unemployment insurance; energy issues; and transportation as an alternate topic · Legislative processes for enacting bills and changing law / process of decision making / partisan politics · Scope of work and processes in legislators' respective Senate Committees · How to maintain and impact local government control · Change the event theme to reflect a more positive, dynamic outlook on business retention in California · Keep the event positive and action-oriented (where are the priorities and where should they be) · Invite regional partners from San Diego County and Inland Empire to participate EDC Government Action Committee Meeting Minutes - July 15, 2003 Page 2 of 2 Next Steps · Regional Mixer - Ken Carlisle suggested the Committee host a meeting mixer and invite other government action groups to introduce the EDC Government Action Committee. Mr. Carlisle will make recommendation to the EDC Board of Directors to hold a mixer meeting. Marketing · Committee Outreach - GAC Mission/Contacts/Involvement - Ken Carlisle suggested the Committee could act as a repository of information for other government action and legislative groups within the region. Committee members suggested outreaching to lobby groups and local legislators to tell the GAC story. Other suggestions included inviting committee involvement by linking with various websites and submitting press releases to local newspapers and to the EDC online newsletter. The Committee agreed that meeting minutes should be distributed to local city councils, county supervisors, school district boards, and Senate and Assembly representatives. Adiourn The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. Action Items: 1) Need to assess and confirm participation of Committee Members. 2) Diane Sessi~ns t~ place C~mmittee~s rec~mmendati~ns ~n EDC B~ard ~f Direct~rs meeting agenda. 3) Ken Carlisle to present recommendations for Legislative Summit and mixer to EDC Board of Directors for approval. 4) Diane Sessions to contact legislative representatives and request that Committee members receive their respective online legislative newsletters. 5) Diane Sessions to email committee meeting minutes to city councils, county supervisors, school district boards, and Senate and Assembly representatives. DRAFT DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 8:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Marlene Best, City of Lake Elsinore (via telephone) Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Rosalie Mul6, Waste Management o£the Inland Empire David Phares, D.L. Phares& Associates Carol Popejoy-Hime, Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Joan Sparkman, Temecula Valley Bank Sonja Wilson, Lake Elsinore Unified School District Roger Ziemer, Southern California Gas Co. Guests: Call To Order Committee Chair David Phares called the meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. and thanked all for attending. Review Meeting Minutes The Committee reviewed and accepted the June 10, 2003 meeting minutes as presented. Discussion on MSHCP Issues · David Phares announced the Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan was at issue in the City of Lake Elsinore. He welcomed Marlene Best to the meeting, who joined via telephone to provide a report on the MSHCP. Ms. Best reported that a study session with Lake Elsinom City Council, County and other agencies was scheduled for Friday, July 11, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. in the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center to discuss the MSHCP and its impacts to the City of Lake Elsinore. She further reported that Council believed the MSHCP was an overall positive plan for the county. However, the majority of council members were highly concerned over the County's proposal to set aside approximately 10,000 acres within Lake Elsinore for habitat conservation under the RCIP. The County would require every city or community to accept the MSHCP proposal and adopt an ordinance by September 1. Ms. Best reported that any jurisdictions that did not adopt an ordinance would not be eligible to receive Measure A funds for local road improvements. At issue was the City's future economic development, as more than 60% of developable land was proposed under the MSHCP. City staff was preparing a fiscal analysis to show the basic impacts the City would sustain if land zoned for commercial and residential development was committed to habitat conservation. At completion of the fiscal analysis, the City would propose its own habitat conservation plan they believed to be more equitable. EDC Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Meeting Minutes - July 10, 2003 Page 2 of 3 After discussion, the Committee requested that Ms. Best provide a recommendation on how the EDC could support the City of Lake Elsinore. Ms. Best suggested the Committee look at the MSHCP from a business perspective. She requested that committee members attend the study session on July 11 and bring information back to the Board of Directors for further action. Discussion on EMWD Brineline Tour · Diane Sessions reported that EDC Director Melanie Nieman of EMWD would arrange for a breakfast presentation and tour of the brine line on August 21, in conjunction with the regular Board of Directors Meeting. Committee Reports · Due to discussion of the MSHCP, committee reports were tabled for discussion at the August meeting. Review Previous Action Items · Tabled for discussion at the August meeting. Previous Action Items (May & June 2003) 1. Diane Sessions to contact Bill l/ardoulis to speak to the group about the "Tunnel to Orange County"project. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 2. Sonia Wilson to inquire about employee shuttle service into Southwest Riverside County. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 3. Sonia Wilson to obtain RTA bus routes/schedules into Southwest Riverside County from other areas and to obtain route maps. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 4. Bob Larsen to follow up on activities of Distribution Management Association of Southern California -Inland Empire. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 5. Diane Sessions to contact Phil Rizzo, Director of March Joint Powers Authority, for meeting dates/times. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 6. Roger Ziemer to invite Bill Blankenship with the BIA to attend committee meetings. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 7. Diane to create a roster of various Internet sites relevant to the Committee's focus. (carried from May 2003 meeting) 8. David Phares to: a) determine what aspects of the proposed RCIP will negatively impact the City of Lake Elsinore and; b) make committee recommendations for further action to the EDC Board on June 19. (carried from June 2003 meeting) 9. Diane Sessions to email the Committee and other partners the CETAP meeting schedule. (carried from June 2003 meeting) 10. David Phares to attend a joint meeting with the City of Lake Elsinore and MSHCP Focus Group on June 18. (carried from June 2003 meeting) EDC Transportation and Infi'astructure Committee Meeting Minutes - July 10, 2003 Page 3 of 3 New Action Items {July 2003): 1. Contact Marlene Best & Dick Watenpaugh to make presentation of MSHCP issues at EDC Board of Directors Meeting on duly 1 Z 2. Place RCTC & RTA Discussion (S. Wilson) on August agenda. Next Meeting Date Thursday, August 14, 2003 at 8:00 a.m. in the Workforce Development Center, 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula. Ad,iourn The meeting adjourned at 9:10 a.m. (909) 6eO~XX) ECONOMIC ALLIANCE TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Bradley J. Hudson Assistant County Executive Officer Riverside County EDA Lori Moss Assistant City Manager City of Murfieta Stevie Field Manager, Business Development August 14, 2003 Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula Marlene Best Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Dear Partnem: Please consider this an update on the markeUng activities for the Alliance as required in the Southwest Riverside County Marketing for Business Attraction Agreement. Leads A total of five leads were generated during the month of July. Two of these leads were direct contacts to the Alliance via phone or web site response and three were as a result of the arlicle in Expansion Management magazine. '03-'04 Marketing Plan/MOU I am pleased to announce that the SWRC Economic Alliance '03-'04 MOU was recently approved by all three c~ councils. In addition, the City of Lake Elsinore was able to provide the full $25,000 cash contribution. I am confident that this will be the most successful Alliance year yet. As a side note: please forward four MOU original signature pages to my office at your earliest convenience. Once received, I will provide each ci~ with a signed original. Cuffing Edge Marketing I am currently working with Cuffing Edge Marketing on the following projects: Branding Campaign/Focus group CD Rom Business Resource Guide th Updates on these projects will be provided at our next Alliance meeting on August 27 . GIS/Website Our GIS site continues to attract many visitors. During the month of July, we had over 1000 visitors on our website and over 460 visitom on our GIS. I am currently working with Cuffing Edge Marketing on the update of our website. We will be adding an additional link to the GIS on the home page as well as our most recent demogmphicdata. We will also be adding additional links and contact information on various pages. The expected completion date for this project is August 25th. Business Attraction Advisory Committee The Business Attraction Advisory Committee (BAAC), held a branding focus group meeting on July 24th, Cuffing Edge Marketing facilitated the meeting and provided great direction and examples of various branding campaigns. A second "brainstorming" meeting was held on August 8th. Committee membem were asked to email branding suggestions to me prior to the August meeting. Several creative ideas were received and discussed dudng this second meeting. Many ideas were eliminated and othem were marked as possibilities, however, they may need ~weaking'. Another brainstorming session is scheduled for 2:00 p.m., Tuesday August 26th at the WDC in Temecula. This will provide committee membem an additional opportunity to work on branding ideas and slogans. Demooraphic Report The most recent 'At a Glance' demographic piece is completed and has been disl~buted to many area brokers. A mass mailing of these pieces will go out next week to all real estate professionals in Southern California. If you need additional copies please contact me and I will drop them off at your office. Trade shows On behalf of the Alliance, I am scheduled to attend the following trade show: · CoroNet (Corporate Office Real Estate Network) October 11th -- 15TM, Atlanta, GA The Alliance is the Sapphire Sponsor for the Atlanta CoroNet, and as a result, we will have several opportunities to spread the word about SWRC. Our sponsomhip includes a 10 x 10 booth space, complimentary full registration, CoroNet Leademhip Reception co-sponsomhip, Sapphire Sponsor signage throughout event, registration packet insert, pre and post conference mailing lists, recognilJon in all pm-conference mailings, logo mcogni'don in conference program and sponsomhip ribbons. You may recall that the Alliance was to be the Sapphire Sponsor at the Toronto, Canada CoroNet. Due to the SARS travel warning that was issued, the show was cancelled and our sponsorship was rolled over to the Atlanta show. "Taste of SWRC" Event I continue to work on vadous components of the October '03 'Taste of SWRC" event which is tentatively scheduled for October 24th - 26th. We have run into a small glitch in that the ~'emecula Creek Inn does not have any available moms for Friday, Oct. 24th. I called Pechanga, and they have plenty of moms available, however, no mom for the panel luncheon on Friday. Rooms at Pechanga am $149.00 per night. I called Churon B & B in Wine Counb7 and they have enough rooms, however, the moms am $250.00 per night. Chumn is able to accommodate us for a luncheon. Please let me know at your earliest convenience how you would like me to proceed. We can either go forward with the planned fall event or postpone until spring. If you would like to go forward with the event in October, please forward me the contact information for any potential business decision maker's you would like to invite. On an ongoing basis, I attend the following meetings: Temecula/Murrieta Group SWRC EDC Board meetings Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Government Action Committee Business Attraction Advisory Committee LE EDC I-15-1 Partnership Meetings Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest Riverside Count~ region UCR Connect meetings If you need any addi~onal information or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 600-6066. Sincerely, Stevie Field Manager, Business Development Copy: Belinda Graham John Viafora Robert Moran PROM :'TOM AND PAT MARTINEZ FAX NO. : 909-305-1218 Au~. 11 2003 08:47AM P2 TEMECUt.^ VALLEY FILM COUNCII. Pat Mar tiu¢,~ P~¢c~dvo Director TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COUNCIL ACTIVITIES REPORT JULY 2003 Sunny Poalson Thomas Steve Phelp~ Co-Pre~dd~at Ellen Watkins Vice President Patty Slaton Maggie Allen Judl S taata OIq~ICERS & MEMBERS OF T~ FILM COUNCIL: Pat Ivlm'tincz, Executive Dircgtor, Sunny Thomas, CO-Presideng Stew Phelps,,CO-Presid~nr, Ellen Watkim. Xrm~ l~:sident; I-Iclcn Scorns. Secmtazy/Treasu~ Eve Craig; Judi S!~,rq & Maggi Allen. Scan McCarthy & Russ McDonald T~. BUSINF~$ OF 'ftt~ ~ COIJNCIL: Priorit~ itea~s f~r th~ Film Council will coflfiflne a~ follo~s_' Monthly mailing of colored "Discover Temecula" flyer to tnoduccr% directors aM location scouts continue. * Follow up with inte,~cd Film nmlcerS who showed an interest in filming in Temecuht The rcdecdgn of thc new Production Guide is completed and the The Axt Deparm~nt is in the process of ~n,lifing it and will be ready for printing by September 25th. Thc delay is cMe to thc need for additional photos ~,tl the collecfon of art work fxom thc various advertisers. Th~ Student Film Fe~ival is moving right along_ We have five new members which all ~ a cl~gre~ inFilmlng, dilecting and producing Jerold l~denou~, one of our new membem, has produced two Student Film Festivals in the high d~.ser t and vail be producing kis tlfird in 2004. Wc welcome thee profc~io--I ~ and anticipate a very Working with Sheri Davis. thc Director of thc I,l,,d Empire Film Commlqsion tO cleateworkshops for the localH~gh Schools, The program will be callcd"Pathwaya to l:RodiictionTM -and. will ~ this fall * Fmld P, aising: A location is still needed for a carnival site. Sunny Thoma~ and Ellen W~*~q.,~ (Realtors) ~ actiwly looking, * Th~ FiLm Council businc~ plan is La work- Board Members and thc Director are in thc proce$s of creating the plan_ ~ROM ~ TOM AND PAT MARTINEZ FAX NO. : 909-305-1~18 Aug. 11 ~003 08:~8AM P3 Activity Report for July Page 2 lqLM IN TF. MECUI. A: * Thanke to Sheri Davis of thc Inland Empire Film ComrniqqiO/1, illquJrers for filming m Tcmecala have picked up. Ori..oi,,~ Productions car Scene are Looking for a straight away streci with a steep incline and descent, ending in a mud puddle. I4-a~t Baiant¢, a local film maker is the process of making a movie fi~med in Teallecu~ Team l-'/alprin Co. is looking for an apple orchard and bare v/n~rard for filming. Phone calls continue to increase for filmi~,g hxformation and the Film & Music Feztival. We anticipate the majolity Of tlle phone calls coming in will be for the Festival_ IEtechNEWS August 2003 - Volume 2; Issue 10 Page 1 of 2 Gloria Wolnick From: IEtechSOURCE [bunderhill@ietechsource.org] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 8:26 AM To: Gloria Wolnick Subject: IEtechNEW$ August 2003 - Volume 2; Issue 10 Executive Dialogue -An Exclusive Business Round Table Discussion Series for Business Executives - brought to you by IEtechSOURCE more... IEtechSOURCE Fall SBIR Conference. Federal Government Research & Development Funding - learn how to get involved College Campus Proposed for the City of Temecula more... Riverside County is Enjoying Unprecedented Economic Growth more... P~,10.1Gat~$1EIli~.., Bart Greenberu Brief Overview of Technology Transfer New Laws on Reporting Electronic Break-Ins more... Preston Gates Ellis LLP Write for Ask the Exper~ WHAT'S HAPPENING AT IE1;~OI~SOURCE Diamond Venture Forum - three technology clients will be pitching 15 venture capitalists on August 13, 2003 ~CHN~i[~QY EDUC~ IQ~4 Learning gets real outside class EDUCATION: A grant-funded Medfly research project teaches math, science, and statistics (reprinted with permission from The Press-Enterprise) California State University, San Bernardino - Center for the Commerdalization of Advanced Technologies spOtLIGHT Your Regional Technology Alliance (IEtechSOURCE) Looses Support From The State What Will Happen To IEtechSOURCE pr~SlIRELEASES August 4, 2003 Luminex Announces 64-Bit PCI to ESCON Protocol Processor more... July 14, 2003 I/O Software Releases New Version of SecureSuite XS to Partners more... July 10, 2003 IEtechSOURCE Becomes Southern California's Leading Small Business Innovative Research Program Center for Small Businesses more... 8/11/2003 IEtechSOURCE.org Page 1 of 1 IEtechSOURCE.or ^bo.t us "I !Etech NEWS Entrepreneurial Prograr¢'~ Late Breaking Business Development Technology Work"force IEtechSOURCE 120! Research Park Drive, Suite ~100 Riverside, CA 92507 Phone: 909-779-6700 Fax: 909-779-0675 ZE-TechNews I Tech Calendar I Sponsorship College Campus Proposed for the City of Temecula An attempt to bring higher education to Temecula is well on its way to becoming a reality. The Temecula City Council is reviewing a preliminary study of a proposed education complex for use by colleges as a Temecula satellite campus. Campus plans include a conference center, stores, multi-story classroom buildings, more than 250 apartments or condos (which approximately 50 will be rent affordable), offices and a day care center. Current Is Archives The campus development, by Capistrano Beach developer A.G. Kading is proposed to be built on a 32-acre site located at the northwest corner of Dendy Street and Diaz Road owned by the City of Temecula. The project will total more than 226,700 square feet and include 1,530 parking spaces, an outdoor grass amphitheater and stage. The complex will bring many benefits to the Temecula Valley, such as consolidating local college classes in one location, allowing area students to take classes closer to home, providing a training center for workers seeking jobs in southwest Riverside County and helping the city provide additional housing for residents with Iow to moderate incomes. The first phase of the project includes one of the two proposed 57,000 sq. ft. classroom towers, which will be leased to local colleges such as UC Riverside, Cai State San Marcos and IVlt. San .]acinto Community College. The Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County will hold its Quarterly Luncheon on August 28th at Temecula Creek Inn. The luncheon will include a presentation on the proposed Higher Education Campus. For tickets or more information call (909) 600-6064. lEtechSOURCE,org 2003 I Privacy Agreement http://www.ietechsottrce.org/ie.php?c-~ewsletter&cx--x 1060313554 8/11/2003 IEtechSOURCE.org Page 1 of 2 IEtechSOURCE.or; About Us ~, IEtechNEWS Entrepreneurial Program;} August - Volume 2; Tssue 10 Business Development Technology Worlfforce IEtechSOURCE 1201 Research Park Drive, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92507 Phone: 909-779-6700 Fax: 909-779-0675 IE-TechNews I Tech Calendar I Sponsorship Late Breaking · Executive Dialogue - An Exclusive Business Round Table Discussion Series for Business Executives - brought to you by TEtechSOURCE more... · IEtechSOURCE Fall SBIR Conference - Federal Government Research & Development Funding - learn how to get involved more... . College Campus Proposed for the City of Temecula more... Current Is Archives Spotlight . Your Regional Technology Alliance (IEtechSOURCE) Looses Support From The State: What Will Happen To IEtechSOURCE more... Community Corner · Riverside County is Enjoying Unprecedented Economic Growth more... Ask the Expert · Brief Overview of Technology Transfer Issues more.,. · New Laws on Reporting Electronic Break-Ins more,,. What's Happening at TEtechSOURCE . Diamond Venture Forum - three technology clients will be pitching 15 venture capitalists on August 13, 2003 more... Technology in Education · Learning gets real outside class EDUCATION: A grant-funded Nedfly research project teaches math, science, and statistics (reprinted with permission from The Press-Enterprise) more... · California State University, San Bernardino - Center for the Commercialization of Advanced Technologies more.., Prese Releases · August 4, 2003: Luminex Announces 64-Bit PCI to ESCON Protocol Processor more,., · I/O Software Releases New Version of SecureSuite XS to Partners more.,, · IEtechSOURCE Becomes Southern California's Leading Small Business Innovative Research Program Center for Small Businesses more... http://www.ietechsource.org/ie.php?c-~aewsletter&cx--x 1060304796 8/11/2003 DAVID CARl. SON / STAF~ PHOTeGRAPHER Golfers cruise up to the ninth tee box after leaving Redhawk Golf Club's signature eighth hole, The course is one of five area courses that will be featured in a new television sbow marketing the area as a golfing destination. Temecula golf courses to be showcased worldwide TERI FIGUEROA STAFF ~/RITER TEMECULA -- How odd it might be; during a long flight on United 'Air- lines, to see a half,hour show highlighting nothing but Temecula Valley. as a golf vacation destination. But that just may be what happens. The city, the Chamber of Commerce, area golf courses and other busi- nesses are teaming up to produce their own seg- ment of a new television series known as California Golf. The Temecula seg- ment will be one of 13 shows featuring golfing destinations across the stale. The show will play dur- ing flights longer than two hours on United Airlines, as well as on the Golf Channel domestically and in Europe, said Shaw Ko- bre, the vice president of Santa Rosa-based In The Loop Goff, which is produc- ing the series. Other regions across the state -- including North San Diego County, Lake Tahoe and the San Francis- co Bay Area -- are also committed to their own episodes, Kobre said Wech~esday. Each area will get its own episode for $20,000, a bargain price in the world of professional video pro- duction. Kobre said his company is investing about $200,000 to produce the se- The goal of the series is to market the state as a goff vacation destination. Kobre, whose In The Loop Golf company wrote the California Official State Golf Guide for the state's Travel and Tourism Commission, said the state has the second highest number of 4.5 and 5-star golf courses in the country, as rated by the readers of Golf Digest. But, Kobre said, data from the National Golf Foundation shows that Cal- ifornia ra~ks sixth as a des- tinafion state for golfers. · GOLF, El 2 GOLF Continued ~rom Local buy' in Five of the area's public courses stgned on and will each get three minutes of the show dedicated to them, said Carrie Thomas, the chamber's tourism director. "At first, it was supposed to be four golf courses;' she said. "But we had such a demand, we allowed a fifth." The city of Temecula is kicking in $5,000 toward the show, said Gloria Wolnick, the cary's marketing coordinato.r. The golf courses are paying in the neighborhood of $1~q00 to $2,000 for their three-minute features. Other local business- es -- including a winery, shut- tie company that serves the wineries, a hot-air balloon com- pany and hotels -- also will pay to be featured, she said. The. business'es also get to keep the footage and use it for their own purposes, Kobre said. Randy Kish, director of goff at CrossC~eek in De Luz, said he is champtomn, g the television 'show as an invest- ment in developing the area as an affordable family vfica- tion destination. The chal, lenge, he said, is simply that most goffars don't think of the area as such. "I'm looking five to 10 years down the road," Kish said. "This is the first step to gettiqg ,Temecula on the map." And it's an opportunity that the individual golf cours- es could never have afforded on,their own, said Brenda Kemball, director of market- - zng and sales of the SCGA Golf Course in Murrieta. "People don~t come 'to Temecula for one course or one winery," Kemball said. "They come to visit Temecula as a whole." International piay The show is the brainchild of London-based production company Black Diamond. which has done a similar se- des ~-~ Ski America -- for an international audience. The reason the show is go- ing to the international mar- ket, KobYe said, is because Black Diamond has a relanon- ship with European television channels, and was thus an easy sell. Kobra said the golf series' has gotten the green light to play,0n the Trav~el Char~nel in most European countries, as well as Sky Sports in the Unit- ed Kingdom and Fox Sports Anstralia. Turn on,the Global Network in Canada, Azreca in Mexico'or J Sky Sports in Japan next year, and'there's a shot the Tem~cula show might be on as well. The series will .be dubbed into foreign languages where necessary. BUt is Temecula shooting for the moon by Uymg to mar- ket to international golfers? "It's a test. It's all u-iai and error;' Kemball said. "(The in- ternational ~narketing) is a bit out there, but why not give it a shot? For ihe amount of dol- lars, it's a no-brainerY ,Thomas said the produc- non planning is slated ko start m the next .few weeks. At this point taping will likely be ~ done in the fail. Kobre laid. Th~ goal. is to get it on the air In addition to playing on sports station internationally, the plan is to offer the series -- once-it's edited and com- plete- to domestic carriers like Fox Sports, Kobre said. Kobre, who also authored a nearly 700-page guide of courses throughout the state, said the golf show will have at least a ~wo-year shelf life. The Ski America series has run on United Airlines for three years, he said. ~;ontact staff writer Tefi Figueroa at 1909) 676~4315, Ext. 2623, or tfigueroa@califo~rpja~n:c~ -- - THE CALIFORNIAN 7/31103 ( ;;k ~(' 3.'") By San Diego's Dean Of Restaurant Reviewers All-New Edition TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~,~-,~ CITY MANAGER ' ~.,) CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 2003 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 July, 2003. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report July / August 2003 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: August 26, 2003 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. 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. ACOE and RCFC are requesting the relocation of the mitigation site to avoid conflict with Murrieta Creek Improvement Project. A letter was sent from the City to ACOE for possible alternate mitigation sites. The City received a response from ACOE approving the relocation of the mitigation site. We are waiting for an appraisal report on a specific piece of property. 2. Children's Museum This project will construct a 7,500 square foot children's museum. The contractor, Fleming Construction, is completing the punch list for the building shell improvements that include the construction of the gazebo entrance, improvements to the restrooms and other items to make the building suitable for the installation of the museum exhibits and use by the public. 2H Construction is continuing with the repairs to the building structure. Mold remediation is complete and the demolition of the floor is proceeding. Once the contractor receives the OK from the structural engineer, the floor joists will be replaced. Due to the extent of structural repairs required, the completion date for the building shell improvements has been extended to the fall of 2003. 3. 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. Bullard Construction has begun building the sound wall at the northeasterly limits of the project along the right-of-way of Jedediah Smith Road just north of Muirfield Drive. The footings have been poured in this area and the block will be placed thereafter. Block at this location is special order (split face) and will not be available from the manufacturer until August. The contractor has poured some of the footings on the west side of Pechanga Parkway and is moving south with the removals. 4. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This project will widen Rancho California Road Bridge over Murrieta Creek 35 feet on the south and 15 feet on the north to provide four additional traffic lanes. CIDH pier pilings are complete, and falsework is being placed for the bridge removal stage. Completion of the project is anticipated in the Spring of 2004 although the allowable working days extend into August of 2004. R:\MonthlyActivityRepor t\ClP\2003Uuly.doc 5. 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. The contract was awarded to International Pavement Solutions of San Bernardino. The contract amount is $36,363.00. Construction is complete. Change Order #1 was revised by contractor. It will be reissued to the contractor during week of 8-18-03. Notice of Completion set for the 9/16/2003 City Council meeting. 6. Annual Slurry Seal Project 200212003 This is the annual project to slurry seal various areas in the City. The Vail Ranch area is the area of concentration this fiscal year. The contractor has completed the work. The area that was slurry sealed is just south of Temecula Creek between Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road. Contractor mailed the Maintenance Bond. Acceptance and filing Notice of Completion is set for Sept. 16, 2003. 7. Citywide Concrete Repairs - FY2002/2003 Annual maintenance project to repaiflreplace miscellaneous damaged concrete improvement including sidewalk, curb & gutter, driveway approaches, etc. A pre-construction meeting was held with Malton Construction on June 9. The work started on July 14 and it will be completed on September 6. 8. Pavement Rehabilitation Program - FY 2002~ 2003 The project involves removing and replacing the pavement in the two westbound lanes of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway. This area was identified as needing rehabilitation in the report "Update of Citywide Pavement Management Program 2002- 2007" prepared by Berryman & Henigar dated December 10, 2002. R. J. Noble Co. started the work on 8/08/03 with the installation of the video detection system and the temporary striping. Pulverization of the asphalt is currently being performed. EnGen is performing material testing services. Construction is scheduled to conclude no later than September 2003. 9. John Warner Road Assessment District Under this project an assessment district was formed. This district includes the construction of street and storm drain improvements in the John Warner Road area. The street improvement plans and the storm drain plans were completed and the Assessment District was advertised for construction bids. Bid opening took place on July 29, with McLaughlin Engineering being the apparent Iow bidder at $1,059,569.50, which is below the engineer's estimate. The formation of the assessment district was approved and the construction contract was awarded at the City Council meeting on August 12. A pre-construction meeting is scheduled for August 27. 10. Rancho California Road Widening & Median Modifications East of Ynez Road 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 2 R:\MonthlyActivilyReport\ClP\2003~July.doc Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. In addition, a dedicated right turn lane will be added on the eastbound direction on Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Bid opening took place on July 29, with RJ Noble being the apparent Iow bidder at $622,269.98; this figure is approximately 40% higher than the engineer's estimate. Additional funding and the contract award were approved in the August 12 City Council meeting. A pro-construction meeting will be held the week of August 25. 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 (formerly Pala Road) to its ultimate width from the Pechanga Parkway Bridge to Pechanga road. The City is currently working with Caltrans' Local Assistance and City's Environmental Consultant to expedite the environmental approval process. The Preliminary Environmental Document Classification (NEPA) of the project has been determined to be an "Environmental Assessment" (EA). Required technical studies (involving Federal action) will be included in the EA. The Planning Department completed Addendum No. 3 to the Wolf Creek EIR and the Notice of Determination for the project. The Addendum and NOD were needed to satisfy all CEQA requirements for the project. The City will return checkprints to DMJM+HARRIS when all of the street plans/specifications/utility companies' comments aro completed. This project will be divided into two stages. The first stage is to construct the storm drain triple box culvert and the channel improvements north of Loma Linda. Construction of this stage is scheduled for Fall 2003. The second stage will construct the remaining street improvements and drainage structures. Construction of this stage will start once the first stage is completed. 2. Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Phase II This project will construct the storm drain triple box culvert and the channel improvements north of Loma Linda. As part of this stage the entire Pechanga Parkway, Phase II project will be environmentally cleared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Planning Department completed Addendum No. 3 to the Wolf Creek EIR and the Notice of Determination for the project. The Addendum and NOD was needed to satisfy all CEQA requirements for the project. The City is finalizing the legal descriptions and plats needed to transfer Right of Way to RCFC & WCD for maintenance of the storm drain system. The City submitted an design/construction agreement to RCFC & WCD for their review and approval. The agreement included an overall right of way map and irrevocable offers of dedications with associated legal descriptions and plats. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is requesting that the City and RCFC & WCD make additional changes to the lower section of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The consultant will redesign the outlet facility. When the USACE, City, and RCFC & WCD finally agree upon a solution, the consultant will complete the redesign and the plans will be resubmitted to RCFC & WCD for final check and approval. 3 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIPk2003~July.doc 3. 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 6/13/02. The City's application was not among the approved ones. The City resubmitted its application for the second round of funding approvals later this year. Construction is delayed until Spring 2004, provided that the City receives funding. Utility services construction will be coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II Street Improvements. 4. 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 under review. Plans were sent to all utilities and utility issues are being addressed. The environmental documents have been finalized by the City's Planning Department and the public comment period will begin when library funding is granted which may not take place for some time. Work is being coordinated with the library project. 5. Landscaping and Sidewalk On SR 79 South (Old Town Front Street to Pechanga Parkway) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewalk, irrigation, and landscaping along State Route 79 South between Old Town Front Street and Pechanga Parkway. The City has just received final planting and irrigation plans for this project. Civil plans have been sent back for minor revisions. Planting and irrigation plans were forwarded to Homeowners Association property management office on 8-11-03 and they received a positive feedback, we anticipate receiving the civil plans by 8-25-03. 6. Temecula Sports Complex A new 40+ Acres sports complex will be built at the corner of Pechanga Parkway and Deer Hollow Way. The City Council approved the Conceptual Master Plan of the project and funding at the January 14, 2003 meeting. RJM, the landscape architect, continues to work on the design of the complex along with coordination efforts with the developer and utility companies. 7. Bridge Barrier Rail Upgrade, Rainbow Canyon Road over Pechanga Creek/Del Rio Road over Empire Creek This project will replace the existing barrier rails of the Rainbow Canyon Bridge over Pechanga Creek and the Del Rio Road Bridge over Empire Creek. Simon Wong Engineering (SWE) delivered the 100% Plans and Engineer's Cost Estimate in early October. The Specifications are complete. The request for authorization for construction funding was sent to Caltrans on 1/14/03. Caltrans responded via e-mail on 8/1/03 saying that their Obligational Authority (OA) for all local federal aid projects has reached its limit for this year and will not be available until the new federal budget is approved sometime after 10/1/03. Once Caltrans approval is received (sometime after 10/1/03)the project will go out to bid. 8. Fire Station -Wolf Creek Site A fire station will be built at the Wolf Creek Site. The Plans have been approved with the exception of the grading plans. We are waiting for the parcel to be recorded and an APN so an address can be assigned and utility services finalized. The Developer was noticed of the need in March 2003. 4 R:\MonthlyAcfivi~yRel~or t\CIP\2003~July.doc 9. Vail Ranch Park (Near Pauba Valley School) - Add Amenities This project will add amenities, including play equipment, to the recently annexed Vail Ranch Park. RHA Landscape Architects/Planners Inc. is the design firm. The final design documents were resubmitted to the City during the last period. There were still comments on the plans, which were transmitted back to the design consultant. Revisions will be made and the project will be advertised for bids once the plan review is complete and all comments are addressed. 10. 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." A progress meeting was held on June 30th. We are working with US Army Corps of Engineers and Riverside County Flood Control to coordinate the trail design with the Murrieta Creek Improvement project. The next progress meeting will be on Sept. 30, 2003. 11. State Route 79 South Medians Under this project medians will be constructed on State Route 79 South within the City of Temecula limits. The City Council approved a design agreement with Project Design Consultants (PDC) on May 27, 2003. PDC just received an encroachment permit to perform field surveying. 12. Guardrail Installation and Replacement On Rainbow Canyon Road In this project, old guardrails will be replaced and new guardrails will be installed in needed locations on Rainbow Canyon Road within the City of Temecula. Authorization to request proposals was received from Caltrans and the RFP went out on June 11,2003. Proposals were received on July 1, 2003 and negotiations with the highest ranked firm is in progress. 13. Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Under this project, 10,000 square feet remnant pamel west of Front Street, which was created by the realignment of First Street, will be landscaped. Project plans are complete. Specifications will be completed shortly. 14. Rancho California Road Widening, Old Town Front Street to 1-15 (Southside) This project will provide a right turn lane for southbound 1-15 motorists and explore the possibility of providing a dual left turn lane from westbound RCR to southbound Front Street. Top design consultant had been chosen with contract approval in September. Title reports for impacted properties have been received. 15. Old Town Community Theatre This project will construct a 20,000 square foot community theater complex and refurbishes the existing Mercantile Building. Plans are through Building plan check. Top construction management form has been chosen with award consideration in late August or early September. City Council approved the pre-qualification of the general contractors on July 22, 2003. We are in the process of acquiring Fourth Street right-of-way for utilities and access. Permit applications were completed and sent to resource agencies the week of May 12th and should be finalized in late August early September. The Regional Water Board and Army Corps are likely to require revegetation of storm drain disturbance per a pre-approved plan. 5 R:\MonthlyAcfivityReporfiCIP\2003Uuly.doc 16. Fire Station - Northeast Site (Roripaugh Ranch) This project will construct a new fire station in the north part of the City. Amendment of the design agreement, for final design, was approved at the 6/10/03 Council meeting. The developer has deposited the additional funding necessary to complete final design and bid the project. 90% drawings will be submitted for Building plan check in August. 17. Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation - Phase II This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue from approximately 650 ft south of Overland Drive to Rancho California Road. The rehabilitation will include pavement overlay and road/driveway reconstruction. The RFPs for design engineering services were sent out 07/25/03 and were due by 08/15/03. Three proposals were just received and they will be reviewed during the next period. Kleinfelder obtained approved traffic control plans and their encroachment permit on Thursday, 08/14/03; they are scheduled to begin boring/drilling on Tuesday, 08/19/03. 18. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moraga Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. City staff is currently designing the project. Street and landscaping design completion is scheduled for April 2003. Widening Diaz Road an additional 20 feet to accommodate four lanes of traffic has been added to the project. In addition, a signal at Rancho Way and Diaz has been added to this project and is being designed in house. The project is on-hold, except for the two traffic signals at Diaz Rd. & Rancho Way and Business Park & Rancho California Road. Right of Way processing is anticipated to be completed soon. Association CC&R restrictions applicable to the proposed roadway are currently being appraised for valuation. 19. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson This project will widen Winchester road between Enterprise Cimle 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 n- house design continues. Right-of-way plats and legals have been prepared and the acquisition process is underway. Right-of-way plats and legals have been prepared and the acquisition process is underway. Offers were sent out to the affected property owners on 08-05-03. 20. Bus Bench Upgrades Under this project, bus benches and shade structures will be installed and existing ones will be upgraded at various locations. Project research on locations of current bus stops, existing bus bench/shade structures, bus bench/shade structure costs and RTA routes is complete. Bus bench/shade structure design and location options were reviewed and a report with recommendations was prepared and is being reviewed by management. PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGE 1. 1-15/SR 79 South Interchange - Project Study Report (PSR) This project will modify the 1-15/SR 79 South Interchange to accommodate projected future traffic. 6 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\ClP\2003Lluly.doc The City will proceed with the modified alternative #5. The draft Project Study Report was submitted to Caltrans and the City for review and comments on April 7, 2003. The City received Caltrans comments on May 22, 2003. The City's responses to the comments were sent back to Caltrans on June 3, 2003. Caltrans is scheduling a meeting with FHWA to determine the proper documentation for this project. 2. French Valley Parkway Overcrossing and Interchange, Project Report (PR), Plans Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) Preparation This project will construct an interchange between Winchester Road Interchange and the 1-15/I-215 split. The consultant continues to work on the Project Report. A PDT meeting was held on 07/24/03. The Value Analysis session has been completed. In the next couple of weeks, the Value Analysis report will be sent out for review and comments. In addition, this project was chosen to be the Federal Highway Administration's pilot program to accelerate projects. The program is called Accelerated Construction Technology Transfer (ACTT). Workshops related to this program will be held in October. We are also pursuing the acquisition of a number of properties to protect them from development. 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 Commerce 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 is reviewing the consultant's original proposal with additional costs due the funding delay. 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 and 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). 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 7 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\ClP\2003XJuly.doc 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. 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 CIP. 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-builts 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. 8 R:\MonthlyAciivityReport\CIP\2003XJuiy .doc I- Z LU UJ --I I-- Z ~U ILl 0 Q. --I I-- I,LI I-- Z ILl LU 0 Q. I- Z 133 0 (J LU uJ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent August 4, 2003 Monthly Activity Report - July, 2003 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of July, 2003: SIGNS A. B. C. Total signs replaced Total signs installed Total signs repaired 24 27 51 32 2~222 39 139 0 15 2,310 Il. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns IIl. 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 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. VII. STENCILING A. 302 New and repainted legends B. 0 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 50 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 48 service order requests for the month of June~ 2003. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 180 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.July~ 2003 was $ 8~190.00 compared to $ 72~224.00 for the month of.June~ 2003. Account No. 5402 $ 8,190.00 Account No. 5401 $ - 0- Account No. 999-5402 $ - 0 - Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer (CIP/Traffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer (Land Development) DATE ACCOUNT STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of July, 2003 DESCRIPTION I TOTAL COST STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK I SIZE CONTRACTOR: DBX, INC. Date: 07/11/03 # 5402 YNEZ ROAD @ PROMENADE MALL NORTH REPLACELOOPDETECTORS TOTAL COST ] $ 3,190.00 CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT. Date: 07/08/03 # 5402 Date: # Date: # CITYWIDE MECHANICAL WEED ABATEMENT, TRASH PICK-UP, DEBRIS PICK-UP TOTAL COST I $ 5,000.00 TOTALCOST [ TOTALCOST I CONTRACTOR: Date: # Date: # CONTRACTOR: TOTALCOST I TOTALCOST I Date: # Date: # TOTALCOST ] TOTALCOST TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 $ 8,190.00 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/03/03 45108 CAMINO CARUNA REMOVED 10 S.F. OFGRAFFITI 07/08/03 28566 PUJOL STREET REMOVED 201 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/08/03 48450 FELIX VALDEZ REMOVED 132 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/09/03 FELIX VALDEZ AT 6TM STREET REMOVED 82 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/09/03 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT TAJO REMOVED 60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/10/03 43511 CALLE ALACIDO REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/I 8/03 REDHAWK AT OVERLAND TRAIL REMOVED I S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/21/03 CITYWIDE REMOVED 400 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/28/03 N/E CORNER MARGARITA AT LA SERENA REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/28/03 29290 MADISON REMOVED 217 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/28103 MAIN STREET BRIDGE REMOVED 645 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/28/03 1-15 AT 79 SO. REMOVED 230 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/28/03 CALLE ARANDA AT SOLANA REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/31/03 MADISON AT SANBORN REMOVED 288 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 07/31/03 31176 CORTE TALAVERA REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITi REMOVED 2~310 TOTAL LOCATIONS 15 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O,W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/08/03 AREA gl CLEANED & CHECKED 5 CATCH BASINS 07/09/03 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED Il CATCH BASINS 07/10/03 AREA gl CLEANED & CHECKED 26 CATCH BASINS 07/15/03 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 20 CATCH BASINS 07/16/03 AREA gl CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 07/17/03 AREA gl CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 07/21/03 AREA gl CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 07/23/03 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 2 CATCH BASINS 07/24/093 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 1 CATCH BASINS 07/28/03 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 21 CATCH BASINS 07/30/03 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 07/30/03 AREAS 3 & 4 CLEANED & CHECKED 10 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 139 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/10/03 PORFINO AT VIA ANGELES TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/16/03 LA SSERENA AT POOLE TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/16/03 AMARITA AT VIA RAMIA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/17/03 VINCENT MORAGA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/21/03 VALLEJO AT LA PAZ TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 07/22/03 SO. GENERAL KEARNEY AT LA SERENA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/22/03 DIAZ- DENDY TO WINCHESTER TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 07/22/03 31268 HEYWAFA TRIMMED I RO.W. TREES 07/23/03 PECHANGA AT CUPEIqO TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 07/29/03 33021 ROSSMAN CIRCLE TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 CALLE EMPLEADO AT WINCHESTER TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 NICHOLAS ROAD 500' S/O NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 40385 CALLE MEDUSA TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 CORTE CANTERA AT CORTE ARANDA TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 VILRIS AT MONTELEGRO TRIMMED I R.O.W. 'FREES 07/31/03 VIA RAM1 AT AMARITA WAY TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 VIA RAMI AT VIA AROEL TRIMMED 1. R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 ABRATO AT LENA WAY TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 McCABE AT AMARITA WAY TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 07/31/03 SUNNY MEADOWS AT JEREZ TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 32 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF JULY, 2003 TOTAL DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TONS 07/02/03 41868 4TM STREET R & R A.C. 195 5 07/07/03 41868 4':" STREET R & R A.C. 225 5.5 07/08/03 MERCEDES AT 4TM STREET A.C. OVERLAY 231 2.5 07/09/03 MERCEDES AT 4TM STREET A.C. OVERLAY 253 2.5 07/10/03 MERCEDES AT 4TM STREET A.C. OVERLAY 209 2.5 07/15/03 MERCEDES AT 6TM STREET R & R A.C. 58 2 07/16/03 41710 YORBA R & R A.C. 180 4 07/17/03 PPAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA A.C. OVERLAY 47 1,5 07/18/03 28924 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET POTHOLE 10 TEMP AC 07/18/03 28007 JEFFERSON POTHOLE 14 TEMP AC 07/18/03 41830 SKYWOOD POTHOLE 20 TEMP AC 07/21/03 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET POTHOLE 10 TEMP AC 07/21/03 41710 YORBA R & R AC 180 5,47 07/21/03 41710 YORBA R&R AC 210 5.5 07/28/03 YNEZ AT SANTIAGO A C OVERLAY 235 2.4 07/24/03 CALLE DE VELARDO AT JEDEDIAH SMITH A C OVERLAY 14 1 07/24/03 40935 V1A MEDIA A C OVERLAY 2 07/24/03 41047 CAMINO CORTO A C OVERLAY 90 07/24/03 JEDEDIAH SMITH AT PESCADO A C OVERLAY 28 07/28/03 AMARITA WAY AT VIA CEJA POTHOLE 11 TEMP AC TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 2~222 TOTAL TONS 39.57 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/01/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MEADOWS REPAINTED I I LEGENDS 07/09/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA REPAINTED 10 LEGENDS 07/15/03 SCHOOL LEGENDS REPAtNTED 22 LEGENDS 07/16/03 SCHOOL LEGENDS VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 28 LEGENDS 07/17/03 SCHOOL LEGENDS REPAINTED 24 LEGENDS 07/21/03 SCHOOL LEGENDS REPAINTED 35 LEGENDS 07/22/03 AREA 5 REPAINTED 66 LEGENDS 07/23/03 AREA 5 REPAINTED 16 LEGENDS 07/23/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY INSTALL 6 LEGENDS 07/24/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA AT COUNTRY GLENN INSTALL 6 LEGENDS 07/28/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA REPAINT 24 LEGENDS 07/29/03 WINCHESTER AT REMINGTON INSTALL I LEGEND 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY - CiTY LIMITS TO 79 SO. INSTALL 10 LEGENDS 07/29/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONES INSTALL 2 LEGENDS 07/29/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA E/O COUNTRY GLENN INSTALL 2 LEGENDS 07/29/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA W/O COUNTRY GLENN INSTALL 2 LEGENDS 07/29/03 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES - VIA RIO TEMECULA & 79 SO. INSTALL 4 LEGENDS 07/30/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA REPAINT I I LEGENDS 07/31/03 LA SERENA AT MARGARITA REPAINT 21 LEGENDS 07/31/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA REPAINT I LEGEND TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 302 I NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 0 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/02/03 SANTIAGO W/O YNEZ REPLACED 2 R-2 35, 2 "N", I DELINEATOR 07/02/03 YUKON AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED R-7 07/02/03 PORTOFINO AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED R-7 07/02/03 WINCHESTER AT COLT REPLACED R-1 07/07/03 VIA NORTE AT PII~IA COLA REPLACED R-I 07/07/03 VIA NORTE AT AVENIDA DEL SOL REPLACED W-45 07/08/03 MEADOWS AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED R-7, TYPE "K" 07/08/03 SO, HILLS AT HONORS REPLACED R-26 07/08/03 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 7 SIGNS 07/09/03 FELIX VALDEZ AT 6'" STREET REPLACED 2 "N" MARKERS 07/09/03 PASEO BRILLANTE AT MARGARITA REPLACED R-26 07/I0/03 SHOOTERS HILL AT VIA SABINO REPLACED R-I 07/10/03 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT ROYAL OAKS REPLACED R-7 07/15/03 EQUITY DRIVE AT YNEZ iNSTALLED R-I 07/15/03 ALCOZO DRIVE AND TIRANO DRIVE INSTALLED 4 R-2, "25", R-I 07/15/03 DE PORTOLA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPLACED R-7 07/15/03 SONORA CIRCLE INSTALLED W-53 07/16/03 VAIL RANCH REPAIRED 22 SIGNS 07/17/03 44155 MARGARITA REPLACED R-7, K MARKER 07/17/03 MARGARITA AT PAUBA REPLACED DELINEATOR 07/17/03 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT CLAIM JUMPER REPLACED DELINEATOR 07/17/03 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 12 SIGNS 07/22/03 WINCHESTER- DIAZ TO COLT INSTALL R2-45 3 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 07/22/03 DIAZ- DENDY TO WINCHESTER INSTALL R2-45 2 07/22/03 WINCHESTER - ENTERPRISE CIRCLE N & W REPAIR R-26 1 07/22/03 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AT CROWN HILL REPAIR R2-55 I 07/23/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT RAINBOW CANYON INSTALL R2-40 1 07/23/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT CUPE~O INSTALL R2 40 07/23/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY NORTH OF LOMALINDA INSTALL R2-50 07/23/03 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT OVERLAND TRAIL REPLACE R-7 1 07/24103 APRIL DRIVE AT PARKSIDE REPAIR SNS 2 07/28/03 VIA GILBERTO AT PASHAHO REPAIR SNS 1 07/29/03 EAST VALLEJO 150' S/O YNEZ INSTALL R2-35 1 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY ATA VIA EDUARDO INSTALL R2-40 1 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT CASINO INSTALL R2-40 1 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT CITY LIMITS INSTALL R2-40 I 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT WOLF VALLEY INSTALL R2-40 1 07/29/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY S/O RAINBOW CANYON INSTALL R2 50 1 07/29/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA AT AVENIDA DE MISSIONES INSTALL R2-40 07/29/03 VIA RIO TEMECULA E/O COUNTRY GLEN iNSTALL R2-40 1 07/29/03 V10 RIO TEMECULA W/O COUNTRY GLEN INSTALL R2-40 1 07/29/03 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES S/O 79 SO. INSTALL R2-35 1 07/29/03 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES N/O VIA RIO TEMECULA INSTALL R2-35 1 07/29/03 WINCHESTER S/O REMINGTON INSTALL R2-45 I 07/30/03 CAMINO CORTO AT CAMINO DEL ESTE REPAIR 2 - SNS 07/30/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT WOLF VALLEY REPAIR R-26 l 07/31/03 CALLE EMPLEADO AND RIO NEDO INSTALL R-l 1 07/31/03 CALLE EMPLEADO AT WINCHESTER INSTALL R- I I 07/31/03 CALLE MEDUSA AT NICHOLAS ROAD REPAIR R2-25 l 07/31/03 AMARITA WAY AT VIA RAMI REPAIR R-I I TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 24 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 27 TOTAL SlGNS REPAIRED 51 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF JULY, 2003 DATE DATE WORK RECEIVED LOCATION REQUEST COMPLETED 07/01/03 44800 LINALOU RANCH ROAD SLURRY QUESTION 07/01/03 07/01/03 41513 AVENIDA DE LA REINA ROOT PRUNING 07/01/03 07/01/03 44875 MELISSA CIRCLE SLURRY QUESTION 07/01/03 07/02/03 41190 VIA CIELO DRAINS PLUGGED 07/02/03 07/02/03 27449 COLT COURT S.N.S. MISSING 07/02/03 07/02/03 41209 PROMENADE CHARDONNAY HILLS SIDEWALK REPAIR 07/02/03 07/03/03 44800 LINALOU RANCH ROAD SLURRY QUESTION 07/03/03 07/03/03 32543 VALENTIO AY SLURRY QUESTION 07/03/03 07/07/03 44630 BRENTWOOD PLACE SLURRY QUESTION 07/07/03 07/07/03 33231 CALLE MIRA COPA SLURRY QUESTION 07/07/03 07/08/03 32084 CORTE CARMELA DEBRIS PICK-UP 07/08/03 07/08/03 30815 AVENIDA DEL REPOSO TREE TRIMMING 07/08/03 07/11/03 44800 LINALOU RANCH ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 07/11/03 07/14/03 39120 PALA VISTA ROAD GRADING 07/14/03 07/14/03 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT LYND1E LANE POTHOLE 07/14/03 07/15/03 CROSS CREEK AT SIERRA MADRE SINKHOLE 07/15/03 07/15/03 31353 HURON ASPHALT 07/16/03 0716/I)3 43922 NORTHGATE ROOT PRUNING 07/16/03 07/17/03 33270 CAMINO RUBIO SIGN DOWN 07/17/03 07/17/03 28924 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET POTHOLE 07/18/03 07/I 7/03 4 1830 SKYWOOD DRIVE POTHOLE 07/18/03 07/17/03 40756 JEFFERSON POTHOLE 07/18/03 07/17/03 31164 KAHWEA ROAD ASPHALT REPAIR 07/21/03 07/17/03 32361 CALLE RESACA SIDEWALK 07/18/03 07/18/03 SUNNYDALE AT TEMEKU HILLS DRIVE CATCH BASIN 07/21/03 DATE DATE WORK RECEIVED LOCATION REQUEST COMPLETED 07/21/03 45520 CLASS IC WAY TREE 07/21/03 07/21/03 31268 FIIAWATHA COURT TREE 07/22/03 07/21/03 41057 VINTAGE CIRCLE TREE 07/21/03 07/22/03 TEMECULA CREEK WEEDS 07/22/03 07/23/03 40935 VIA MEDIA POTHOLE 07/24/03 07/23/03 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT HWY 79 TIRE 07/24/03 07/23/03 RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA SDIDEWALK 07/24/03 07/23/03 APRIL DRIVE AT PARKSIDE SNS 07/24/03 07/24/03 42976 VIA ALHAMA DRAINAGE 07/29/03 07/24/03 41588 BIG SAGE COURT CATCH BASIN 07/28/03 (17/25/03 ViA GILBERTO AT PASHAHO SNS 07/28/03 07/25/03 FIRST STREET BRIDGE GRAFFITI 07/28/03 07/25/03 MONTELEGRO E/O PIO PICO POTHOLE 07/28/03 07/25/03 AMARITA WAY W/O PIO PICO POTHOLE 07/28/03 07/25/03 31130 SO. GENERAL KEARNEY CATCH BASIN 07/28/03 07/25/03 FIRST STREET BRIDGE CREEK 07/28/03 07/25/03 41057 VINTAGE CIRCLE TREES 07/28/03 07/28/02 ELIZABETH ROAD AT VIA SABINO SNS 07/28/03 07/28/03 29947 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL TREE 07/28/03 07/28/03 33021 ROSSMAN CIRCLE TREE 07/29/03 07/28/03 29791 DAWN CREST CIRCLE FIANCE 07/29/03 07/28/03 31906 CALLE NOVELDA TREE 07/28/03 07/29/03 CAMINO CORTO AT CAMINO DEL ESTE SNS 07/30/03 07/30/03 TIERRA VISTA AT YNEZ ROCKS 07/31/03 07/31/03 42200 MAIN STREET CREEK 07/31/03 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 50