HomeMy WebLinkAbout012897 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 pdor to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
JANUARY 28, 1997 - 7:00 PM
5:30 PM - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Sections:
1. ~54957, Performance EvaluaUon for City Manager.
2. ~54956.9(c), Potential Litigation, one item.
3. ~54956.9(a), Strachote v. City of Temecuia.
4. ~54966.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator, Property: Parcels 152, 153, 154 and 155
of Parcel Map 6835; Negotiating parties: Rancho Land Associates, Inc. and City of Temecuia;
Under negoUatkm: Price and terms.
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda
items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM and may continue all other
items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are
scheduled to end at 10:00 PM.
CALL TO ORDER:
Prelude Music:
Invocation:
Flag Salute:
ROLL CALL:
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding
Brad Beyenhof
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 97-01
Resolution: No. 97-05
Pastor Gary Nelson, Calvary Chapel
Councilmember Lindemans
Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall
Certificate of Achievement - Temecula Soccer Club Under 17 Boys
Team
Certificate of Appreciation - Friends of the Library
A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute
time limit for individual speakers.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this
time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members
of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for
separate action.
1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
2
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of January 14, 1997.
3 Resolution ADDroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
R:'~Agenda~012897
4
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
1997 Workers Compensation Coveraae Annual Renewal
5
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1
Approve renewing the annual agreement with California Compensation (CAL COMP) for
the Citys Employee Workers Compensation Insurance, subject to final approval as to
form by the City Attorney.
Waiver of Fees for a Natural Gas Re-Fuelin~l Facility
6
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Waive the processing fee for a Natural Gas Re-Fueling Facility.
Riverside County Transportation Commission, Measure E3A Expenditure Plan and Measure E3A
Plan Map
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSIONS AMENDMENT 96-01 TO ORDINANCE NO. 88-1
7
Parcel Map No. 26232-2, Located at the Southeast Corner of Winchester Road (I-Iwy 79 North)
and Nicolas Road
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 26232-2 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
[] []No Parkincl Zone on North General Kearny Road Adjacent to the Bicycle Path Crossinq
RECOMMENDATION:
9
10
8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING A [3NO PARKING ZONE ON NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD
ADJACENT TO THE BICYCLE PATH AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT FjA
[]No Parking Zone on Rancho California Road between Marclarita Road and East City Limits
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING A []NO PARKING ZONE ON RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BETWEEN
MARGARITA ROAD AND EAST CITY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT []A
No Parking Zone on the Rainbow Canyon Road at Birdie Ddve
11
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING A []NO PARKING ZONE ON RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AT BIRDIE
DRIVE AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT E~A
Solicitation of Construction Bids for FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Projet, PW95-28
12
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to
solicit public construction bids for FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Projet,
PW95-28.
Award of Construction Contract for Installation of Conduit on Rancho California BridGe at I-15,
Project No. PW95-16A
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Award a contract for installation of conduit on Rancho California Road bddge, Project No.
R:',Agenda\012897 4
12.2
12.3
PW95-16A to DBX, Inc. in the amount of $16,688.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute
the contract.
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency
amount of $1,668,80 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
Appropriate funds in the amount of $18,356.80 from the Development Impact Fees to the
Capital Improvement Account No. 210-165-5804.
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING,
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT MEETING,
OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING
AND THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
R:',Agenda~12897 5
TEMECULA COMMUNrTY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
AAAAAAAAAAA&AAAAAAAAAAAAAA&AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA&AXAAAAAAAAAAAA
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. CSD 97-01
Resolution: No. CSD 97-01
CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone
ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone
PUBLIC COMMENT:
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 desire to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not listed 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 before
the Board of Directors gets to 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
13 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Approve the minutes of January 14, 1997.
14 Approve Purchase of Concrete Maintenance Machine
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Approve purchase order of $17,634 to Marco Equipment Company for the purchase of a
concrete maintenance machine.
14.2 Approve budget transfer of $17,634 from Account #190-180-999-5212 to #190-180-999-
5610.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Bradley
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next meeting: February 11, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:'~genda~12897 7
AAAAAAAAAA&AAAAAA&AAAAAAAAAAA&AAAA,AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA&&AAA~A&,AAAAA
TEMECULA RE~PMENT AGENCY MEETING
AA&AAAAAAAAAA&AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA&AAA~AAAAAAAA~AA&AAA&AAAAAAAAwAAAAA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Chairperson Steven J. Ford presiding
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. RDA 97-01
Resolution: No. RDA 97-01
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsail, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Ford
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 desire to speak to the Agency on an item not listed on the
agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and
filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be flied with the City Clerk before
the Agency gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of January 14, 1997.
AGENCY BUSINESS
2 Consideration of SPonsorshiP Requests
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Consider the sponsorship requests for the Temecula Rod Run and the Temecula Valley
Balloon and Wine Festival events to be held in 1997.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: February 11, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
R:',Agenda~012897 9
AAAAAA&AAAAAAAAAA&A&AAA&AAAAAAAAAAaAAAA&AAAAAAAAAAAAA&AAA&AAAAAA
OLD TOWN WEST~,IDE GOMMUNITY FAGILJTIE~ DISTlaGT FINANCING AUTHORITY
Next in Order:
Resolution No.: No. FA 97-01
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Karel F. Lindemans
ROLL CALL: Birdsall, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Ford
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that
are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to
speak to the Council about an item not listed on the agenda a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
VVhen you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of January 14, 1997.
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: February 11, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
R:',Agenda~012897 10
OLD TOWN MMIE~T~JI)E IMPROVEMFrNT AUTHORITY
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA&AAAA&AA&AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Chairperson Karel F. Lindemans presiding
Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans
Next in Order:
Resolution No.: No. IA 97-01
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that
are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to
speak to the Council about an item no__t listed on the agenda a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you am called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of January 14, 1997.
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: February 11, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
RECONVENE TEMECULACITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of
the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior
to, the public hearing.
15
Appeal of the Planning Commission Approval of Planning Application No. PA96-0157, the
Development of an 11 Acre Commercial Shopping Center Consistin~l of 102.632 Sauare Feet of
Building Area
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission to approve Planning Application No.
PA96-0157 (Development Plan), an 11 acre commercial shopping center consisting of
102,632 square feet of building area.
15.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA 96-0157, DEVELOPMENT
PLAN TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 102,000 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERLY
CORNER OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSORE~S PARCEL NO. 950-020-037
16
Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment) and Planning Application No.
PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan - Paloma Del Sol)
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Make a determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact
Report was previously certified.
16,2 Road by titlc only and introduec an ordinancc Adopt a Resolution entitled:
ORDINANCE RESOLUTION NO. 97-
R:'~Agenda~012897 12
AN ORDINANCE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0107, CHANGING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION ON PLANNING AREA 2 FROM HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, PLANNING
AREA 29A FROM LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OPEN
SPACE/RECREATION, AND PORTIONS OF PLANNING AREA 1 FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND MODIFYING FIGURE
2-4 (VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY) OF THE GENERAL PLAN, DELETING THE AREA
CORRESPONDING TO PLANNING AREA 2 FROM THE VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY
AND ADDING AREAS CORRESPONDING TO PLANNING AREAS 6 AND 37 TO THE
VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR
79 SOUTH, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND WEST OF
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD
16.3 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0106 (ZONING AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN
NO. 219) AMENDING PLANNING AREAS 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36 AND 37 OF
PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN ORDINANCE AND ADDING
PLANNING AREA 38 TO THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AND SPECIFIC
PLAN ORDINANCE, ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR79
SOUTH, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND WEST OF
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORE~S PARCEL NUMBERS
950-020-001 THROUGH 550-020-004, 950-020-009 THROUGH 950-020-025, 550-020-
027, 950-020-029, 955-030-002 THROUGH 955-030-004 AND 955-030-006 THROUGH
955-030-011
17 General Plan Land Use Mal~ Amendment No. 2 and Zoning MaD Amendment No, I (PA96-0043)
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Make a finding that the Proposed Amendments to the General Plan are consistent with
the impacts included in the previously approved Final Environmental Impact Report of the
City General Plan for the City and its environs.
17.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING
THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND AMENDING SOME OF THE
STATISTICAL TABLES IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
17,3
Make a finding that the Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Map are consistent with the
impacts included in the previously approved Negative Declaration for the Development
Code and Zoning Map as well as the Final Environmental Impact Report of the City
General Plan for the City and its environs.
17.4 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING
THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
18 Development Code Amendment Number 2
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING
CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CHANGES TO
TABLE t 7.08(a) OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE
COUNCIL BUSINESS
19 Review and Approval of the 23rd Year Community Development Block Grant Applications for FY
.1997-98
2O
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1
Review the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding recommendations
submitted by the Finance Committee, and provide final recommendations to be forwarded
to the Riverside County Economic Development Agency (EDA) for consideration,
City Council Assianments for 1997
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1
Appoint a member of the City Council to serve on the following committees:
[] Riverside County Conservation Habitat Agency - Steve Ford
[] Riverside Transit Agency - Karel Lindemans
[] Riverside County Transportation Commission - Ron Roberrs
R:~Agenda~12897 t4
20.2
20.3
WRCOG (Western Riverside Council of Governments) - Ron Roberts
French Valley Airport Committee - Jeff Stone
The Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors ~ Pat Birdsall
Temecula/Murrieta Joint Transportation/Traffic Committee - Steve Ford
Appoint two members to each of the following Advisory Committees
Economic Development Committee - Councilmembers Stone and Roberts
[] Finance Committee - Councilmembers Lindemans and Stone
[] Old Town Steering Committee - Councilmembers Ford and Lindemans
Public Works/Facilities Committee - Councilmembers Stone and Roberts
Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City Commissions
and Committees and to the Pechanga Tribal Council.
× Community Services Commission - Jeff Stone
Planning Commission - Ron Roberrs
X Redevelopmerit Advisory Committee Karel Lindemans
X Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison - Ron Roberrs
21
Discussion and Direction to Councilmember Roberts Re~larding Upcoming Joint Meeting of
RCTC, WRCOG and CEBAG ReeardinQ Orclanizational Structure and Institutional Changes
(Discussion Item Only)
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CffY MANAGEWSREPORT
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next Meetin~ Wednesday, February 5, 1997 at 11:00 AM to be held Jointly with the Pachen~a Tribal
Council at the Pachen~a Tribal Council Hall, 12784 Pachenqa Road, Temecula (by consensus)
Next regular meeting: February 11, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
PROCLAMATIONS/
PRESENTATIONS
CITY OF TEMECULA
Special Achievement Award
The City Council of the City of Temecu@a commends the outstanding achievement of..
-17
and J'olns with the cli3'zens of the City of Temecuia in congratulating them on their exception&
performance diuring the the 17th Annual Tempe Thanksgiving Day Tournament he@d in Tempe,
Arizona. Their first place finish over 350 teams, participating from ten states and Mexico was the
result of three @' s and one tie game @ outscore al@ other teams in overall points. The Under 17 Boys
Team consisted of Noah Buehman, Andrew MacRae, Aaron Betts, Anlrew Hifl, Curtis Kraus,
Jason imafhls, John Mitchell, John Spin, Casey Wassmu@h, Corey Dole, Brain @Martin, Justin
Jet-, Matt Sherman, Andy Stuart, AJ&m Farmer and Matt Prince. The very able coaches were
Reg,
Steve Dole and Doug &crae.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
affixed my hand and off@cial seal this
28th day f January, 199 7
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
Cutting Edge Marketing 28690 Front Street Suite 370 8P.O. Box 1985 Temecula, California 92593-1985 909-695-0046 Fax: 909 695-0852
For Immediate Release
Date: December 10, 1996
Contact:Jerry Regier
Phone:909-695-0046
Fax: 909 695-08-52
TEMECULA SOCCER CLUB WINS CHAMPIONSHIP
TEMPE, ARIZONA (November 29 - December 1, 1996)- While most. families
in Temecula Nvere enjoying Thanl@giving dinner at home, players on the Temecula
Soccer Club (TSC) Boys Under 17 team and their families NNere driving to Tempe,
Arizona to compete in the 17th Annual Tempe Thanl@giving Day Tournament. Last
vear this same Temecula team ended the tournament one -%Nin a-%vay from the
championship. This vear the team,%vas determined to "go all the -.vay" and bring the first
place trophv back to Temecula - and that thev did!
Each year the level of competition has gro,.vn for this tournament as a result of the
higher sl-,ifl levels of the plavers and teai-ns. This year over 350 teams participated from
ten states and Mexico. Only teams playing in top competitive leagues and divisions
-vvere eligible to enter the tournament. The TSC team played four games over the long
i,veekend, -%vinning three and tying one for a total overall 33 points, two more than
second place Scottsdale N@ith 3 1.
-more-
Temecula Soccer Club Wij-is Championship - 2222-
TSC's first game against Shamrock X-Cel from Pi-ioenix Nvas a very defensive game
until defender Corev Dole scored 33 minutes into the game mal,,ing it I -0 at half time.
Midfielder John Mitchell scored on a perfectly placed long chip eight minutes into tl-ie
second half and forward Andrew MacRae completed the scoring @vith 2 goals on assists
from forward John Spain and midfielder Casev Wassmuth. Shamrock X-Cel scored two
late goals to end the game 4-2 TSC.
Game tnvo with Verde Sumn-iit from Northern Arizona was a verv phvsical game
with a total of six cautions, or yellow cards issued, with one to TSC. TSC outshot Verde
Summit 18 to 5, but Verde Summit scored the onlv goal of the first half. Midfielder
Casey Wassmuth open the TSC scoring in the second half vvith a great header off a
corner I,,icl,, delivered b-y fonvard Noah Buehman. Casev follonved with another goal after
a fine individual run. Fonvard John Spain completed the scoring with an assist from
midfielder John Mitchell. The final score of this, probiblv tl-le best overall game of the
tournament, Nvas 3-0 TSC after officials disallowed the Verde Summit goal.
The TSC team found themselves involved in another extremely physical game, the
third in the series. Both teams plaved an excellent defensive game that ended 0-0. TSC
outshot Scottsdale United 9 to 6. Goalkeeper A-ndv Stuart had one critical save to
preserve the shutout.
In the final ame TSC shokved vet another solid offensive and defensive
9
performance, outshoot.ing Durango, Colorado 17 to 3. Midfielder John Spain opened
the scoringv-,ith an outstanding header on a cross from fonvard Andrew MacRae and
qtticldyfollo-,N,e.d,Ait.hasecondgoalonanassistfromrwdfielderjasonMathis. Fonvard
Andrew MacRae scored two additional first half goals, the third goal of the game coming
on an assist from midfielder John Mitchell maldng the score 4-0 at half time. A lone
second half "ova-i" goal bv Durango completed the scoring Nvith TSC 5 and Durango 0.
The TSC Boys Under 17 team traveling to Tempe Nvere Noah Buehman, AndreNv
MacRae, Aaron Betts, Andrew Hill, Curtis Kraus, Jason Mathis, John Mitchell, John
Spain, Case-V Wassmuth, Corev Dole, Biian Martin, Justin Regier, Matt Sherman and
Andy Stuart. Adam Farmer and Matt PrinceAere injured during the regular season and
didn't mal,,e the trip to Tempe. Coaches are Steve Dole and Doug MacRae.
CitTof Temecula
Certificate of Appreciation
Presented in appreciation and gratitude on behalf of the
citizens of the City of Temecula
TO'.
This expression of the communify's deepest appreciation serves to achnowledge a donation
of $10,000.00 to reimburse, in part, the costs of providing library services to residents of
the entire Temecula Valley. This dedicated group of community-minded citizens
puhlically committed to raising this sum on June 25, 1996, at the time the Temecula
City Council pledged $ 95,000.00 fdleep the doors of the Temecula Valley Lihrary
open on a full 48 hour per weeh schedule to serve the puhlic.
In Witness ereof, I have hereunto affixed
my hand and official seal this 28th day of
January, 1997
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Grech, CMC, City Clerh
ITEI\4 I
ITEI\4 2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD JANUARY 14, 1997
EXECUTIVE SESSION
A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:35 PM. It was duly
moved and seconded to adjourn to Executive Session at 5:30 PM, pursuant to Government
Code Sections:
1. 54956.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator: Property: 28735 Pujol Street (APN
922-062-01 7): 28717 Pujol Street (APN 922-062-008, -9, Evelyn Zinn); 28726 Pujol Street
(APN 922-062-01 0; Bonnie Corbin); 28731 Pujol Street (APN 922-062-01 6, William A. Rutner);
and 28735 Puiol Street (APN 922-062-01 9, Steve Ladanyi; Negotiating Parties: Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Temecula and the property owners, Pujol Joint Venture); Under
Negotiation:Price and terms of payment.
2. 54956.8, Conference with Real Property negotiator: Property: City property at Santiago
and Ynez (APN 922-140-010); Under consideration will be valuation of the property.
3. 54956.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator; Property: Approximately 1.7 acres
on the south side of First Street, east of Pujol Street (APN 922-010-017) and approximately 1.4
acres at the southwest corner of Front and First (APN 922-01 0-01 8); Negotiating Parties:
Richard and Marilyn Gabriel and City of Temecula; Under consideration is price and terms of
payment.
The motion was unanimously carried.
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:00 PM at the
Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor
Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts,
Stone, Birdsall
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk
June S. Greek.
PRELUDE MUSIC
The prelude music was provided by Cindi Cook.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Ken Coil, Church of the Nazarene.
Minutes\Ol \1 4\97 -1- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes January 14, 1997
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the flag salute by Councilmember Ford.
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Birdsall presented a gavel to outgoing Mayor Karel Lindemans. Councilmember
Lindemans presented Mayor Birdsall with a gavel for the year 1 997.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
City Attorney Thorson stated in accordance with the provisions of the Brown Act, there was
nothing to report from Closed Session.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments given.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Roberts reported he was reappointed to the California League of Cities Public
Safety Policy Committee and National League of Cities Transportation and Communication
Policy Committee and appointed to the Southern California Association of Governments Taking
Sub-Committee and the Southern California Association of Governments Finance Task Force.
Councilmember Roberts requested staff send a report to the next Riverside County Board of
Supervisors meeting outlining the City Council's concerns regarding the traffic impacts that will
be generated as a result of the proposed Walker Basin project.
Councilmember Stone requested staff investigate any existing ordinances from other
jurisdictions which deal with restrictions on sales of the chemical components used in the
manufacture of Methamphetimines.
Councilmember Ford reported RCHCA will be meeting on Thursday and will consider the multi-
specifies part of the Habitat Conservation Plan. He also announced that the Murrieta Creek has
been cleared and the next meeting of the Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee will be held on
Thursday, January 16, 1 997 at 1:00 PM in the Temecula City Council Chambers.
CONSENT ALENDAR
Councilmember Roberts requested the removal of Item No. 11 from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Ford made a correction to the minutes of December 1 7, 1996, page 8, item 8,
correcting the Congressman Calvert's title. Councilmember Ford also requested the removal
of Item no. 8 from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Stone noted an abstention on Item
Minutes\01\14\97 -2- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes
January 14, 1997
No. 9. Mayor Birdsall noted an abstention on Item 2.2 and Item 2.4 and Mayor Pro Tem
Roberts noted an abstention on Item 2.2.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-7, 9-1 0 and 1 2 with noted correction on Item 2.3 and Mayor Birdsall
abstaining on Items 2.2 and 2.4, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts abstaining on Item 2.2 and
Councilmember Stone abstaining on Item No. 9.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone,
Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
1 . Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
1.1Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included
in the agenda.
2.Minutes
2.1Approve the minutes of December 3, 1 996.
2.2Approve the minutes of December 10, 1 996.
2.3Approve the minutes of December 1 7, 1996, as amended.
2.4 Approve the minutes of December 23, 1 996.
The motion was unanimously carried with Mayor Birdsall abstaining on Item No. 2.2 and
2.4and Mayor Pro Tem Roberts abstaining on Item 2.2.
3.Resolution Apr)rovinci List of Demands
3.1Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Minutes\01\14\97 -3- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes Jan 14 1997
4.City Treasurer's Report
4.1Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of November 30, 1 996.
5.Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Annual Rod Run Event in Old Town (Front
Street, and Related Streets, between Moreno Street and First Street)
5.1Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR ANNUAL ROD RUN
EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS
SPECIFIC ANNUAL SPECIAL EVENT
6.Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Public Improvement Securities in
Tract No. 21 81 8 (Located Westerly of intersection of Via Norte at Kahwea Road)
6.1Accept the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Traffic Signalization
Mitigation agreement, and securities for Faithful Performance and Labor and
Material for Street and Drainage, and Water System improvements, Subdivision
Monumentation, and Traffic Signalization Mitigation fees in Tract No. 21 81 8;
6.2Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developers and Sureties and to release the
securities on file upon notification of the completion of sale between the several
parties.
7.Substitute Subdivision Improvement Acireement and Public Improvement Securitv in
Tract No. 21 821 (Located Northwesterly of Via Norte at Kahwea Road)
7.1Accept the substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Traffic
Signalization Mitigation agreement, and security for Faithful Performance and
Labor and Material for Street and Drainage, and Water System improvements,
Subdivision Monumentation, and Traffic Signalization Mitigation fees in Tract No.
21821;
7.2Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developers and Sureties and to release the
securities on file upon notification of the completion of sale between the several
parties.
Minutes\Ol \1 4\97 -4- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes
January 14, 1997
9.Proposed Resolution Rescindinci Resolution No. 96-142
9.1Consider for adoption proposed Resolution No. 97-(next in order), Rescinding
Resolution No. 96-142, receive from the staff the evidence stated and referred
to herein, concerning certain errors in the legal descriptions of the subject
property interests, and if warranted thereon, adopt Resolution No. 97-(next in
order), and direct that Staff take all necessary steps to correct the legal
descriptions and extend a revised offer letter to the property owner that
incorporates the corrected legal descriptions and any additional changes resulting
from the corrections.
RESOLUTION NO. 97-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 96-142 (ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE GABRIEL PROPERTY - APN 922-010-017 FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES)
(Note: This requires an affirmative FOUR-FIFTHS (4/5) vote of the City Council.)
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts,
Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
10.Purchase of Computers for Temecula Police Der)artment from Asset Forfeiture Funds
10.1Authorize the Temecula Police Department to purchase three computers and
monitors, and one laser printer, using existing asset forfeiture funds held by
Riverside County, for a price not to exceed $7,000.
Minutes\Ol\l 4\97 -5- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes January 14, 1997
1 2. Second Readinci of Ordinance No. 96-23
1 2.1Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 96-23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 15, BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING
STANDARDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVES
AND ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING SYSTEM EQUIPMENT
8.Furniture and Office Eguipment for Parkview Fire Station 84
Councilmember Ford asked that the record be clarified on the additional funding
requested in 8.2. Community Services Director Shawn Nelson stated there is enough
appropriation to cover the traditional furniture, however, an additional appropriation is
needed to cover miscellaneous small furniture items, equipment and a photocopier.
It was moved by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
8.1Approve a purchase order of $38,589, based upon the terms and conditions
presented in the Request of Proposal dated April 29, 1 996, to Pacific Business
Interiors (PBI) for the purchase of office furniture, chairs, training room furniture,
and appurtenances for the new Parkview Fire Station No. 84.
8.2Appropriate $32,600 from Fire Mitigation Funds for the purchase of additional
furniture, equipment and one photocopier for Station 84.
The motion was unanimously carried.
1 1Lease between City of Temecula and Radnor/Land Grant - Rancho California Town
Center Partnership
Councilmember Roberts questioned the sign conditions of this agreement and asked that
this item be continued to clarify the condition.
Nancy Bain, representing Radnor/Land Grant, stated that the sign conditions are not a
requirement of this lease and asked that it be approved with those sign conditions
struck out.
Minutes\Ol @l 4\97 -6- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes
January 14, 1997
It was moved by Councilmember Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Stone to
approve staff recommendation with the understanding that the sign conditions are not
a part of the agreement.
1 1.1Approve a lease agreement with Radnor/Land Grant - Rancho California Town
Center Partnership and the City of Temecula.
Themotion was unanimously carried.
RECESS
Mayor Birdsall called a recess at 7:30 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the
scheduled Community Services District Meeting, Redevelopment Agency Meeting, Old
Town\Westside Financing Authority Meeting and the Old Town/Westside Improvement
Authority Meeting at 7:47 PM.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
13Murrieta Creek Flood Control - Desicination of Hicihest Priority, Flood Control - Publi
Works Project.(Requested by Supervisor Buster)
Mayor Birdsall announced a new draft of the resolution has been distributed to the City
Council which more closely reflects the City's desire that this be the highest priority
flood control project and which accurately describes the city's involvement in the joint
Temecula/Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee.
Councilmernber Stone asked that additional language be added, "in Zone No. Seven" to
the final paragraph which beings "Now, therefore...". He explained that this has been
requested by Riverside County Flood Control.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Stone to
approve staff recommendation with the addition of the language, "in Zone No. Seven"
to the final paragraph which begins "Now, therefore..."
1 3.1Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DESIGNATING THE IMPROVEMENT OF MURRIETA CREEK AS THE HIGHEST
PRIORITY FLOOD CONTROL PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT
The motion was unanimously carried.
Minutes\01\14\97 -7- 01/22/97
City Council Minutes January 14, 1997
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Roberts to adjourn at
7:48 to a meeting on January 28, 1997, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
Minutes\01\14\97 -8- 01/22/97
ITEI\4 3
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMEECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIM AND
DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHI[BIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the
Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby
allowed in the amount of $2,236,087.31
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPRED, this 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Resoa 125
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 97- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 28th day of January, 1997 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
Resos 125 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
01/09/97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $395,981.11
01/16/97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 214,310.70
01/28/97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 1,494,720.29
01/09/97 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 131,075.21
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 01128197 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 2 236 087 31
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001 GENERALFUND $577,985.99
165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 54,866.06
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 57,460.35
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 13,238.27
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 28,267.33
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 27,060.46
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 897.32
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R 1,728.00
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND 717,481 @37
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP 594,550.92
300 INSURANCE FUND 6,879.69
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 14,440.99
330 SUPPORT SERVICES 689.64
340 FACILITIES 9,465.71
2,105,012.10
PAYROLL:
001 GENERAL $92,879.81
165 RDA-LOW/MOD 818.04
190 TCSD 24,915.86
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 69.35
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 173.20
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 2,875.88
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 1,039.07
280 RDA-CIP 2,596.03
300 INSURANCE 603.11
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1,405.29
330 SUPPORT SERVICES 836.41
340 FACILITIES 2,863.16 131,075.21
TOTAL BY FUND: $223608731
PREPARED BY RETA WESTON, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST
i- -, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
TIM McDERMOTT, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR
I- HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
MARY JAN@@LAR@Y, ASSISTANT CITY NIANAGER
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE AMOUNT
001 GENERAL FUND 101,087.98
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 21,440.89
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 30,956.14
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 3,332.60
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 119.87
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 22,327.07
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 897.32
195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R 1,728.00
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 4,497.01
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 196,137.44
300 INSURANCE FUND 6,201.06
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 3,349.10
330 SUPPORT SERVICES 633.87
340 FACILITIES 3,272.76
TOTAL 395,981.11
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41259 01/06197 001260 C P R S AWARD SUBMITTAL FOR SKATE PARK 190-180-999-5226 25.00 25.00
41260 01/06/97 002629 J S A PUBLISHING DEPOSIT-REPRINT VISITOR GUIDES 280-199-999-5264 5,387.50 5,387.50
41261 01/07/97 000124 C E P 0 CEPO CF:S.JONES 2/9-14 001-120-999-5261 766.00 766.00
41262 01108197 002610 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS SALES TAX ASSISTANCE 001-2030 205.80 205.80
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 001-2070 13,411.27
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 165-2070 110.34
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 190-2070 3,474.21
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 191-2070 8.99
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 192-2070 22.27
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 193-2070 353.20
649946 01109/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 194-2070 160.66
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 280-2070 359.53
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 300-2070 131.78
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 320-2070 421.77
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 330-2070 98.73
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 340-2070 199.52
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 001-2070 3,558.80
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 165-2070 29.13
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 190-2070 892.03
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 191-2070 2.38
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 192-2070 5.98
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 193-2070 99.09
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 194-2070 37.29
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 280-2070 85.98
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 300-2070 23.50
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 320-2070 66.56
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 330-2070 27.70
649946 01/09/97 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 340-2070 94.74 23,675.45
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 001-2070 39.45
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 190-2070 33.48
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 193-2070 2.36
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 280-2070 .86
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 340-2070 2.51
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 001-2070 3,422.76
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 165-2070 48.68
651879 01/09197 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 190-2070 792.22
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 191-2070 1.63
651879 01109/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 192-2070 3.80
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 193-2070 69.80
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 194-2070 28.80
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 280-2070 110.89
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 300-2070 39.45
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 320-2070 103.63
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 330-2070 21.80
651879 01/09/97 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 340-2070 23.20 4,745.32
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHERICHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
970109 01/09/97 OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMP 1ST TIME HOME BUYER:M.KEATING 165-199-999-5449 20,552.86 20,552.86
41265 01/09/97 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI SOFTBALL PROGRAM AWARDS 190-183-999-5380 991.21 991.21
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-100-999-5230 12.80
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-110-999-5230 137.65
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-120-999-5230 223.95
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-162-999-5230 53.72
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 190-180-999-5230 82.58
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-140-999-5230 343.66
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-150-999-5230 61.56
41266 01/09197 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-161-999-5230 583.86
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 001-164-604-5230 71.91
41266 01/09/97 000680 A M S T M S DEPOSIT FOR RESETTING POSTAGE 320-199-999-5230 1.65 1,573.34
41267 01109197 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 001-2310 470.54
41267 01109/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 165-2310 8.60
41267 01/09/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 190-2310 64.90
41267 01/09/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 193-2310 .52
41267 01/09/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 280-2310 29.28
41267 01/09/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 300-2310 4.30
41267 01/09/97 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 340-2310 17.20
41267 01/09/97 000116 AV P VISION PLANS COBRA/JAN/LAUBER 001-1180 17.20 612.54
41268 01/09/97 002348 A-PARK AVENUE BUILDERS EMERG REPAIR-5 DESILTING PONDS 001-164-601-5401 2,000.00 2,000.00
41269 01109/97 000104 ABSOLUTE ASPHALT, INC. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 001-164-601-5218 800.80
41269 01/09/97 000104 ABSOLUTE ASPHALT, INC. TAX 001-164-601-5218 62.06 862.86
41270 01/09/97 002485 ALMOST ANYTHING PROF. 0 TEMP HELP WIE 12127 D.ALBERT 001-140-999-5118 165.00 165.00
41271 01/09/97 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 12/21 J.YONKER 001-140-999-5118 516.00 516.00
41272 01/09/97 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER, INC. DEC DRINKING WATER FOR CTY HAL 340-199-701-5240 82.50
41272 01/09/97 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER, INC. BOTTLED WATER FOR CITY MAINT 001-164-601-5240 19.04 101.54
41273 01/09/97 002541 BECKER, WALTER KARL R&R CURB, GUTTER & ASPHALT 001-164-601-5402 1,300.00
41273 01/09197 002541 BECKER, WALTER KARL R&R CURB & GUTTER & AC 001-164-601-5402 285.00 1,585.00
41274 01/09/97 BIRDSALL, PATRICIA REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00
41275 01/09/97 002625 BUTLER CHEMICALS PREVENT MAINT DISHWASHER-T.C.C 190-184-999-5250 77.96 77.96
41276 01/09/97 000924 C A P P 0, INC. CONF:M.VOLLMUTH-2/26-28/97 001-140-999-5261 235.00 235.00
41277 01/09/97 000702 CADDY GRAPHICS HOLIDAY LIGHTS BROCHURE 190-183-999-5370 80.00 80.00
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 001-2370 4,754.67
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 165-2370 111.44
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 190-2370 1,686.05
41278 01109/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 191-2370 .90
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 192-2370 2.26
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 193-2370 244.34
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 194-2370 30.00
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 280-2370 143.23
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 300-2370 9.13
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 320-2370 44.24
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 330-2370 10.58
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 340-2370 358.84
41278 01/09/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, WORKERS' COMP FOR DECEMBER 96 190-181-999-5112 1.54 7,397.22
41279 01/09/97 CALDER, CHARLES R. REFUND:PRK CITATION/COURT FEE 001-2260 5.00
41279 01/09197 CALDER, CHARLES R. REFUND:PRK CITATION/COURT FEE 001-170-4055 45.00 50.00
41280 01/09/97 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA SAM HICKS PARK/LDSC MAINTENANC 190-180-999-5415 490.00 490.00
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 600 A&S 001-2330 39.75
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 600 A&S 190-2330 39.75
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 001-2330 66.50
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 190-2330 65.56
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 193-2330 .94
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 001-2330 148.21
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 165-2330 12.94
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 190-2330 56.17
41281 01109/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 193-2330 1.59
41281 01/09/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 280-2330 12.94 444.35
41282 01/09/97 002521 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D SUBSCRIPTION:MJM 280-199-999-5228 393.00 393.00
41283 01/09/97 000864 CORONA CLAY CO., INC. BASEBALL LDSC MAINT-SPORTS PRK 190-180-999-5212 915.88 915.88
41284 01/09/97 000144 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPOR CAMERA FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT 001-163-999-5242 172.39 172.39
41285 01/09/97 002106 DA FAMILY SUPPORT 002106 SUPPORT 190-2140 100.00 100.00
41286 01/09/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT AUG 96 LEGAL SERVICES 300-199-999-5246 1,487.50
41286 01/09/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT CM:FOR INCORRECT # HRS BILLED 300-199-999-5246 250.00-
41286 01/09/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT SEPT-OCT 96 LEGAL SERVICES 300-199-999-5246 4,458.71 5,696.21
41287 01/09/97 001716 DANIS ROOFING REPAIR LEAKING ROOF 190-182-999-5212 100.00
41287 01/09/97 001716 DANIS ROOFING REPAIR LEAKING ROOF 340-199-701-5212 125.00 225.00
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-140-999-5250 416.00
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-170-999-5250 416.00
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-140-999-5250 17.50
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-170-999-5250 17.50
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. OCT PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-140-999-5250 326.25
41288 01/09/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. OCT PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-170-999-5250 326.25 1,519.50
41289 01/09/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENT-REV 001-1180 8.81-
41289 01/09/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENTICAR 001-2340 8.81
41289 01/09/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DEN-AMIN 001-2340 15.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41289 01/09/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENT-ADV 001-1180 8.81
41289 01/09/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENTICAR 001-2340 8.81 32.62
41290 01/09/97 002635 DFM ASSOCIATES PUB:J.GREEK-97 CA ELECT. CODE 001-120-999-5228 41.21 41.21
41291 01/09/97 002466 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY JAN ELEVATOR MAINT FOR CTY HAL 340-199-701-5250 195.00 195.00
41292 01/09/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE LDSC MAINTENANCE SLOPES 193-180-999-5415 20,080.77
41292 01/09/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE LDSC MAINTENANCE PARKS 190-180-999-5415 7,704.51
41292 01/09/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE MAINLINE REP/RANCHO VISTA/GREK 193-180-999-5212 138.94
41292 01/09/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE TREE PLANTING-RIO RANCHO 193-180-999-5415 300.00 28,224.22
41293 01/09/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 280-199-999-5230 8.75
41293 01/09/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-161-999-5230 39.87
41293 01109197 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-140-999-5230 9.50
41293 01109197 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 190-180-999-5230 9.50 67.62
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 001-2360 589.91
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 165-2360 4.25
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 190-2360 124.11
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 191-2360 .43
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 192-2360 1.28
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 193-2360 16.16
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 194-2360 8.90
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 280-2360 13.60
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 300-2360 4.24
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 320-2360 8.50
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 330-2360 8.50
41294 01/09197 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 340-2360 19.12
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 001-2380 1,104.19
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 165-2380 11.41
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 190-2380 225.12
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 191-2380 .82
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 192-2380 2.05
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 193-2380 28.12
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 194-2380 12.94
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 280-2380 29.00
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 300-2380 8.05
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 320-2380 21.65
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 330-2380 9.26
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LTD 340-2380 26.22
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 001-2500 1,168.20
41294 01/09197 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 165-2500 12.07
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 190-2500 238.16
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 191-2500 .86
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 192-2500 2.17
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 193-2500 29.73
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 194-2500 13.71
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 280-2500 30.69
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 300-2500 8.52
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 320-2500 22.91
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 330-2500 9.80
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 STD 340-2500 27.75
41294 01/09/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FLAMMER/JAN/LIFE&STD 001-1170 22.08 3,864.48
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, MASTER DAY PLANNERS-B&S DEPT 001-162-999-5220 192.06
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, ORGANIZER REFILLS 190-180-999-5220 84.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, FREIGHT 190-180-999-5220 8.15
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, TAX 190-180-999-5220 7.14
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, OFFICE SUPPLIES - B&S DEPT 001-162-999-5220 80.50
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, FREIGHT 001-162-999-5220 8.15
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, TAX 001-162-999-5220 6.87
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #10448 STORAGE BINDGER (COMP) 001-140-999-5220 5.95
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #10445 STORAGE BINDER-CLASSIC 001-140-999-5220 37.50
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #15177 SEASON'S RENEWAL 001-140-999-5220 28.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #14002 TRAD'L GREEN RENEWAL 001-140-999-5220 22.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, ERGO PUNCH FOR CALENDARS 001-140-999-5220 22.00
41296 01/09197 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #11651 BATTERIES FOR CALCULATR 001-140-999-5220 6.00
41296 01109/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #14902 CLASSIC STANDARD 001-140-999-5220 16.95
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, SHIPPING AND HANDLING / GROUND 001-140-999-5220 15.50
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, TAX 001-140-999-5220 11.93
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, MASTER DAY PLANNER 001-171-999-5228 34.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, MASTER DAY PLANNER 001-171-999-5228 68.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, PAGE FINDER #15329 001-171-999-5228 4.95
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, ZIPPER BINDER Wll 112 RINGS 001-171-999-5228 55.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, FREIGHT 001-171-999-5228 9.75
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, TAX 001-171-999-5228 13.31
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, #15112 TRAD'L GREEN RENEWAL 001-140-999-5220 22.00
41296 01/09/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, TAX 001-140-999-5220 1.78 761.49
41297 01/09/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 964-8927 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 26.22
41297 01/09/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 699-2475 PUBLIC WORKS 001-164-601-5208 42.89 69.11
41298 01/09197 002552 GARCIA, JOSE & AUDELINA RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 1,596.00 1,596.00
41299 01/09/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CITY MGR 001-110-999-5220 11.92
41299 01/09/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CITY MGR 001-110-999-5220 4.29
41299 01/09/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES - TCSD 190-180-999-5220 3.34 19.55
41300 01/09/97 001098 GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIP ALUMINUM ROLLING STEPLADDER 340-199-701-5242 312.95
41300 01/09/97 001098 GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIP FREIGHT 340-199-701-5242 21.13
41300 01/09197 001098 GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIP TAX 340-199-701-5242 24.25 358.33
41301 01/09/97 002374 GOVERNMENT INTERFACE, L DEC CONSULTING SRVCS FOR PW 001-164-604-5248 1,000.00 1,000.00
41302 01/09/97 HOA, RAINBOW CNY REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00
41303 01/09/97 002207 HTE PROGRAMMED FOR SUCC ANNUAL MAINT ACTIVITY REGIST 320-199-999-5211 1,320.00 1,320.00
41304 01/09/97 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 2,309.78
41304 01/09/97 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 165-2080 12.50
41304 01/09/97 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 190-2080 583.15
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41304 01/09/97 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 193-2080 9.64
41304 01/09/97 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 280-2080 61.42 2,976.49
41305 01/09/97 IMANI TEMPLE OF TEMECUL REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00
41306 01/09/97 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-182-999-5212 182.10 182.10
41307 01/09/97 000199 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVIC 000199 IRS GARN 001-2140 291.46 291.46
41308 01/09/97 000820 K R W & ASSOCIATES SEPT PROF SVCS-PLAN CHECKING 001-163-999-5249 670.00
41308 01/09/97 000820 K R W & ASSOCIATES SEPT PROF SVCS-PLAN CHECKING 001-163-999-5249 620.00
41308 01109/97 000820 K R W & ASSOCIATES CREDIT:OVERBILLED-PLAN CK #2 001-163-999-5249 15.00- 1,275.00
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/15 J.EVANS 001-164-604-5118 138.65
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/15 J.EVANS 001-163-999-5118 138.65
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP WIE 12/15 J.EVANS 001-165-999-5118 138.70
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12122 J.EVANS 001-164-604-5118 83.19
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/22 J.EVANS 001-163-999-5118 83.19
41309 01/09/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/22 J.EVANS 001-165-999-5118 83.22 665.60
41310 01/09/97 KILLINGWORTH, CAROL REFUND:CANCELLED RENTAL 190-183-4990 274.00 274.00
41311 01/09/97 000206 KINKO'S OF RIVERSIDE, I STATIONERY PAPER/MISC SUPPLIES 280-199-999-5220 13.64 13.64
41312 01/09/97 000209 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. MISC MAINT SUPPLIES FOR PW 001-164-601-5218 128.75
41312 01/09/97 000209 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. PARTS, EQUIP AND REPAIRS/TCSD 190-180-999-5242 84.17
41312 01/09/97 000209 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. MISC MAINT SUPPLIES FOR PW 001-164-601-5218 217.43
41312 01/09/97 000209 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. MISC MAINT SUPPLIES-PW MAINT 001-164-601-5218 366.93
41312 01/09/97 000209 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. MISC MAINT SUPPLIES FOR PW 001-164-601-5218 98.64 895.92
41313 01/09/97 001719 L P A, INC. NOV PROF SRVCS FOR CRC 210-190-152-5802 81.24 81.24
41314 01/09/97 000843 MCDANIEL ENGINEERING CO NOV PROF SRVS-WINCHESTER/I-15 280-199-602-5804 475.00 475.00
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 FOIL BUSINESS CARDS 190-180-999-5222 410.00
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 B/W BUSINESS CARDS 190-180-999-5222 153.00
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 190-180-999-5222 43.63
41315 01/09197 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 FOIL BUSINESS CARDS 001-165-999-5222 102.50
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 FOIL BUSINESS CARDS 001-164-604-5222 205.00
41315 01109/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 FOIL BUSINESS CARDS 001-163-999-5222 102.50
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 B/W BUSINESS CARDS 001-165-999-5222 153.00
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 B/W BUSINESS CARDS 001-164-604-5222 38.25
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 B/W BUSINESS CARDS 001-163-999-5222 229.50
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-165-999-5222 19.80
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-164-604-5222 18.85
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-163-999-5222 25.73
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS FOR DON HILLBER 001-110-999-5222 38.25
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-110-999-5222 2.96
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 500 CORRECTION NOTICES-B&S DPT 001-162-999-5222 63.34
41315 01/09/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-162-999-5222 4.91 1,611.22
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41316 01/09/97 001892 MOBILE MODULAR DEC INTERIM FIRE STATION LEASE 001-171-999-5470 975.14
41316 01/09/97 001892 MOBILE MODULAR DEC INTERIM FIRE STATION LEASE 001-171-999-5470 738.09 1,713.23
41317 01/09/97 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERG EROS CONTR-RIDGE PK/RANC 001-164-601-5402 4,325.00
41317 01/09/97 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING BLADE DIRT RDS DUE TO RAINS 195-180-999-5402 768.00
41317 01/09/97 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING BLADE DIRT RDS DUE TO RAINS 195-180-999-5402 960.00 6,053.00
41318 01/09/97 001394 NATIONAL SANITARY SUPPL BUILDING MAINT SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212 18.64 18.64
41319 01109/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT PUBLIC NOTICES/PLANNING 001-161-999-5256 45.21
41319 01/09/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL NOTICES 001-120-999-5256 26.80
41319 01/09/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL NOTICES 001-120-999-5256 18.91
41319 01/09/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT PUBLIC NOTICES/PLANNING 001-161-999-5256 22.86 113.78
41320 01/09/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 001-164-601-5214 25.10 25.10
41321 01/09/97 002422 PACIFIC BELL DIRECTORY ORANGE CO-IN EMPIRE PHONE BOOK 001-140-999-5220 38.25 38.25
41322 01/09/97 002564 PADUA GLASS ENTERPRISES ALUM.PASS-THRU WINDOW-CASHIER 340-199-701-5212 490.00 490.00
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 001-2130 194.50
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 190-2130 4.38
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 280-2130 1.31
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 15,035.53
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 165-2390 153.81
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 3,064.73
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 11.02
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 192-2390 27.66
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 379.26
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES/ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 194-2390 174.73
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 280-2390 391.35
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 108.65
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 320-2390 292.08
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 330-2390 124.91
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 340-2390 353.77
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 001-2130 150.20
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 001-2390 75.90
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 165-2390 .47
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390 13.58
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390 .05
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 192-2390 .14
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 193-2390 1.77
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 194-2390 .97
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 280-2390 1.48
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 .46
41323 01109/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 .93
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 330-2390 .93
41323 01/09/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 2.09 20,566.66
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 001-2090 26.91
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 165-2090 89.88
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 8
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 280-2090 89.88
41324 01109197 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 001-2090 99.47
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 190-2090 46.96
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 340-2090 6.59
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 001-2090 24.62
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 190-2090 81.90
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 193-2090 5.85
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 340-2090 29.25
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 001-2090 95.78
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 001-2090 54.62
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 280-2090 131.40
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS REV 001-2090 803.07-
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 TAKECARE 001-2090 19.96
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 001-2090 156.86
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 165-2090 111.16
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 280-2090 111.13
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD 001-2090 697.00
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD 190-2090 354.35
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA 001-2090 574.15
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA 300-2090 38.25
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 FHP 001-2090 1,158.88
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 001-2090 5,058.18
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 190-2090 1,540.49
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 191-2090 14.80
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 192-2090 44.40
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 193-2090 296.00
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 194-2090 236.80
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 280-2090 38.48
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 330-2090 296.00
41324 01/09197 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 340-2090 372.91
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 001-2090 2,080.92
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 190-2090 319.38
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 193-2090 12.25
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 340-2090 61.32
41324 01109197 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 001-2090 2,210.05
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 190-2090 305.70
41324 01109/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 194-2090 101.90
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 001-2090 1,835.98
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 280-2090 176.54
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 300-2090 77.00
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS DED 001-2090 908.84
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS-ADM 001-2090 81.23
41324 01/09/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE FLAMMER/JAN/HEALTH INS 001-1170 154.85 19,425.80
41325 01/09/97 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO 001958 PERS L-T 001-2122 40.62 40.62
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS PHOTO DEV. FOR CIP DIV. 001-165-999-5250 7.53
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING - REC DIV. 190-180-999-5301 30.13
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS PHOTO DEVELOPMENTILAND DEV. 001-163-999-5250 17.99
41326 01/09197 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM, DEV & PRINTS-REC DIV. 190-180-999-5301 16.26
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING FOR REC DIV. 190-180-999-5301 8.57
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 9
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING FOR REC DIV. 190-180-999-5301 8.57
41326 01/09/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM DEVELOPMENT & PRINTS 190-180-999-5301 11.93 100.98
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 001-2340 2,160.95
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 165-2340 33.85
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 190-2340 369.51
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 192-2340 3.39
41327 01/09197 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 193-2340 20.32
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 194-2340 47.38
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 280-2340 101.55
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 300-2340 16.91
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 330-2340 25.66
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. 001537 DENTALPM 340-2340 84.62
41327 01/09/97 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. COBRA/JAN 001-1180 186.72
41327 01/09197 001537 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. FLAMMER/JAN/DENTAL 001-1170 25.66 3,076.52
41328 01/09/97 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKSMITH SRVCS-CITY HALL 340-199-701-5212 32.33
41328 01/09/97 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKSMITH SVCS-CRC JANITORS RM 190-180-999-5212 51.50 83.83
41329 01/09/97 002612 RADIO SHACK, INC. MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221 31.18
41329 01/09/97 002612 RADIO SHACK, INC. MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221 56.46
41329 01/09/97 002612 RADIO SHACK, INC. MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221 103.07 190.71
41330 01/09/97 000728 RAMSEY BACKFLOW & PLUMB LEAKY BACKFLOW DEV/SOLANO WAY 193-180-999-5212 149.00 149.00
41331 01/09/97 000836 RANCH MUFFLER SPECIALIS HEAVY DUTY TOOL BOX FOR PW TRK 001-164-601-5242 375.00
41331 01/09/97 000836 RANCH MUFFLER SPECIALIS TAX 001-164-601-5242 29.06 404.06
41332 01/09/97 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C PRINTING SVC/SUPPLIES-PLANNING 001-161-999-5222 35.27 35.27
41333 01/09/97 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION PRG PMT #10-WINCHESTER/1-15 BR 280-199-602-5804 200,649.73
41333 01/09/97 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION W/H PMT#10-WINCH/115 280-2035 20,064.97- 180,584.76
41334 01/09/97 000499 S C C C A CONF:J.GREEK-SCCCA-1-17-97 001-120-999-5260 25.00 25.00
41335 01/09197 000403 SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA POOL MAINT SVC/TEM ELEM SCHOOL 190-180-999-5212 162.70 162.70
41336 01/09/97 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON ELECT SERV-79S/BUTTERFLD ST RD 210-165-676-5804 243.60 243.60
41337 01/09/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-02-351-4946 SENIOR CENTER 190-181-999-5240 671.13
41337 01/09/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-00-397-5026 VARIOUS METERS 191-180-999-5319 3,289.79
41337 01/09/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-02-351-5489 FRONT STREET 001-164-601-5240 113.03 4,073.95
41338 01/09/97 000282 SOUTHERN CALIF. MUNICIP TURF & BALLFIELD DEV.WORKSHOP 190-180-999-5261 75.00 75.00
41339 01/09/97 001497 T R W,INC.-INFORMATION CREDIT REPTS FOR RDA LOANS 280-199-999-5250 50.00 50.00
41340 01/09/97 002568 TANGENT ENTERPRISES, IN WATER QUAL.MGT.MATERIAL/DCK PD 190-180-999-5212 589.88 589.88
41341 01/09/97 000305 TARGET STORE SUPPLIES FOR COMMUNITY CENTER 190-184-999-5301 10.76 10.76
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 10
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 001-2125 363.52
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 190-2125 74.00
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 191-2125 .93
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 192-2125 1.85
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 193-2125 13.88
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 194-2125 1.84
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 280-2125 1.85
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 300-2125 4.63
41342 01/09/97 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 320-2125 18.50 481.00
41343 01/09/97 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P PLUMBING SERVICES FOR CRC 190-180-999-5212 72.00 72.00
41344 01/09/97 001254 TEMECULA STAMP & GRAPHI ELECTRIC LIGHT PARADE BUTTONS 190-183-999-5370 135.00
41344 01109/97 001254 TEMECULA STAMP & GRAPHI TAX 190-183-999-5370 10.46 145.46
41345 01/09/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TROPHYS-HOL.DECORATING CONTEST 190-183-999-5370 164.14 164.14
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 165-1020 137.50
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 001-1020 4,462.47
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 190-1020 651.66
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 193-1020 12.50
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 300-1020 9.99
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 340-1020 62.50
41346 01/09/97 000642 TEMECULA, CITY OF FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 280-1020 452.50 5,789.12
41347 01/09/97 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR LAND DEV. 001-163-999-5220 104.25
41347 01/09/97 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING 001-161-999-5220 91.46 195.71
41348 01/09197 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VL REVER 001-2510 203.95-
41348 01109/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 162.60
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 34.52
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 192-2510 .30
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 1.64
41348 01109/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 4.20
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 .69
41348 01109197 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VL ADVAN 001-2510 211.15
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 169.80
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 34.52
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 192-2510 .31
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 1.63
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 4.19
41348 01/09/97 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 .70 422.30
41349 01/09/97 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN DEC PROF SVC-PAVEMENT MGMT PRJ 210-165-655-5802 4,172.17 4,172.17
41350 01/09/97 001921 TRANSAMERICA INFORMATIO QTR METROSCAN SOFTWARE SUBSCRI 320-199-999-5211 497.25 497.25
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001-2080 6,518.33
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 190-2080 866.26
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 192-2080 1.26
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 193-2080 18.74
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 11
01/09/97 17:11 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41351 01/09197 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 194-2080 22.51
41351 01109197 001065 U S C M IPEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 280-2080 5.00
41351 01109197 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 300-2080 19.99
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 320-2080 312.50
41351 01/09/97 001065 U S C M IPEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 340-2080 112.50 71877.09
41352 01/09/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 001-2160 592.16
41352 01/09/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 190-2160 502.18
41352 01/09/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 193-2160 35.28
41352 01/09/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 280-2160 12.86
41352 01/09/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 340-2160 37.64 1,180.12
41353 01/09/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995894-RR-DEC 001-100-999-5258 1,672.21 1,672.21
41354 01/09/97 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 001-2120 106.80
41354 01/09/97 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 190-2120 17.00
41354 01/09/97 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 192-2120 .75
41354 01/09/97 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 193-2120 3.75
41354 01/09197 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 194-2120 10.50
41354 01/09/97 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 uw 280-2120 .20 139.00
41355 01/09/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, UNIFORMS FOR PW MAINT. CREWS 001-164-601-5243 111.72
41355 01109/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, FLOOR MATS RENT/CLEAN-CITY HAL 340-199-701-5250 20.40
41355 01/09/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, FLOOR MATS RENT/CLEAN-CITY HAL 340-199-701-5250 75.52
41355 01/09/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, FLOOR MAT RENTAL/CLEANING-CRC 190-182-999-5250 86.80
41355 01/09/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, FLOOR MAT RENTAL/CLEAN-SR CTR 190-181-999-5250 44.52 338.96
41356 01/09/97 002576 URBAN DESIGN STUDIO NOV PROF SVC-CTY WD GUIDELINES 001-161-999-5248 1,000.00 1,000.00
41357 01/09/97 002554 VELASQUEZ, M. & GONZALE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 5,235.84 5,235.84
41358 01/09/97 W C D ENTERTAINMENT REFUND:OVERCHARGE OF RENT 190-183-4990 50.00 50.00
41359 01/09/97 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINT SUPPLIES-TCC 190-184-999-5212 54.41 54.41
TOTAL CHECKS 395,981.11
VOIJCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 9
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE AMOUNT
001 GENERAL FUND 63,164.52
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 28,818.42
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 26,504.21
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 9,905.67
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 28,147.46
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 4,733.39
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 37,120.32
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 3,372.47
300 INSURANCE FUND 678.63
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 5,616.89
330 SUPPORT SERVICES 55.77
340 FACILITIES 6,192.95
TOTAL 214,310.70
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41360 01/13197 001887 KEMPER LUMBERMANS SALES TAX ASSISTANCE 001-2030 25,558.48
41360 01/13/97 001887 KEMPER LUMBERMANS SALES TAX ASSISTANCE 001-2030 25,558.48
41360 01/13197 001887 KEMPER LUMBERMANS SALES TAX ASSISTANCE 001-2030 25,558.48- 25,558.48
970114 01/14/97 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 1ST TIME HOME BUYER - AULBACH 165-199-999-5449 19,000.00 19,000.00
41363 01/16/97 001985 A E P (ASSOC OF ENVIRO CEQA WKSHP:FAGAN:2127197 001-161-999-5261 155.00 155.00
41364 01/16/97 001538 ALBERT GROVER & ASSOCIA DEC PROF SRVCS/CITYWIDE ITMS 210-165-640-5802 1,500.00 1,500.00
41365 01/16/97 002485 ALMOST ANYTHING PROF. 0 TEMP HELP W/E 1/10/97 D.ALBERT 001-140-999-5118 231.00 231.00
41366 01/16/97 000102 AMERICAN FENCE CO. OF C SECURITY FENCE FOR PUJOL ST 165-199-812-5804 44.00 44.00
41367 01/16/97 001947 AMERIGAS PROPANE FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-162-999-5263 276.82
41367 01/16/97 001947 AMERIGAS PROPANE FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263 83.48 360.30
41368 01/16/97 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 12/28 J. BARNETT 001-150-999-5118 144.48
41368 01/16/97 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 12/28 J.YONKER 001-140-999-5118 412.80
41368 01/16/97 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 1/4/97 J.YONKER 001-140-999-5118 412.80 970.08
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-170-4125 115.00
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-161-4116 3,702.00
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-163-4116 1,048.00
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-161-4129 575.40
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-163-4129 45.00
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-163-4358 780.00
41369 01/16/97 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-162-4216 30.00
41369 01116197 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-163-4388 266.00
41369 01/16197 ARCO PRODUCTS REFUND:CHGE LOCATION PA96-0330 001-171-4036 554.00 7,115.40
41370 01/16/97 000475 B N I PUBLICATIONS, INC 2 BOOKS:97 METRIC GREENBOOK 001-163-999-5228 71.79 71.79
41371 01/16/97 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER ELECT SRVCS-TEMECULA COMM CTR 190-184-999-5212 45.00
41371 01/16/97 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER HVAC/ELECT SVCS/SENIOR CTR 190-181-999-5250 67.50 112.50
41372 01/16/97 002145 BIOCOM - SAN DIEGO SEMINAR:M.MCLARNEY-11/6 BIOCOM 001-110-999-5260 35.00 35.00
41373 01/16/97 002099 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES OLD TOWN RSTRM LEASE-BUTTERFLD 280-199-999-5212 826.00 826.00
41374 01/16/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, AUTO LIABILITY INSURANCE #2787 300-199-999-5200 510.00 510.00
41375 01/16/97 001054 CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFF ANNUAL MTG:ELMO:FEB 18-21,197 001-162-999-5258 275.00 275.00
41376 01/16197 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA LDSC MAINT.RANCHO CA RD MEDIAN 191-180-999-5415 728.00 728.00
41377 01/16/97 CAMPBELL, ERIC REFUND:MEN BASKETBALL FORFEIT 190-183-999-5380 40.00 40.00
41378 01/16/97 000387 CAREER TRACK SEMINARS M SEM:B.KARCHER-12/16-GRAMMAR GM 001-150-999-5261 69.00
41378 01/16/97 000387 CAREER TRACK SEMINARS M SEM:J.ROBINSON 12/16 GRAMMAR G 190-180-999-5261 69.00 138.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41379 01/16/97 000131 CARL WARREN & CO., INC. PRATT & HOXSEY 3-26-96 300-199-999-5205 94.63
41379 01/16/97 000131 CARL WARREN & CO., INC. OLD VAIL PARTNERS 11/12/93 300-199-999-5205 74.00 168.63
41380 01/16/97 002628 CARPENTER, BETH ANN SVCS/REFRESHMENTS-CTY COMM. EV 001-100-999-5280 150.00 150.00
41381 01/16/97 001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC ALARM MONITORING SRVCS-CRC 190-182-999-5250 50.00
41381 01/16/97 001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC ALARM MONITORING SRVC/SR CTR 190-181-999-5250 45.00 95.00
41382 01/16/97 001139 CHIP MORTON PHOTOGRAPHY SHOPPING CENTER PHOTO 280-199-999-5270 161.63 161.63
41383 01/16/97 COMMERCIAL OFFICE RESC)U REFUND:OVER PAYMENT OF FEES 190-183-999-5380 15.00 15.00
41384 01116/97 001009 D B X, INC. RELEASE OF RETENTION:PW96-03 210-2035 4,275.00 4,275.00
41385 01116/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. NOV PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-140-999-5250 247.00
41385 01/16/97 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. NOV PARKING CITATIONS BILLING 001-170-999-5250 247.00 494.00
41386 01/16/97 000155 DAVLIN TAPING OF PLANNING COMM. MTGS 001-161-999-5250 156.68
41386 01/16/97 000155 DAVLIN TAPING OF CITY COUNCIL MTG 001-100-999-5250 800.00 956.68
41387 01/16/97 002643 DE PREZ TRAVEL HOTEL:BRADLEY,R:5/18-22:SHP CT 001-110-999-5258 170.00
41387 01/16/97 002643 DE PREZ TRAVEL HOTEL:ROBERTS,R:5/18-22:SHP CT 001-100-999-5258 170.00
41387 01/16/97 002643 DE PREZ TRAVEL HOTEL:STONE,J:5/18-22:SHP CTR 001-100-999-5258 170.00
41387 01/16/97 002643 DE PREZ TRAVEL HOTEL:THORNHILL:5/18-22:SHP CT 001-161-999-5258 170.00 680.00
41388 01/16/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 12/22 C.COX 001-161-999-5118 361.20
41388 01/16197 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 12/22 L.KAPRYN 001-162-999-5118 117.39
41388 01/16/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 1/5197 C.COX 001-161-999-5118 288.96 767.55
41389 01/16197 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATIO SUPPLIES FOR GRAFFITI REMOVAL 001-164-601-5218 114.86 114.86
41390 01116197 000754 ELLIOTT GROUP, THE INSPECTION SVCITCSD LDSC CONTR 193-180-999-5248 425.00
41390 01/16/97 000754 ELLIOTT GROUP, THE LDSC PLAN CK SVC FOR TEMEKU 193-180-999-5248 1,620.00 2,045.00
41391 01/16/97 002128 ENGINEERING VENTURES, I AUTOICAD SRVCS-PW LD DEV.DIV. 001-163-999-5250 300.00 300.00
41392 01/16/97 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN REFRESHMENTS FOR COUNCIL MTGS 001-100-999-5260 125.63 125.63
41393 01116/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE EMER STRM CLEAN UP-RAN.HIGHLAN 193-180-999-5415 100.00
41393 01/16/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE EMERG STRM CLEAN UP-VINEYARDS 193-180-999-5415 200.00
41393 01/16/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE EMERG STRM CLEAN UP-RIDGEVIEW 193-180-999-5415 100.00
41393 01/16/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE EMERG STRM CLEAN UP-CALLE TAJO 193-180-999-5415 50.00
41393 01/16/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE EMERG STRM CLEAN UP-RAN. CA RD 193-180-999-5415 50.00 500.00
41394 01/16/97 002148 EXPRESS TEL MONTH LONG DISTANCE SERVICES 320-199-999-5208 1.45 1.45
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-140-999-5230 13.50
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 165-199-999-5250 28.75
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 280-199-999-5230 9.50
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-162-999-5230 30.37
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 165-199-999-5250 13.50
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41395 01116/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-150-999-5230 9.50
41395 01/16197 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-140-999-5230 26.25
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 9.50
41395 01/16197 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 280-199-999-5230 11.00
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-120-999-5230 9.50
41395 01116/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-161-999-5230 9.50
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 190-180-999-5230 20.23
41395 01/16/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-100-999-5230 9.50 200.60
41396 01/16/97 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 001-150-999-5250 46.00
41396 01/16/97 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 001-150-999-5250 124.00 170.00
41397 01/16/97 000643 FORTNER HARDWARE, INC. TCSD MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 27.97 27.97
41398 01/16/97 000540 G NEIL COMPANIES UPDATED MANDATORY ST-FED POSTR 001-150-999-5222 119.88
41398 01/16/97 000540 G NEIL COMPANIES FREIGHT 001-150-999-5222 11.83 131.71
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 197-5072 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 2,314.95
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 308-1079 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 55.32
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 695-1409 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 92.66
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 695-3539 COPT 320-199-999-5208 36.30
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 699-0590 ALARM LINES PTA 320-199-999-5208 54.46
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 699-1370-SVC FOR COP 001-110-999-5223 109.87
41399 01/16/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 699-2309 COPT 320-199-999-5208 36.98 2,700.54
41400 01/16/97 001355 G T E CALIFORNIA, INC. DEC ACCESS-RVSD CO OPEN PHONE 320-199-999-5208 305.58
41400 01/16197 001355 G T E CALIFORNIA, INC. DEC ACCESS-CRC OPEN PHONE LINE 320-199-999-5208 350.47 656.05
41401 01/16197 002141 GEIS, PAUL MOTORCYCLE REPAIR -TEM POLICE 001-170-999-5214 25.00
41401 01116197 002141 GEIS, PAUL MOTORCYCLE REPAIR -TEM POLICE 001-170-999-5214 25.00
41401 01/16/97 002141 GEIS, PAUL MOTORCYCLE REPAIR -TEM POLICE 001-170-999-5214 25.00 75.00
41402 01/16/97 000481 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM WATER TEST - TEMECULA DUCK PD 190-180-999-5250 975.00 975.00
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-170-999-5220 18.43-
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES - B&S 001-162-999-5220 27.95
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-HR DEPT 001-150-999-5220 221.87
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-HR DEPT 001-150-999-5220 154.79
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES / FINANCE DEPT 001-140-999-5220 92.12
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES / FINANCE DEPT 001-140-999-5220 34.52
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT CREDIT: RETURNED OFFICE SUPPLI 190-180-999-5220 52.31-
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT CREDIT:RETURNED OFFICE SUPPLIE 001-161-999-5220 13.46-
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT CREDIT:RETURNED OFFICE SUPPLIE 190-180-999-5220 13.30-
41403 01/16/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT CREDIT:RETURNED OFFICE SUPPLIE 001-161-999-5220 19.19- 414.56
41404 01/16/97 000186 HANKS HARDWARE, INC. SUPPLIES FOR THE CRC 190-182-999-5301 147.04
41404 01/16/97 000186 HANKS HARDWARE, INC. SUPPLIES FOR CTY-WD SPEC EVENT 190-180-999-5301 135.60
41404 01/16/97 000186 HANKS HARDWARE, INC. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES FOR TCSD 340-199-701-5212 244.94
41404 01/16/97 000186 HANKS HARDWARE, INC. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 348.80 876.38
41405 01/16/97 HARRISON, JOHN MAXWELL REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0338 001-161-4104 274.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41405 01/16/97 HARRISON, JOHN MAXWELL REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0338 001-163-4104 200.00
41405 01/16/97 HARRISON, JOHN MAXWELL REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0338 001-163-4388 22.00
41405 01/16/97 HARRISON, JOHN MAXWELL REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0338 001-171-4036 113.00 609.00
41406 01/16/97 HESFORD, DARRELL REFUND:MEN BASKETBALL FORFEIT 190-183-999-5380 40.00 40.00
41407 01/16/97 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 13.00 13.00
41408 01116197 002481 INLAND FOUNDATION ENGIN DEC PROF SRVCS-6TH ST PARKING 280-199-804-5804 503.88
41408 01/16197 002481 INLAND FOUNDATION ENGIN DEC PROF SVCS-6TH ST PARKING 280-199-804-5804 960.89 1,464.77
41409 01116/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 SHOP CTR CF:BRADLEY:5/18-22 001-110-999-5258 220.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 SHOP CTR CF:ROBERTS,R:5/18-22 001-100-999-5258 220.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 SHOP CTR CF:STONE,J:5118-22 001-100-999-5258 220.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 SHOP CTR CF:THORNHILL:5/18-22 001-161-999-5258 220.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 MEMBERSHIP DUES:ROBERTS,RON 001-100-999-5226 50.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 MEMBERSHIP DUES: STONE,JEFF 001-100-999-5226 50.00
41409 01/16/97 000198 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 0 MEMBERSHIP DUES:THORNHILL,G. 001-161-999-5226 50.00 1,030.00
41410 01/16197 JOHNSON, PAMELA REFUND:OVERPAYMENT OF RENTAL 190-183-4990 54.00 54.00
41411 01/16/97 002642 KELGAN RECREATION PRODU INSTALL TOT LOT-RANCHO CRK APT 165-199-813-5804 8,320.98 8,320.98
41412 01/16/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/30 J.EVANS 001-164-604-5118 83.19
41412 01/16/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/30 J.EVANS 001-163-999-5118 83.19
41412 01/16/97 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/30 J.EVANS 001-165-999-5118 83.22 249.60
41413 01/16/97 002512 LA MASTERS OF FINE JEWE EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PINS 001-150-999-5265 2,666.81
41413 01/16/97 002512 LA MASTERS OF FINE JEWE EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PINS 001-150-999-5265 404.06 3,070.87
41414 01/16/97 001973 LA SALLE LIGHTING SERVI PARKING LIGHT REPAIR-TCSD PRKS 190-180-999-5212 217.00
41414 01/16/97 001973 LA SALLE LIGHTING SERVI PARKING LIGHT REPAIR-TCSD PRKS 190-180-999-5212 112.00 329.00
41415 01/16/97 002187 LAKE ELSINORE ANIMAL FR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVS-DEC 96 001-172-999-5255 3,224.66 3,224.66
41416 01/16/97 001690 LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONE MINUTE BOOK FILLER PAPER 001-120-999-5220 448.80
41416 01/16/97 001690 LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONE UPS CHARGES 001-120-999-5220 21.19
41416 01/16/97 001690 LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONE MINUTE BOOK FILLER PAPER 001-120-999-5220 1,582.80
41416 01116/97 001690 LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONE TAX 001-120-999-5220 122.67
41416 01116197 001690 LAUTZENHISER'S STATIONE FREIGHT 001-120-999-5220 72.33 2,247.79
41417 01/16/97 000384 LAW/CRANDALL, INC. DEC PROF SVCS-WALCOTT CORRIDOR 210-165-637-5804 2,672.50 2,672.50
41418 01/16/97 000669 LEAGUE OF CAL. CITIES 1997 ANNUAL DUES-RIVERSIDE DIV 001-100-999-5226 100.00 100.00
41419 01/16/97 000213 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMIS THORNHILL:1/29:HEART OF CITY 001-161-999-5261 20.00 20.00
41420 01/16/97 002229 LUCE PRESS CLIPPINGS, I LUCE PRESS CLIPPING SERVICE 280-199-999-5270 106.12 106.12
41421 01/16/97 002632 MAIL BOXES ETC. MAIL DELIVERY SERV 330-199-999-5250 38.50 38.50
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41422 01/16/97 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS ADULT SOFTBALL OFFICIALS 190-183-999-5380 1,005.40
41422 01/16/97 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS ADULT SOFTBALL OFFICIALS 190-183-999-5380 347.60 1,353.00
41423 01/16/97 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS, INC. DES/PROD-SKATEBRD PRK BROCHURE 190-180-999-5222 1,264.98 1,264.98
41424 01/16/97 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERG EROSION CONTROL/PAUBA RD 001-164-601-5402 2,500.00 2,500.00
41425 01/16/97 002639 MOREL, ED TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 462.40 462.40
41426 01116/97 002526 MUSE PRESENTATION TECHN TASK LIGHTS IN COUNCIL CHAMBER 210-199-650-5804 1,131.00
41426 01116/97 002526 MUSE PRESENTATION TECHN FREIGHT 210-199-650-5804 24.75
41426 01/16/97 002526 MUSE PRESENTATION TECHN TAX 210-199-650-5804 87.65 1,243.40
41427 01/16/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL NOTICES 001-120-999-5256 34.08
41427 01/16/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL NOTICES 001-120-999-5256 29.82
41427 01/16/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT PUBLIC NOTICES - PLANNING 001-161-999-5256 31.05
41427 01/16/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL NOTICES - CTY CLERK DEPT 001-120-999-5256 15.53 110.48
41428 01/16/97 002292 OASIS VENDING CITY HALL COFFEE/VENDING SERVS 340-199-701-5250 611.44
41428 01/16/97 002292 OASIS VENDING CITY HALL COFFEE/VENDING SERVS 340-199-701-5250 429.00 1,040.44
41429 01/16/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 001-163-999-5214 75.90
41429 01/16/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 001-164-601-5214 160.71
41429 01/16/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 001-164-601-5214 82.17
41429 01/16/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLES MAINT/REPAIR-B&S 001-162-999-5214 329.45
41429 01/16197 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT/REPAIR-B&S 001-162-999-5214 167.29
41429 01116197 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS-B&S 001-162-999-5214 99.39 914.91
41430 01/16/97 001383 P M W ASSOCIATES, INC. PROF SERVICES- 001-150-999-5248 1,929.46 1,929.46
41431 01/16/97 PECORARO, MIKE REFUND:MEN BASKETBALL FORFEIT 190-183-999-5380 40.00 40.00
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING-REC DIVISION 190-180-999-5301 20.14
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR CIP 001-165-999-5250 8.57
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING - REC DIVISION 190-180-999-5301 47.41
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS RDA PHOTO PROCESSING 280-199-999-5250 31.20
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS RDA PHOTO PROCESSING 165-199-999-5250 31.19
41432 01/16/97 000580 PHOTO WORKS FILM PROCESSING-REC DIVISION 190-180-999-5301 34.72 173.23
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-165-999-5230 53.80
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-120-999-5230 53.75
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-140-999-5230 15.00
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-161-999-5230 25.75
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 280-199-999-5230 32.25
41433 01/16/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-150-999-5230 10.75 191.30
41434 01/16/97 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT LIGHT TOWERS 190-183-999-5370 1,200.00
41434 01/16/97 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT DIESEL FUEL 190-183-999-5370 150.00
41434 01116/97 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT LIGHT TOWERS/DIESEL FUEL 190-180-999-5238 386.98
41434 01116197 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT TRUCK RENTAL - PW DEPT 001-164-601-5238 35.33
41434 01/16/97 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT RENTALS-PARKS 190-180-999-5238 105.98 1,878.29
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6
01/16/97 15:28 VOtJCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41435 01/16/97 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY TCSD LOCKSMITH SERVICES - TCSD 190-180-999-5212 97.99
41435 01/16/97 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY TCSD LOCKSMITH SERVICES - TCSD 190-180-999-5212 71.25 169.24
41436 01/16/97 002627 R A ROSA CONSTRUCTION DRAIN:TOT LOT:RANCHO CRK APTS 165-199-813-5804 1,380.00 1,380.00
41437 01/16/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF SIGNATURE PLATES FOR CHECK 001-140-999-5250 40.00
41437 01/16/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF SIGNATURE HAND STAMP FOR CHECK 001-140-999-5250 12.50
41437 01/16/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF TAX 001-140-999-5250 4.07 56.57
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 01-06-84300-1 WATER USAGE 001-164-601-5240 11.95
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-182-999-5240 689.85
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-184-999-5240 130.83
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 2,038.26
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 313.79
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-181-999-5240 94.16
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 191-180-999-5240 64.85
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 191-180-999-5240 115.46
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 193-180-999-5240 363.27
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 193-180-999-5240 1,031.80
41438 01/16/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 340-199-701-5240 335.14 5,189.36
41439 01/16/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-162-999-5214 10.00
41439 01/16/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-165-999-5214 5.00
41439 01/16/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE MAINT & DETAIL 001-163-999-5214 17.00
41439 01/16/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5214 16.50
41439 01/16197 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263 9.19 57.69
41440 01/16/97 001327 RANCHO RECYCLED PRODUCT SUPPLIES-TEM.HOCKEY RINK REPAI 190-180-999-5212 2,251.20
41440 01/16/97 001327 RANCHO RECYCLED PRODUCT FREIGHT 190-180-999-5212 100.00
41440 01/16/97 001327 RANCHO RECYCLED PRODUCT TAX 190-180-999-5212 174.47 2,525.67
41441 01/16/97 001428 RANCHO TEMECULA WOMANS 96/97 COMMUNITY SERV FUNDING 001-100-999-5267 2,500.00 2,500.00
41442 01/16/97 002400 REBEL TEMECULA MISC. EQUIP. RENTAL - PW MAINT 001-164-601-5238 53.80
41442 01/16/97 002400 REBEL TEMECULA MISC. EQUIP. RENTAL-PW MAINT. 001-164-601-5238 193.70 247.50
41443 01/16/97 001046 REXON, FREEDMAN, KLEPET NOV 96 PROF LEGAL SERVS 001-130-999-5247 70.00 70.00
41444 01/16/97 000266 RIGHTWAY PORTABLE TOILET FOR CITY YARD 001-164-601-5238 57.39
41444 01/16/97 000266 RIGHTWAY TEMP PWR INSTALL-VOORBURG PRK 190-180-999-5212 30.00
41444 01/16/97 000266 RIGHTWAY PORTABLE RENT-NIC.RD/RVRTN PRK 190-180-999-5238 62.89
41444 01/16/97 000266 RIGHTWAY PORTABLE RENT-NIC.RD/RVRTN PRK 190-180-999-5238 172.50 322.78
41445 01/16/97 000418 RIVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R APERTURE CARDS DUPLICATES 001-163-999-5220 5.00 5.00
41446 01/16/97 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR PEST CONTROL SRVCS-CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250 42.00
41446 01/16/97 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR PEST CONTROL SRVCS-CRC 190-182-999-5250 42.00
41446 01116/97 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR PEST CONTROL SRVC/TEM.COMM.CTR 190-184-999-5250 36.00
41446 01/16/97 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR PEST CONTROL SRVC-SENIOR CTR 190-181-999-5250 29.00 149.00
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-06-105-0654 VARIOUS METERS 191-180-999-5319 1,872.22
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-03-464-4989 MEADOWS PRK 193-180-999-5240 15.48
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-00-397-5042 VARIOUS METERS 340-199-701-5240 4,360.65
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-00-397-5059 VARIOUS METERS 190-180-999-5240 8:113.08
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS METERS 193-180-999-5240 777.84
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-02-351-5281 RANCHO VISTA A 190-182-999-5240 3,119.18
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-01-202-7330 VARIOUS METERS 192-180-999-5319 28,147.46
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-01-202-7603 VARIOUS METERS 191-180-999-5319 7,006.52
41447 01/16/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 53-77-850-2000-01 RANCHO CAL 191-180-999-5319 118.62 53,531.05
41448 01/16/97 001212 SOUTHERN CALIF GAS COMP RELOC.GAS MAIN-RANCHO CA/1-15 210-165-601-5804 23,234.00 23,234.00
41449 01116/97 001987 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TEL 909 205-7877 EOC 320-199-999-5208 27.32 27.32
41450 01116/97 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET C REPAIR MAINTENANCE-CITY HALL 340-199-701-5212 65.00 65.00
41451 01/16/97 000521 STEWART, BRUCE M. CONSULTANT STREET ADDRESSING 001-162-999-5250 175.00 175.00
41452 01/16/97 001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS GLASS REPAIR @ TEM COMM CTR 190-184-999-5212 10.78 10.78
41453 01/16/97 002150 SUMMIT SAFETY PRODUCTS ICE PACKS FOR FIRST AID 190-182-999-5301 64.65 64.65
41454 01/16/97 002453 SUPER SEER CORPORATION TEM P.D. MOTORCYCLE HELMETS 001-170-999-5243 295.00 295.00
41455 01/16/97 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL FLOWERS FOR EMPLOYEES 001-2170 58.19 58.19
41456 01/16/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. AWARDS-SANTA'S ELECT LIGHT PAR 190-183-999-5370 380.63
41456 01/16/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. WALNUT GAVELS FOR OFFICIALS 001-100-999-5220 65.85
41456 01/16/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. ENGRAVING OF PLATES FOR GAVELS 001-100-999-5220 10.08
41456 01/16/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. CITY SEAL ENGRAVED ON EA.PLATE 001-100-999-5220 12.00
41456 01/16/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TAX 001-100-999-5220 6.81 475.37
41457 01/16/97 TEMECULA VALLEY BAPTIST REFUND:CANCELLED EVENT 190-183-4990 71.00 71.00
41458 01/16/97 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER GALAXY DINNER:MJM:1/25/97 001-110-999-5260 75.00 75.00
41459 01/16/97 000319 TOMARK SPORTS, INC. HEAVY DUTY DRAG MAT 190-183-999-5380 198.00
41459 01/16/97 000319 TOMARK SPORTS, INC. FREIGHT 190-183-999-5380 9.00
41459 01/16/97 000319 TOMARK SPORTS, INC. TAX 190-183-999-5380 15.35 222.35
41460 01/16/97 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PW DEPT 001-164-604-5220 113.54 113.54
41461 01/16197 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN OCT PROF SRVCS-SAM HICKS PARK 280-199-805-5802 730.00
41461 01/16/97 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN NOV PROF SVCS/WESTERN BYPASS 210-165-612-5802 4,195.42 4,925.42
41462 01/16/97 002396 U.S. LONG DISTANCE, INC LONG DISTANCE TELECOM PROVIDER 320-199-999-5208 2,341.40 2,341.40
41463 01116197 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995928 MJM 001-110-999-5220 217.27
41463 01116/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995928 MJM 001-110-999-5226 305.00
41463 01/16/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995928 MJM 001-110-999-5228 216.11
41463 01/16197 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995928 MJM 001-150-999-5220 64.66
41463 01/16197 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995985 GY 001-150-999-5260 50.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 8
01/16/97 15:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41463 01/16/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995944 TE 001-162-999-5260 24.98
41463 01/16/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. 5305001995977 JK:HOLIDAY PARAD 190-180-999-5260 86.75 964.77
41464 01/16/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, UNIFORMS FOR PUBLIC WORKS 001-164-601-5243 111.72
41464 01/16/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, UNIFORM MAINT. FOR TCSD 190-180-999-5243 90.84
41464 01/16/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, RENTICLEAN-FLR MATS-CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250 104.78
41464 01/16/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, FLOOR MAT RENTAL AND CLEANING 190-182-999-5250 86.80
41464 01/16/97 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE, RENT/CLEAN-FLOOR MATS-SR CTR 190-181-999-5250 44.52 438.66
41465 01/16/97 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINT.SUPPLIES/SR CTR 190-181-999-5212 153.97
41465 01/16/97 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINT.SUPPLIES/SR CTR 190-181-999-5212 54.41
41465 01/16/97 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINT.SUPPLIES/CRC 190-182-999-5212 34.91 243.29
41466 01/16/97 WESTSIDE CITY II, LLC REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0339 001-161-4104 274.00
41466 01/16/97 WESTSIDE CITY 11, LLC REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0339 001-163-4104 200.00
41466 01/16/97 WESTSIDE CITY 11, LLC REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0339 001-163-4388 22.00
41466 01/16/97 WESTSIDE CITY 11, LLC REFUND:EXT OF TIME PA96-0339 001-171-4036 113.00 609.00
41467 01/16/97 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI MAINT. INSTALL ON ENG. COPIER 330-199-999-5217 17.27
41467 01/16/97 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILL[ LEASE FOR COPIER AT CRC 190-182-999-5239 117.84 135.11
41468 01/16/97 002473 YUCAIPA AUTO & TRAILER TRAILER - DEBRIS PU/SPEC EVENT 001-164-601-5610 2,120.52 2,120.52
TOTAL CHECKS 214,310.70
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3
01/16/97 15:59 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE AMOUNT
001 GENERAL FUND 413,733.49
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 4,606.75
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 675,864.04
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 395,041.01
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 5,475.00
TOTAL 1,494,720.29
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
01/16/97 15:59 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41469 01/28/97 002541 BECKER, WALTER KARL CITYWIDE P.C.C. REPAIRS 001-164-601-5402 9,660.40 9,660.40
41470 01/28/97 002086 CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT MAN DEC SRVCS-CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL 001-164-601-5402 67,168.29
41470 01/28/97 002086 CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT MAN RETEN.W/H-CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL 001-2035 6,716.83- 60,451.46
41471 01/28/97 002182 D K S ASSOCIATES OCT PROF SVCS-1-15/1-215 CORR 210-165-633-5802 14,873.57 14,873.57
41472 01/28/97 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS, INC. ANNUAL EDEN SYS SUPPORT-1997 320-199-999-5211 5,475.00 5,475.00
41473 01/28/97 001550 FIRST PACIFIC NATIONAL RETENTION PMT #5-WALCOTT CORR 210-1035 13,621.00 13,621.00
41474 01/28/97 002468 GENERAL CONSOLIDATED PRG PMT #4-6TH ST PARKING LOT 280-199-804-5804 40,632.00
41474 01128/97 002468 GENERAL CONSOLIDATED RETENTION W/H #4-6TH ST PARKIN 280-2035 4,063.20- 36,568.80
41475 01/28/97 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION C/O #5-WALCOTT CORRIDOR PROJEC 210-165-637-5804 58,250.00
41475 01/28/97 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION PRG PMT #5-WALCOTT CORRIDOR 210-165-637-5804 77,960.00
41475 01/28/97 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION RETENTION W/H PMT #5-WALCOTT 210-2035 13,621.00- 122,589.00
41476 01/28/97 002129 GREAT WEST CONTRACTORS, PRG PMT #11-PARKVIEW FIRE STAT 210-190-626-5804 299,104.42
41476 01/28/97 002129 GREAT WEST CONTRACTORS, C/O PRG PMT #11-PARKVIEW 210-190-626-5804 6,298.40
41476 01128/97 002129 GREAT WEST CONTRACTORS, RETENTION W/H PMT#ll-PARKVIEW 210-2035 30,540.28-
41476 01/28/97 002129 GREAT WEST CONTRACTORS, STOP PMT NOTICE-INFINITY STRUC 210-2038 24,948.88- 249,913.66
41477 01/28/97 002499 L.D. KING, INC. DEC PROF SVCS/WINCH/I-15 BRIDG 280-199-602-5801 30,465.00
41477 01/28/97 002499 L.D. KING, INC. LACK OF DOCUMENTATION 280-199-602-5801 3,721.00- 26,744.00
41478 01/28/97 002397 LANDMARK/CALIFORNIA STA RET:ESCROW ACCT GREAT WEST #11 210-1035 30,540.28 30,540.28
41479 01/28/97 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION PRG PMT #11-SAM HICKS MON. PRK 280-199-805-5804 19,965.90
41479 01/28/97 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION C/O PMT#ll-SAM HICKS MON. PARK 280-199-805-5804 6,363.45
41479 01/28/97 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION RET. W/H PMT#ll-SAM HICKS PARK 280-2035 1,316.47-
41479 01128/97 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION REL. PART. RETENT:PW 94-15 CSD 280-2035 24,388.61
41479 01/28/97 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION ADJUSTING RETENTION TO 10% 280-2035 25,705.08- 23,696.41
41480 01/28/97 001007 N P G CORP. REMOVE/REPLACE ASPHALT-PAUBA 001-164-601-5402 8,514.00 8,514.00
41481 01/28/97 001383 P M W ASSOCIATES, INC. RDA CONSULTING SERVS-DEC 96 280-199-999-5248 4,606.75
41481 01/28/97 001383 P M W ASSOCIATES, INC. RDA CONSULTING SERVS-DEC 96 165-199-999-5248 4,606.75 9,213.50
41482 01/28197 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 572.80
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI WORKSTATIONS FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 96,469.50
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTER[ OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 2,688.15
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 1,684.99
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 44,612.81
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI WORKSTATIONS FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 2,517.04
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 536.21
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI WORKSTATIONS FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 1,226.20
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI OFFICE FURNITURE FOR CITY HALL 210-199-650-5804 37.71
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI REUPHOLSTER CHAIR T. ELMO 001-162-999-5242 195.00
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI FREIGHT 001-162-999-5242 20.00
41482 01/28/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI TAX 001-162-999-5242 16.66
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
01/16/97 15:59 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI CREDIT: CHARGED TAX ON LABOR 210-199-650-5804 193.35-
41482 01128197 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI CREDIT: CHARGED TAX ON LABOR 210-199-650-5804 2.71-
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI BUYBACK OF FURNITURE 210-199-650-5804 1,179.37-
41482 01128/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI HARPER'S FURNITURE BUYBACK 210-199-650-5804 20,770.00- 128,431.64
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5288 203,803.32
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5299 40,558.84
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5298 19,552.12
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5294 10,131.04
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5288 11,273.40
41483 01128/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5291 3,239.20
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5291 3,077.24
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFFIS LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-1230 3,239.20
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-1230 3,077.24
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5281 23,966.97
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5282 2,777.60
41483 01/28/97 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S LAW ENFORCEMENT NOV. 1996 001-170-999-5262 10,179.80 334,875.97
41484 01/28/97 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION WINCH/1-15 PRGSS PMT/DEC 96 280-199-602-5804 303,425.05
41484 01/28/97 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION-WINCH/1-15 DEC PRGSS 210-2035 30,342.51- 273,082.54
41485 01128197 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC EXISTING CROSSWALK RELOCATION 210-165-664-5804 287.50
41485 01/28/97 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC SIGNAL @ COSMIC/HUMBER RANCHO 210-165-664-5804 22,246.50
41485 01128/97 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC RETENTION:SIGNAL COSMIC/HUMBER 210-2035 2,253.40- 20,280.60
41486 01/28/97 002451 SKYTEC PRG PMT #4-CITY MAINT. FACILIT 210-190-144-5804 140,209.40
41486 01/28/97 002451 SKYTEC RETENT W/H #4-CITY MAINT. FAC. 210-2035 14,020.94- 126,188.46
TOTAL CHECKS 1,494,720.29
0
ITEI\4 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORI
DIRE TOR 01
CITY MANAC-
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council
FROM:Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT: 1997 Workers' Compensation Coverage Annual Renewal
PREPARED BY: Grant M. Yates, Human Resources Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council approve renewing the annual agreement with California
Compensation (CAL Comp) for the City's Employee Workers' Compensation Insurance, subject
to final approval as to form by the City Attorney.
BACKGROUND: The City utilized the services of State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) for
its workers' compensation insurance during its first six years of incorporation. In 1996, the
City was able, under the Workers' Compensation Reform Act of 1994, to go out to the open
market to gain additional quotes. The bid process resulted in the selection of California
Compensation (CAL Comp) and a 1996 premium of $79,825; which saved the City $10,755
had they selected SCIF's 1996 quote.
Over the first coverage year, with CAL Comp, the City staff has been impressed with their
commitment to the best possible service. CAL Comp's staff has been conscientious and
consistently demonstrated their dedication to what is best for the City and its employees. CAL
Comp is the fifth largest writer of workers' compensation coverage in California, and is an
admitted carrier with a rating of A-Vill.
The 1997 Plan Year (2/01/97- 1/31/98) quotes, provided by our benefit broker Mike Bush of
Cal Surance, are as follows:
CAL Comp 74,955
State Fund 91,020*
UniCare 96,411
AmericanHomelnsurance $100,000+
*The State Fund quote allows the City the opportunity to possibly receive a
dividend return only if our claim experience for the 1997 policy year is
outstanding.
R:\LANIERDA\REPOR'ngrAFF38.MIS 1116/97
Staff is very pleased with CAL Comp's 1997 quote and believes it reflects CAL Comp's positive
relationship with the City along with their approval of our Loss Prevention Program, under the
leadership of the City's Safety Committee. This premium reduction is even more impressive,
as the City's payroll has increased, due to normal merit salary progression, from the previous
plan year. In addition, the experience modification (determined by the relationship of City
claim costs to industry-wide standards) has increased from 1 1 8% to 123%.
Based on the above listed quotes and the quality of the services received; staff recommends
the renewal of coverage with CAL Comp, for the 1997 Plan Year.
FISCAL IMPACT: The CAL Comp quote is saving the City a total of $4,870 for the upcoming
1997 Plan Year. Adequate funds are available in the operating budget to fund this policy.
R:\LANIERDA\REPORTWAFF38.MIS 1/16/97
JAN-16-97 THU 11:19 P.02/14
PROPOSAL OF
WORKERS-'COMPENSA-noN INSURANCE
fo r
CrrY OF TEMECLRLA
COVERAGE INCEPTING: 02-01-97
Presen
Mic!hael Bush
Sr. Vice President/Account Executive
January 14,1997
JAN-18-97 THU 11:19 P.03/14
INTRODUC-HON TO CAL-SURANCE
Cal-Sur Associates, Inc., a member of the Cal-Surance C;roup, is a hM service
@ance brokerage. Spec g in Murdcipal and Con-unercial 'Property, Casualty
and Workers' CoinpensaLion Insuraitce and Risk hunagement Services, Cal@urance
rep@nts you, our Clients.
abounded in 1962, we are currently r@-ed as tl-xe 49Lh largest broker iii the country, and
the large-qt independently owned agerLcy/broker in California.
Our philosophy is client oriented. We strive to provide our customers with
comprehensive prourarm to properly confront their exposures to loss, through:
t,
InqurancL- rontraclq with tbe best available comp@es, with the best avalable
conditions, at the lowest possible cost.
Risk Management techniques to transfer, reduce and control exposures and their
C03L
(:>ur @l @ ib tv rwuct: the ul@te net cost of risk for our clients and to provide
s@ces in a professional manner.
You are professiorws in your field as we are profession in our3. By using Ced-
Surance to assist in developing and maintaining your in.-,uranc4p prr)gtam you will free
up your r@u@es iuid add to the @pt!rtise n@ed for maxiinum efficiency and
economy.
WM:mm.0%2
JAM-16-97 THU 11:20 P.04/14
SERVICE PERSONNEL
CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIAM, INC
SERVICE PERSONNEL
fo r
THE@OFTEMECULA
ACCOLJNT EXF-C
Mir-hael G. Bush
Office DirecL Line (714)939-7453
Office (714)939-08M
Home (714)998-7479
SENIOR ACCOUNR ADMINISTRATOR
Judy Pavlik
Office Direct Line: (714)939-745,5
Office- (714)939-0800
ACCOUNT ADMINISTRATOR
Rose David
Office Direct @: (714)939-7458
Office: (714)838-0800
Address
333 Oty ]3oulevard West
Orange, CA 92668
P.O. Box 7W
Orange, CA 92613
Fax
(714)939-1@
JAN-16-97 THU 11:20 P.05/14
WORKERS'COMPENSATION
EXPERIENCE MODIFICATION
Your ex@ence modification for the current year 1997, Febi-uary lsL is 123%.
THIS MODIRCATION HAS BEEN DEVELOPED BY @ CALIFORNIA INS CIC,
RATING BUREAU BASED UPON YOUR INDIVIDUAL C-'T.ATMq NTEPJENCIE FOR
THE ]FOLLOWING Y]EAR,9:
'1995
1994
1993
MC.MM.016.4 Wan-M
JAN-16-97 THU 11:21 P.06/14
AREAS OF MAJOR CONCERN
(Addressed by Cal-Surance and Calff0mia COmPensation @ance Company)
1 - @late BiU,#198 Compliance (Continuous Audit)
2.@ety Com@ttee AtLendaLice (D@uss)
A. California Comp tion Loss Control Support
B. ]FiLm Library Available
C.Attend=ca by Cal-Surance and Carrier Loss Contxol
3-Written @ft-ty Program (Review and Update)
4.Reserve Reviews (Frequency as Desired)
5.Firm Record Keeping
A.Ease of Reporting (fax Link)
B.Exchange of Information
1.Fax Link for Claim Status Reports
2.In-House Claims Modem for review of individual claim file detail
(adjuster notes and plans of action).
6.Clainis Adjuster Case Load - 140 Indemnity
A. 11 Year Veteraii Adjuster
ma@ol&a (@7)
JAN-16-97 THU 11:21 P.07/14
MARKETS APPROACHED BY CAL-SURANCE
Insurance Coml!anv Cover4i&29 Status
1. California Compensation Workerr.'Compensation Quotation provided.
2. American Home AssuraitceWorkers'Compe@tion Unwilling to quote at
Cornpany under $100,000 premium.
3. Uj-ticarehisuranceCurnpany Workers'Compensation Quotation provided.
4. State Compcnsation Worker.%'ComppnRation Violation provided.
Im-urance Fund
@.01&5 (
JAN-16-97 THU 11:22 P.08/14
1. PROPOSAL
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY
02-01-97/02-01-98 ]POLICY PERIOD
F-';T'IMATT-D ANNUAL PRIEMRUM
ONE YEAR - NON PARTICIPATING
CIassification Code PayroU Rate Premium
Municipal (non-n-wnual) 9410 $2,207,154 2.83 $62,462
M@pal (all other) 9420 $603,275 7.79 46,995
Clerical 8810 $1,718@6 .85 14,607
$124,064
Modification: x 1.23
$146,396
Pren-dum Mudifier. x .5705
$83,513
Pre@um Discount- x.8975259
Total Pren-duin: $74,955
(.2548"/o) Califon-da Admn. A ment + 373
(.4242) California Fraud As ment + 621
Payment Terms Net Bilfing Rates
10% Down Code Rate
Monthly Installments or Audits 9410 1.71
(Di.,;cu&s) 9420 4.71
8810 .51
Note: Coinparison using 1997 payroll esfi=tes.
Pr@um using 1996 rates and modffication - $89,464
Premium @ing 1996 rates and 1997 modffication - $93,254
JAR-@RAGII @7)
JAN-16-97 THU 11:22 P.00/14
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION TNSURANCE COMPANY
I.B"t's Ra@ and Finandal Size:
A-:Vlll, Adniitted (Owned by Foundation Health)
if. I-ocation:
Orange, CA (Home Office, Novato, CA)
III.Strong Points:
Loss Prevention, @ifomia Workers' Compensation Specialty Company,
Claims Review Scheduling, 2nd Largest Writer of Wurkers'Comp=sation in
Califorrda.
IV.Rcvicw @ices
Per Areas of Major Cuiicern @-@on
mv;o".U@f (@ti
JAM-16-97 THU 11:23 P.10/14
11.PROPOSAL -
AMERICAN HOME ASSLJRANCE COMPANY
Unwilling to quote under $1 OOMO in premiun-t-
IIL PROPOSAL -
UNIC,ARE INSURANCE COMPANY
Pre@urrt! $96,411 (plus California Admin. & Fraud)
IV.PROPOSAL -
STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND
following page.
Note:
The State CoinperisatLon Insurance Fund proposal is subject to L)ividend Calculation.
*A retention of 45% would require that the City incur less than $29,562 in losses in
order to receive dividend refunds resulting in a net cost of $74,955 (CaIifo@
Compensation's net cost proposal).
aLosses in excess of this figure may result in higher net cost.
*Losses below this figure may result in lower net cost.
oDividends cannot be guaranteed.
Workers' CoutpeL@tiuii im@ are authorized to irsue participating po@es. A
dividend (@@d) under m& a policy can only be pead front @lus accumulated from
pr@uim on Workers'Compensation policies @ued pursuant to the laws of C:atifomia.
Under @on-kia law, it is urdawful for an insurer to pro@ the future payment of
dividends under an unexpired Workers' Compensation policy or to misrepresent the
co@tions for dividend payment. Dividends are payable only pursuant to conditions
deterby the Board of Directors or other governing board of the Company
follo@ policy expiration
It is a misdemeanor for any insurer, officer or agent thereof, or any i ance broker or
solicitor, to pro@ the payment of future Workers' Compensation dividends. Past
dividend performance is no guarantee of an insurer's future dividend performance.
JAN-16-97 THU 11:23 P.11/14
STATE
Compf!pjs,&Tfot4
1 ?4 r. U R A 14 C B
FUND
:N REPLY FIEVIEP
rnis Quote does NoT provide insu Prepared Ol/l6ifgg7
EnMate of Annual PFemiwn @ed for
City of Taffiecula (2-1 NAD m6th MERIT + KAISER Discounts)
c@ EStfrmted Base
Code Descdptlon Rgv paymfl Premium
G 041 01 Municipal or @ty @@ 3.41 2,207.@ 76.264
94201 AN @ Munidpal or County @oy@NOC 9.39 003275 50.6-0
@10, Clot" Office Employe*s 1-04 718.43S 17,
Bast Premium $ 149.783
A~ (V#4 co I m
Created 8 PrwWufn 3 184,233
This quote is ftw on I
PW Mwft Rating Plan m 0.75,n
"sw Airianco m 0.90 k
Eadm@ Modfl7ed Prmft#M $124,368
EsdmaW Premium Discount Credt factor 0.7!io
To(W ftO Annual PmnilLtni $91,020
@pioyere Li" lnmnm
Is i,ow,ooo -7 Minimum Premium 200
flity umits: BiWng Factor 0.4@
P@ium D@unt
Modiffed PmmiLun is d@unted a=fding to the Cm=
fbiloviing saedule. Code Rate
s 1.000 0% 94101 3.41
N*A $ 4,000 21.8% 94201 9.39
AbCrve $ 5,000 ZT2% 88101 i.o4
In@ biling,@ W~ in this quote @ll be used on
payroll reports. They take into a=ura ratng plan
(or debits) which will apply at final bl@ ano an estimate
of your pmium discount as ftwed above. The a=W
dkmunt applied at final bilkg wal be b2uW on @
@l repcw led on your poficy and su@ to audil
Your @n@
applytothess@dmbBkv@.
V" Surch@ (manda(my) 0.2W% ofpmwtm $46
KC.=A SurchaMs (nwnd2tcvy) 0 4242% a@um $782
i@) pre@m- d@ $0,102
@it aquired to lnhyate ro 10,3531
p@ed to Stato F@ Class Code,& iq@le
Me
Interim
aill;ng
Rate I
1.60N 1. 23 = 2.07
4.6434 1.23 - 5.71
1- 23 - .63
im Will
i750 @St CA 9
(714) 93100 @ (714) 5@77 CLAT@ F;ax (714) -%5@l
L4uiring Addnmm P.O. Sox 419 - AA2. CA @19
PROPOSAL OF,
WORKERSF COMPENSATION INSURANCE
for
CITY OF TEMECULA
COVERAGE INCEPTING: 02-01-97
Presen
Michael Bush
Sr. Vice President/Account Executive
January 14, 1997
MB rnm 016 1(Jan-97)
INTRODUCTION TO CAL-SURANCE
Cal-Surance Associates, Inc., a member of the Cal-Surance Group, is a full service
insurance brokerage. Specializing in Municipal and Commercial Property, Casualtv
and Workers' Compensation Insurance and Risk Management Services, Cal-Surance
represents vou, our Clients.
I
Founded in 1962, we are currently ranked as the 49th largest broker in the countrv, and
the largest independently owned agencv/broker in California.
Our philosophy is client oriented. We strive to provide our customers with
comprehensive programs to properlv confront their exposures to loss, through:
-Insurance contracts with the best available companies, with the best available
conditions, at the lowest possible cost.
-Risk Manac-ement techniques to transfer, reduce and control exposures and their
cost.
Ourfinal goal is to reduce the ultimate net cost of risk for our clients and to provide
services in a professional manner.
You are professionals in vour field as we are professionals in ours. Bv using Cal-
Surance to assist in developing and maintaining your insurance program vou will free
up your resources and add to the expertise needed for maximum efficiency and
economv.
MBmmO',62 Jan-97)
SERVICE PERSONNEL
CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, INC.
SERVICE PERSONNEL
for
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE
Michael G. Bush
Office Direct Line (714)939-7453
Office (714)939-0800
Home (714)998-7479
SENIOR ACCOUNT ADMINISTRATOR
Judy Pavlik
Office Direct Line: (714)939-7435
Office: (714)939-0800
ACCOUNT ADMINISTRATOR
Rose David
Office Direct Line: (714)939-7458
Office: (714)838-0800
Address
333 Cltv Boulevard West
Orange, CA 92668
P.O. Box 7048
Oranc,e, CA 92613
Fax
(/-14)9--19-160-4
MBmmOl63 (Jan-97)
WORKERS'COMPENSATION
EXPERIENCE MODIFICATION
Your experience modification for the current year 1997, February lst is 123'/'O.
THIS MODIFICATION HAS BEEN DEVELOPED BY THE CALIFORNIA INSURANCE
RATING BUREAU BASED UPON YOUR INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS EXPERIENCE FOR
THE FOLLOWING YEARS:
1995
1994
1993
MBmmOl64 @Jan-97)
AREAS OF MAJOR CONCERN
(Addressed bv Cal-Surance and California Compensation Insurance Company)
1.Senate Bill #198 Compliance (Continuous Audit)
2.Safety Committee Attendance (Discuss)
A.California Compensation Loss Control Support
B.Film Librarv Available
C.Attendance bv Cal-Surance and Carrier Loss Control
3.Written Safety Program (Review and Update)
4.Reserve Reviews (Frequencv as Desired)
5.Claims Record Keeping
A.Ease of Reporting (Fax Link)
B.Exchange of Information
1.Fax Link for Claim Status Reports
2.In-House Claims Modem for review of individual claim file detail
(adjuster notes and plans of action).
6.Claims Adjuster Case Load - 140 Indemnitv
A. 11 Year Veteran Adjuster
MBmmDlS,3 (Jan-97)
MARKETS APPROACHED BY CAL-SURANCE
Insurance Company Coverages Status
1. California Compensation Workers' Compensation Quotation provided.
2. American Home Assurance Workers'Compensation Unwilling to quote at
Companv under $100,000 premium.
1
3. Unicare Insurance Companv Workers' CompensationQuotation provided.
4. State Compensation Workers' Compensation Quotation provided.
Insurance Fund
MBmmol65 ;Jan-97)
1. PROPOSAL-
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY
02-01-97/02-01-98 POLICY PERIOD
ESTIMATED ANNUAL PREMIUM
ONE YEAR - NON PARTICIPATING PLAN
Classification Code Payroll Rate Premium
Municipal (non-manual) 9410 $2,207,154 2.83 $62,462
Municipal (all other) 9420 $603,27-D 7.79 46,995
Clerical ssio $1,718,4-@6 .85 14,607
$124,064
Modification: x 1.23
$146,396
Premium Modifier: x .:')705
$83,313
Premium Discount: x.8975259
Total Premium: $74,955
(.2548"O) California Admn. Assessment: + 373
(.4242) California Fraud Assessment: + 621
Payment Terms Net Billing Rates
10% Down Code Rate
Monthlv Installments or Audits 9410 1.71
(Discuss) 9420 4.71
8810 .51
Note: Comparison using 1997 pavroll estimates.
Premium using 1996 rates and modification = S89,464
Premium using 1996 rates and 1997 modification = S93,2-D4
MBmmOI68 (Jan-97)
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY
1.Best's Rating and Financial Size:
A-:Vlll, Admitted (Owned by Foundation Health)
II.Location:
Orange, CA (Home Office, Novato, CA)
Ill.Strong Points:
Loss Prevention, California Workers' Compensation Specialtv Companv,
Claims Review Scheduling, 2nd Largest Writer of Workers' Compensation in
California.
IV.Review Services
Per Areas of Major Concern Section
MBmmOl6,- iJan-97)
11.PROPOSAL -
AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
Unwilling to quote under $100,000 in premium.
111. PROPOSAL -
UNICARE INSURANCE COMPANY
Premium: $96,411 (plus California Admin. & Fraud)
IV.PROPOSAL -
STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND
See following page.
Note:
The State Compensation Insurance Fund proposal is subject to Dividend Calculation.
* A retention of 45% would require that the Citv incur less than $29,562 in losses in
order to receive dividend refunds resulting in a net cost of S7,4,955 (California
Compensation's net cost proposal).
* Losses in excess of this figure mav result in higher net cost.
* Losses below this figure mav result in lower net cost.
* Dividends cannot be guaranteed.
Workers' Compensation insurers are authorized to issue participating policies. A
dividend (reftmd) under such a policv can oniv be paid from surplus accumulated from
premiums on Workers'Compensation policies issued pursuant to the laws of California.
Under California law, it is unlawful for an insurer to promise the future pavment of
dividends under an unexpired Workers' Compensation policv or to misrepresent the
conditions for dividend pavment. Dividends are pavable only pursuant to conditions
determined bv the Board of Directors or other governing board of the Companv
following policv expiration.
It is a misdemeanor for anv insurer, officer or @igent thereof, or anv insurance broker or
solicitor, to promise the pavment of future @,Vorkers' Compensation dividends. Past
dividend performance is no guarantee of an insurer's future dividend performance.
MBMMC169 @jan-g@7)
STATE
COPAPENSATIC)N
I N S U R A N C E
FUND
@;=@l -Y RE=E.R TO
This Quote does NOT provide insurance Prepared 01/15/1997
Estimate of Annual Premium prepared for
City of Temecula (2-1 NAD with MERIT + KAISER Discounts)
Class Base Estimated Base
Code Description Rate Payroll Premium
G 941 01 Municipal or County Employees 3.41 2,207,154 75,264
94201 All Other Municipal or County Employees-NOC 9.39 603,275 56,648
88101 Clerical Office Employees 1.04 1,718,436 17,872
Base Premium $ 149,783
Group Policy? (YIN) Experience Modirication 1.23
Estimated Standard Premium $184,233
9
a
PPN nN Merit Rating Plan modifier 0.75 m
Kaiser Alliance modifter 0.90 k
Estimated Modified Premium $124,358
Estimated Premium Discount Credit factor 0.73192
Total Estimated Annual Premium $91,020
Employer's Liability Limits: Interim Billing Factor 0.494051
$ 1,000,000 Minimum Premium $200
This quote is based on information provided to State Fund. Class Code & Rate Summary
Premium Discount Interim
Modified Premium is discounted according to the Class Base Billing
following schedule. Code Rate Rate *
First $ 1,000 0% 94101 3.41 1.68 1. 23 = 2. 07
Next $ 4,000 21.3% 94201 9.39 4.64 1. 23 = 5. 71
Above $ 5,000 27.2% 8101 1 04 o.51 -N 1.23 = - 63
Interim billing rates shown in this quote will be used on
payroll reports. They take into account rating plan credits
(or debits) which will apply at final billing and an estimate
of your premium discount as detailed above. The actual
discount applied at final billing will be based on the
actual payroll reported on your policy and subject to audit.
Your experience modification will
apply to these interim billing rates.
WCA Surcharge (mandatory) 0.2548% of premium $469
WCFA Surcharge (mandatory) 0.4242% of premium $782
Initial premium deroosit $9,102
@IR Rep CodeUnderwriter Deposit required to initiate coverage $10,353
750 East Fourth Street - Santa Ana. CA 92705-3923
(714) 565-5000 Sales Fax (714) 565-91977 Claims Fax (1@l 4@ 565-0-801
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 419 - Santa Ana. CA 92702-(3419
ITEI\4 5
APPRO
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAO
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council/City Manager
FROM:Gary Thornhill, Community Development Director
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT: Waiver of Fees for a Natural Gas Re-Fueling Facility
Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Waive the Processing Fee for a Natural Gas Re-Fueling Facility.
BACKGROUND
On November 4, 1996, the Southern California Gas Company filed a Minor Conditional Use
Permit to obtain approval to add a single natural gas dispenser to an existing gas station located
at 41981 Avenida Alvarado. At the time the application was filed with the Community
Development Department, the applicant requested a waiver of processing fees. This request
was made as a result of the project being funded through a grant from the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (RCTC). Since City policy is that no staff member may grant a
waiver of fees for any application, this request is before the City Council for review and
approval. Because public funding is being utilized for this facility, staff supports the request.
FISCAL IMPACT
A processing fee of $888.00 would be refunded to the applicant.
Attachment:Letter from Southern California Gas Company dated December 4, 1996
R:\STAFFRPT\NAT-GAS.CC 1/16/97 klb 1
The Gas Company
December 04, 1996
199F,
Mr. Tony Elmo
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033 Southern California
43200 Business Park Drive Gas Company
Temecula, CA 92589 555 li@ Filih Sere,,t
I-os.4ngeles, C.4
Dear W. Elmo: 9t)Ol @- 101
The C@-. Corn--, has apt-ll;--,-A @P--r m:,rcr public u-.-- pc.@-,@t to i.-.s*LC-"Il a -.alt-ural, gas
r --IY
refueling station on existing facilities at a card lock gasoline service station owned by
SKS. The project, application no. PA 96-307, is located at 41981 Avenida Alvarado
(SWC at Diaz Road). This project is a clean air project which is financed by the Temecula
Rapid Transit District Authority. It will have significant implication on the quality of life
within the city of Temecula.
By supporting this clean air alternative fuel project, we think The City is very pro-active in
it's effort of providing cleaner air for it's residents. Because of the benefits which The
City expects to derive from this project, and because of the source of funding, we
encourage The City to contribute to the project by waiving the $888 permit application
fee. The Gas Company has already submitted a check for the said amount so that we
would not slow down the plan check and approval process. If the permit fee is waived,
we would like the city to credit the $888 which were paid.
We have installed several of these projects in different cities and because of the nature of
the project and it's potential rewards to the cities, several of them have waived their fees.
We hope that Temecula is an advocate of cleaner air and therefore will show their support
by waiving this fee.
We are pleased to be working with the city of Temecula on this project and we encourage
@f
The C;@j 'to so.-,.c compressed i-@tui-di gas (CNG) vehicles in their continued
support of cleaner air. If you should have any questions please contact me at (213) 244-
2665.
B,@x ?-'49
@s inge-ie,. (-.i
90051 1 '49
Sincerely,
@ vt @ @ Ck"
Stan Sinclair
Project Engineer
Nfinor Public use Perinit Fee 2
cc:Herb Bemett
Gary Albaugh
Gary Thomhill
I\ 4 6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORP
FINANCE DIRI
Y MANAG
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Riverside County Transportation Commission, Measure "A" Expenditure
Plan and Measure "A" Plan Map
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THE RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S AMENDMENT 96-
01 TO ORDINANCE NO. 88-1
BACKGROUND:
The Riverside County Transportation Commission, at their November 13, 1996 meeting, made
a finding of necessity to amend the Measure "A" Expenditure Plan and authorized revision to
the Measure "A" Plan Map.
The amendments that are proposed depict the presence and location of the Cities of Calimesa
and Murrieta. These two (2) Cities were incorporated subsequent to adoption of the
Expenditure Plan.
In addition, the map provides for a name change for our City, by changing from Rancho
California as depicted on the originally adopted map to Temecula.
For the amendment to become effective, the proposed Measure "A" Expenditure Plan along with
Measure "A" Plan Map must be approved by Riverside County and the number of incorporated
cities that would constitute majority of population within the incorporated areas.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
1.Resolution No. 97-
2.Revised Measure "A" Expenditure Plan Map
r:\agdrpt\97\01 28\rctcmasa.r@ajp
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEM[ECULA AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THE
]]DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S
AM[ENDMENT 96-01 TO ORDINANCE NO. 88-1
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") has
adopted Expenditure Plan Amendment No. 96-01 seeking to amend the expenditure plan draft as
part of the Commission's Ordinance No. 88-1.
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula (the "City") hereby determines that it is in the best
interests of the City that Expenditure Plan Amendment No. 96-01 be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City adopts and incorporates in this Resolution all findings made in
Expenditure Plan Amendment No. 96-01; and
WHEREAS, a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population
pursuant to Section 240302 of the Public Utilities Code is required to approve the Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula approves Expenditure Plan Amendment No. 96-01.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
r:\agdrpt@97@O 1 28\rctcmesa.res/ajp
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the forgoing
Resolution No. 97- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 28th day of January, 1997 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
r:\agd,pt%97\01 28\rctcm"a.res/ajp
LLI- 2 a
ui
La
10- IIXL
OX(ft 0
Ulmd
oz
ITEI\4 7
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORT
FINANCE DIRI
CITY MANAG
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Parcel Map No. 26232-2, Located at the Southeast Corner
of Winchester Road (Hwy 79 North) and Nicolas Road
PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development
Gerald L. Alegria, Assistant Engineer - Land Development
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 26232-2 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26232-2, was approved by the City of Temecula Planning Manager,
Debbie Ubnoske, on December 5, 1996. The Developers: John E. Roripaugh, June Roripaugh
Tull, Leo E. and Marian E. Roripaugh, have met all of the Conditions of Approval.
Parcel Map No. 26232-2 is a nine (9) parcel commercial subdivision, of 9.53 gross acres,
located at the southeast corner of Winchester Road (Hwy 79 North) and Nicolas Road. The site
is currently vacant.
The following fees have been deferred for Parcel Map No. 26232-2:
Area Drainage Plan Fee Due prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Public Facilities Deposit Due prior to issuance of a building permit
Signal Mitigation Fee Due prior to issuance of a building permit
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
1 . Development Fee Checklist
2.Project Location Map
3.Parcel Map No. 26232-2
4.Fees & Securities Report
R:\AGDRPT\97NO1 2B\PM262322.AGN
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Parcel Map No. 26232-2
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
FEE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Flood Control (ADP) To be paid prior to issuance of grading or
building permit
(Condition no. 45)
Public Facility Deposit To be paid prior to issuance of building permit
(Condition no. 51)
Traffic Signal Mitigation To be paid prior to issuance of building permit
(Condition no. 33)
R:\AGORPT\97\01 28\PM262322.AGN
@l u a P- I rl,-ra
@10 /- I
6AV
a@
tql&OLA@ P-OAL?
/z
@l
@K2
LC 00, H@AC@
49 , (,A, L@' \ \
o
z
C\l
C)
z
cli
LLI w
w
LU
> zw
m
cl
0
z
L'i
LL-
<
C\J
0
w ui
C\i Z>O
r,C)
Lj
C)
it
LL)
-0
<
LLJ
co
LL)
ui
Z
2.,92
-C)
0
LLJ
4 zz
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
PARCEL MAP NO. 26232-2 DATE: December 10, 1996
IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR
SECURITY SECURITY
Street and Drainage 66,000.00 33,000.00
Water 0.00 0.00
ewer 0.00 0.00
TOTAL $ 66,000.00 $3,000.00
Maintenance Retention $0.00
Monument Security $ 1,750.00
DEVELOPMENT FEES
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs $0.00
RCFCD (ADP) Fee $ T.B.D.*
Signal Mitigation Fee - Deferred to Bldg Permit $ 23,825.00
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee $ N/A
Other Development Fees/Deposit $ T. B. D.
SERVICE FEES
Planning Fee $110.00
Comprehensive Transportation Plan $8.00
Plan Check Fee $930.00
Inspection Fee $0.00
Monument Inspection Fee $250.00
Fees Paid to Date $1,298.00
Balance of Fees Due $0.00
T.B.D. - To Be Determined
R:\AGDRPT\97\0128\PM262322.AGN
ITEI\4 8
APPROVAL
CITY A'
FINANC
CITY M
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:"No Parking" Zone on North General Kearny Road adjacent to the Bicycle
Path Crossing
PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution
entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE ON NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD ADJACENT TO THE BICYCLE PATH
CROSSING AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A"
BACKGROUND:
The City received a request to establish "No Parking" zones on North General Kearny Road
north of Nicolas Road adjacent to the bicycle path crossing. There is an existing bicycle path
along the south side of Santa Gertrudis Creek which extends from Joseph Road to Ynez Road.
This path crosses North General Kearny Road over the bridge near Nicolas Road Park and
Voorburg Park. Park visitors parking at the entrances to the bicycle path obstruct the view of
bicyclists crossing North General Kearny Road. The proposed parking restriction will improve
the sight distance and enhance safety of the bicycle path users. The Public/Traffic Safety
Commission unanimously approved the proposed "No Parking" zones at their December 12
1996 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Department of Public Works Striping/Stenciling Account No. 001-
164-601-5410.
Attachments:
1.Resolution No. 97-
2.Exhibit "A" - Proposed Parking Restriction
r:\agdrpt\97\0128\keamy.prktajp
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMIECULA ESTABLISHING A uNO PARKING" ZONE
ON NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD ADJACENT TO
THE BICYCLE PATH CROSSING AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT
"A".
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
Section 1. Pursuant to Section 10. 12. 100, of the Temecula Municipal Code, "No
Parking" zones are hereby established in the City of Temecula on North General Kearny Road
adjacent to the bicycle path crossing, as shown on Exhibit "A".
Section 2. The City Clerk shall ce@ to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-2- r:\agdrpt\97\0128\keamy.prk/ajp
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 97- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 28th day of January, 1997 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-3- r: \agdrpt\97\0 I 28\keamy. prk/ajp
EXHIBIT"A"
PROPOSED PARKING RESTRICTION
N
SANTA
GER'RRUDIS
PROPOSED RED CURB
NICOLAS RD. P@
NICOLAS
SIERRA MADRE DR.
EK
EXITING
BIKE PATH
VOORBURGPMM
ROAD
z
EI\4 9
APPROVAL
CITY Al
FINANC
CITY Mi
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:"No Parking" Zone on Rancho California Road between Margarita Road
and East City Limits
PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution
entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE ON RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND EAST
CITY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A"
BACKGROUND:
The City received two (2) separate requests to establish "No Parking" zones on various locations
on Rancho California Road including in front of the Post Office east of Margarita Road.
Rancho California Road is designated as a four-lane divided arterial roadway on the circulation
element of the General Plan. Currently, this roadway is 86 feet wide with two (2) travel lanes
in each direction and striped median/left-turn lane. The speed limit is posted at 55 MPH on
Rancho California Road east of Margarita Road.
Although on-street parking does not often occur on Rancho California Road, an occasional on-
street parking could create an unsafe condition for bicyclists and vehicular traffic. Therefore,
parking should be restricted on Rancho California Road from Margarita Road to the easterly City
limits. At the December 12, 1996 meeting of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, the
Commission reviewed the proposed parking restriction on Rancho California Road and
unanimously approved staff's recommendation to eliminate parking on Rancho California Road
east of Margarita Road.
It should be noted that Rancho California Road has been identified as a "No Parking" - Bike Lane
arterial roadway on the City's General Plan.
r:\agdrpt\97\0128\RC G.PRK/ajp
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Department of Public Works Striping/Stenciling Account No. 001-
164-601-5410.
Attachments:
1.Resolution No. 97-
2.Exhibit "A" - Proposed Parking Restriction
-2- r:\agdrpt\97\0128\RC@G.PRK/ajp
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE
ON RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BETWEEN
MARGARITA ROAD AND EAST CITY LD41TS AS SHOWN
ON EXHIBIT "A".
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
Section 1. Pursuant to Section 10.12.100, of the Temecula Municipal Code, "No
Parldng" zones are hereby established in the City of Temecula on both sides of Rancho California
Road between Margarita Road and east City Limits as shown on Exhibit "A".
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-3- r:\agdrpt\97\0128\RC G.PRK/Etjp
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 97- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 28th day of January, 1997 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-4- r: \agdrpt\97\0 I 28\RCRMARG. PRK/ajp
EXHIBIT
POSED PARKING RESTFJCTION
L,-
'A
SITE
-C
4 DE t;
2
ri
i-)
e
!i
MARGARIT
r>0 @/'%
TC
ITEI\4 1 0
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECT
Y MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:"No Parking" Zone on Rainbow Canyon Road at Birdie Drive
PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution
entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A"NO PARKING"ZONE ON RAINBOW
CANYON ROAD AT BIRDIE DRIVE AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT 'A'
BACKGROUND:
The City received a request to establish a "No Parking" zone on Rainbow Canyon Road at Birdie
Drive to improve the visibility of oncoming vehicles when exiting Birdie Drive.
At the December 12, 1996, meeting of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, the Commission
reviewed this item and unanimously approved staff's recommendation to restrict parking on
Rainbow Canyon Road at Birdie Drive. The proposed parking restriction will improve sight
distance and visibility of the approaching vehicles at this intersection.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Department of Public Works Striping/Stenciling Account No. 001-
164-601-5410.
Attachments:
1.Resolution No. 97-
2.Exhibit "A" - Proposed Parking Restriction
R:\AGDRPr\97\0128\RAINBOW.PRK
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNC]IL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE
ON RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AT B@IEE DRIEVE
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
Section 1.Pursuant to Section 10. 12. 100, of the Temecula Municipal Code, "No
Parking" zones are hereby established in the, City of Temecula on Rainbow Canyon Road at Birdie
Drive as shown on Exhibit "A".
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 97- - was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 28th day of January, 1997 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-2- R:XAGDRPn97\0128\RAINBOW.PRK
EXHIBIT"A"
PROPOSED PARKING RESTRICTION
PALA
ROAD
I
I
I q
0
09
i I
BIRDIE DR@ I PROPOSED RED CUR]G
I
4
0
N Go
I
t
i
44
1
f
C)
2
ITEI\4 11
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY_
FINANCE DIREC@01
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works\City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Solicitation of Construction Bids for FY95-96 Annual Pavement
Management Project, PW95-28
PREPARED BY:Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
Scott Harvey, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of
Public Works to solicit public construction bids for FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management
Project, PW95-28.
BACKGROUND:
The Pavement Management Program was established to provide a method of prioritizing street
repairs by developing procedures to categorize the existing conditions of local and arterial
roadways throughout the City. Street improvements for each category are developed and a
repair program including a cost/benefit analysis is prepared. A five year plan has been prepared
identifying the local residential and arterial roadways and types of rehabilitation work needed
for each year. The FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Rehabilitation Project is the City's
second project using this pavement management system. This project along with the slurry
sea[ project will be an annual program to maintain the roadways in the City.
The project plans and specifications are proposing two (2) types of pavement rehabilitation
which include an asphalt overlay and the removal and reconstruction of the existing asphalt
pavement. There are three (3) roadways to be rehabilitated, which include portions of Rancho
Vista Road, Solana Way, and La Serena Way (see exhibit "A").
The plans, specifications and contract documents have been completed and the project is ready
to be advertised for construction bids. These plans and specifications are available for review
in the City Engineer's office. The engineer's estimate for this project is $390,000.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project is a Capital Improvement Project which will be funded by Measure A.
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit "Al'
pwG4\agdrpt\97\0 I 28\pw95-28.bid
EXHIBIT '?Al?
FY95/96 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
LOCATION MAP
ILI
l@@ l@TA
@.1c c@
I ITEI\4 12
APPROVAL \i
CITY ATTORNEY)--.
FINANCE DIRECTO
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Award of Construction Contract for Installation of Conduit on Rancho
California Road Bridge at 1-1 5, Project No. PW95-16A
PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
Ali Moghadam, Associate Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1 .Award a contract for installation of a conduit on the Rancho California Road bridge,
Project No. PW95-16A to DBX, Inc. in the amount of $16,688.00 and authorize the
Mayor to execute the contract.
2.Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency
amount of $1,668.80 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
3.Appropriate funds in the amount of $18,356.80 from the Development Impact Fees to
the Capital Improvement Account No. 210-165-5804.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the Traffic Signal Interconnect, which is a federally funded project, conduits were
installed on Rancho California Road and Business Park Drive between Lyndie Lane and City Hall.
The original project design intended to utilize the existing Traffic Signal Interconnect conduits
that are currently on Rancho California Road bridge over the 1-1 5 freeway (within Caltrans'
right-of-way). However, Caltrans, upon further review of the plans, would not allow TCI cable
to be installed in the same conduits that carried Caltrans' interconnect cable. Therefore, a
separate 2" conduit will be installed on the north side of the bridge within Caltrans' right-of-
way for exclusive use of TCI.
The engineer's estimate for this project was $16,000.00
Three (3) bids were publicly opened on January 1 5, 1 997, and the results for the bid are as
follows:
Base Bid
1 DBX, Inc $16,688.00
2. Peek Traffic $25,500.00
3. A Park Avenue Builders $27,500.00
R:\AGDRPT\97\0 1 28\PW96-16A.AWD rh
Staff has reviewed the bid documents for compliance with City requirements and have
determined that DBX, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder for this project. DBX, Inc. has
completed several other projects for the City in the past, including installation of traffic signals
at Highway 79(S)/Margarita Road, Highway 79(S)/La Paz Street and Margarita Road/Rustic Glen
Drive, with satisfactory results.
The specifications allow 10 working days for completion of this project. Work is expected to
be completed by the first week February, 1997.
A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate funds are available in the Development Impact Fees Account and should be
transferred to the Capital Improvement Account No. 210-165-640-5804.
ATTACHMENTS:
Contract
R:\AGDRPT\97\0128\PW95-16A.AWD rh
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRACT
FOR
PROJECT NO. PW95-16A
INSTALLA TION OF CONDUIT
RA NCHO CA L IFORNIA ROA D BRID GE A T /- 15
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 28th day of January, 1997, by and between the City
of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and DBX, Inc., hereinafter
referred to as "CONTRACTOR."
WITNESSETH:
That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows:
l.a. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS- The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents,
to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and
Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW95-16A, Installation of
Conduit on Rancho California Road Bridge at 1-15, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all
modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of
Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans
and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specification@
Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the
Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American
Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as
amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for
PROJECT NO. PW95-16A, Installation of Conduit on Rancho California Road Bridge at 1-1 5.
Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher:
Building News, Incorporated
3055 Overland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90034
(213) 202-7775
The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and
construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General, Specifications, Special
Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW95-16A, Rancho California Road
Bridge at I- 1 5.
In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the
other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting
portions.
Where the Contract Document describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete
detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that
only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall
furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in
executing the Contract.
CONTRACT CA-1 r: \cip\p rojects\pw95-1 6Nco ntract. a/aip
The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding
as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall
be resolved in favor of this Contract.
2.SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide
and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and
transportation services required for the following:
PROJECT NO. PW95-16A
INSTALLA TION OF CONDUIT ON RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BRIDGE A T /- 15
All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with
the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove
enumerated and adopted by CITY.
3.CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work
performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of CITY
or its authorized representatives.
4.CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept
in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: SIXTEEN THOUSAND SIX
HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($16,688.00), the total amount of the base
bid.
CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed ten (10) working days,
commencing with delivery of Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until
bonds and insurance are approved by CITY.
5.CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City
Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions
to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council.
6.PAYMENTS,
LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE:
A.Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City
Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in
such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer
may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis
for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests.
UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE:
B.Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contracts Code, within thirty (30) days after
submission of a payment request to the City, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal
to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule.
Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each
successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part
thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and
the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the
CITY on forms provided by the CITY.
CONTRACT CA-2 r:\cip\projects\pw95-1 6\contract. a/ajp
C.Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied
by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is
demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the
amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments
on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work.
D.Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within 30 days pursuant
to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contracts Code Section 7107 is hereby
incorporated by reference.
7.WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the
CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and
correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule:
CONTRACT AMOUNI RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE
$25,000 - $75,000 180 days 3%
$75,000 - $500,000 180 days $2,250 + 2% of amount in
excess of $75,000
Over $500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1 % of amount
in excess of $500,000
8.LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section
53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One Thousand Dollars
($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant
to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to
become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to
become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not
be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the
fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is
required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay.
9.WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above,
CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to
the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance
by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related
to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnity
agreement with each claim for payment.
10.PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the
State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per them
wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft,
classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of
the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies
may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post
a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates
as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775,
1776, 1 777.5, 1 777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code.
CONTRACT CA-3 r:\cip\projects\pw95-1 6\contract.alajp
Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as
a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker,
or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this
Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract.
ii.TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract.
12.INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or
in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone.
CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers,
employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons
(CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly
out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by
CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active
negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY.
13.GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or
representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees,
agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable
treatment with respect thereto.
14.CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage
relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee,
or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this
project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been
employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids.
1 5.CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT, After the completion of the work contemplated by this
Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all
workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon
the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the
Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an
affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been
filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California.
16.NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any
actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance
of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant
information with respect thereto, to CITY.
1 7.BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof
as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be
subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY.
18.INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its
authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and
places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers.
CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and
convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as
to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance
notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be
made within a reasonable time after completion of the work.
CONTRACT CA-4 r:\cip\projects\pw95-l6\contract.a/ajp
19.DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not,
discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin,
color, sex, age, or handicap.
20.GOVERNING LAW. This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by
the law of the State of California.
21.ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is
in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101-336,
as amended.
22.WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract
Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid,
directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and
to the CITY addressed as follows:
Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590-3606
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first
above written.
DATED:CONTRACTOR
DBX, INC.
42066 Avenida Alvarado, Suite C
Temecula, California 92590
(909) 676-0115
By:
Jim Perry, President
Print or type TITLE
DATED:CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
CONTRACT CA-5 r:\cip\projectskpw95-1 6\contract.a/ajp
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
CONTRACT CA- 1 r: \cip\projects\pw95-1 6\co ntract. a/aip
TEMECULA CONANAUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
I
ITEI\4 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD JANUARY 14, 1997
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at
7:31 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, Temecula, California. President Jeffrey E. Stone
presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
Also present were General Manager Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson and City
Clerk/District Secretary June S. Greek.
President Stone presented outgoing President Roberts with a gavel for 1 996. Director
Roberts presented President Stone with the gavel for 1 997.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Roberts requested the removal of Item No. 3 from the Consent Calendar.
Director Birdsall and Director Roberts noted an abstention on Item 1 . 1 .
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Stone to approve Consent Calendar
Items 1, 2, 4 and 5, with Director Birdsall and Roberts abstaining on Item 1.1.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
1 Minutes
1.1Approve the minutes of December 10, 1 996.
1.2 Approve the minutes of December 1 7, 1 996.
The motion was unanimously carried with Directors Birdsall and Roberts abstaining
on Item 1.1.
r:\minutes.csd\Ol 1497 -1-
2Release of Landscape Bond - Tract 231 25-1 (Located at Butterfield Stage Road and
De Portola Road)
2.1Authorize the release of the Parkland/Landscape Labor and Materials Bond for
Tract No. 231 25-1 - Kaufman and Broad of San Diego, Inc.
2.2Direct the Secretary/City Clerk to notify the Developer and the Surety.
4Completion and Acceptance of the Construction of North/South Restroom Facility,
Pro@ect No. PW96-07CSD
4.1Accept the construction of North/South Restroom Facility, Project No. PW96-
07CSD and file the Notice of Completion.
5Solicitation of Bids for the Acoustical Panels at the CRC Gym (Progect No. PW96-
16CSD)
5.1Approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the
Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids of the
Acoustical Panels at the community Recreation Center Gym, Project PW96-
16CSD.
3Amendment No. 1 to Desicin Services Contract - Duck Pond Pr@ct
Director Roberts suggested delaying action on this matter until after the March 4,
1997, Measure C Election.
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Roberts to delay
consideration of this item until after the March 4, 1 997, Measure C Election. The
motion was unanimously carried.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
Director Birdsall announced her reappointment to the Community Services Committee of the
League of California Cities, and stated she has served on this Committee since 1 990.
Director Stone announced his election to First Vice President for the Riverside Division of
the California League of Cities.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT
None given.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
None given.
r:\minutes.csd\Ol 1497 -2-
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Roberts to adjourn at 7:43 PM
to a meeting on January 28, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried.
Jeff Stone, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk/
District Secretary
r:\minutes.csd\Ol 1497 -3-
ITEI\4 2
APPROV
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECT%R,.,
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:Board of Directors
FROM:Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services
DATE:January 28, 1 997
SUBJECT:Approve Purchase - Concrete Maintenance Machine
PREPARED BY:Bruce A. Hartley, Maintenance Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION:That the City Council:
1Approve purchase order of $1 7,634 to Marco Equipment Company for the purchase of
a concrete maintenance machine.
2.Approve budget transfer of $1 7,634 from Account #1 90-1 80-999-521 2 to #1 90-1 80-
999-5610.
BACKGROUND: A Request For Proposal was advertised by the City's Finance Department
to select the most qualified firm to provide a concrete cleaning machine for the Community
Services Department. As a result of the construction of the Community Recreation Center and
the skateboard/hockey facility, the need for an efficient method of maintaining concrete
sidewalks, decking, skateboarding surfaces, and hockey facilities has become a priority.
It was determined that current methods were not effective in maintaining the facilities in the
desired condition. After evaluating various options, it became evident that a rider/sweeper
would scrub and clean the facilities with the least cost in time and manpower. On-site tests
of this type of machinery provided verification of the effectiveness of cleaning facilities by this
method.
Of the three companies who responded to the RFP, one company declined to submit a proposal
and one company did not meet the minimum specifications of the RFP. Therefore, it was
determined that Marco Equipment Company's proposal was the lowest, most qualified proposal.
FISCAL IMPACT:Cost of the concrete maintenance machine is $1 7,634. Funds for the
purchase of thismachine have been included in the 1996-1997 Community Services
Department Budget.It is recommended that $17,634 be transferred from repair and
maintenance of facilities account to the capital equipment account.
R@IIARTLEYB@AGENDA\TIIARCO.CNC
DEPARTI\4ENTAL
REPORT
APPROV
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTO@
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, General Manager
DATE: January 16, 1997
SUBJECT:Departmental Report
PREPARED BY:Gail L. Zigier, Administrative Secretary
Construction of the Parkview Fire Station began on January 3, 1996. The exterior stucco is
scheduled to be completed by the end of January, 1997. The interior of the building is
nearly complete. On site parking and sidewalks are complete. This project is scheduled to
be completed in March, 1997.
The Rancho California Creek Restoration Project completed construction on September 25,
1996 and completed the 90 day maintenance period on January 2, 1997. This project
consisted of the improvements to the banks along the creek, landscaping, drainage and a
sidewalk along the Sports Park.
Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project is complete and the 90 day maintenance
period is nearly completed. Installation of the park lighting system and the bare root roses
will occur in the next 30 days. The park is scheduled to open late February, 1997.
A contract was awarded to Skytec, Inc., for the construction of the City of Temecula
Maintenance Yard facility. Construction began on September 3, 1996. The perimeter
masonry walls, exterior masonry walls and plywood roof are complete. Rough framing,
interior electrical, plumbing and HVAC is nearly complete. Application of the exterior
stucco, windows, parking lot and roofing materials is scheduled to begin at the end of
January, 1997. This project is scheduled to be completed by Spring of 1997.
The Alhambra Group has completed the construction documents for second submittal for
Margarita Community Park. It is anticipated this project will go out to bid in March, 1997.
The Master Plan includes parking, lighting, tot lots, picnic facilities, landscaping, irrigation,
and pedestrian walkways. The bid will also include additive alternates for a roller hockey
rink, tennis courts, and improvements to the adjacent school district baseball fields.
The 6th Street Parking and Restroom Project is currently in the masonry construction phase
of the restroom facility and block wall along Front Street. This project will be the first built
as part of the Old Town demonstration block. Amenities include a restroom facility, public
R:\A\AGENDAS\DEPT038 January 16, 1997
lockers and eighty (80) parking stalls. Additionally, the Temecula Stage Stop transportation
center will begin construction and is located on this site. It is anticipated this project will be
completed in April 1997.
A bid has been let for acoustic panels at the Community Recreation Center gymnasium. The
project consists of installing acoustic panels on the walls and the ceilings of the gymnasium
at the Community Recreation Center. Bid opening is scheduled for March, 1997, with the
project to be completed by April, 1997.
R:\A\AGENDAS\DEPT'038 lan@ 16,1997
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ITEI\4 I
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD JANUARY 14, 1997
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at
7:43 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Chairperson Steven J. Ford presiding.
PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Roberts,
Stone, Ford
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson and
City Clerk/Redevelopment Secretary June S. Greek.
Chairperson Ford presented outgoing Chairperson Birdsall with a gavel for 1996. Agency
Member Birdsall presented Chairperson Ford with the gavel for 1 997.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR.
It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to
approve Consent Calendar Items 1-3, with Agency Member Birdsall and Agency Member
Roberts abstaining on Item No. 1.1 and Agency Member Stone abstaining on Items 2 and 3.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone,
Birdsall
NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
1 Minutes
1.1Approve the minutes of December 10,1996.
1.2 Approve the minutes of December 17,1996.
The motion was unanimously carried with Agency Members Birdsall and Roberts
abstaining on Item 1 . 1 .
Minutes.rda\Ol 1 497 -1-
2Award of Professional Services Contract to Westcott and McGrecior and Associates
for Property Manaciement of the Sherwood and Pumol Apartments
2.1Award a Professional Services contract in the amount of $1,600 per month to
Westcott and McGregor and Associates for property management, operation
and maintenance of the Sherwood and Pujol Apartments.
The motion was unanimously carried with Agency Member Stone abstaining.
3Fundinci for Old Town Mainstreet Billboard
3.1Consider a request to reallocate funds to the Old Town Temecula Mainstreet
Association for the remaining balance of $4,500 for the billboard sign lease.
The motion was unanimously carried with Agency Member Stone abstaining.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
None given.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Stone to
adjourn at 7:45 PM to a meeting on January 28, 1997, City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried.
Steven J. Ford, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk/
Agency Secretary
Minutes.rda\Ol 1497 -2-
ITE?\4 2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DI
CITY A
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
FROM:Mary Jane McLamey, Assistant City Manager
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Consideration of Sponsorship Requests
Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator
RIECOMMENDATION:
That the Agency Members consider the sponsorship requests for the Temecula Rod Run and the
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival events to be held in 1997.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has received the annual sponsorship requests for the Rod Run and the Temecula Valley
Balloon and Wine Festival events.
Temecula hosts a year-round affay of exciting events and attractions including festivals, parades,
seasonal celebrations and more, all adding to the city's exceptional quality of life. Temecula's unique
advantage of hosting such popular events as the Rod Run and the Balloon & Wine Festival enables
the City to carefully position itself to compete effectively with other tourist destinations.
In previous years, the City has received wide spread media exposure from the events through
newspaper, magazine, radio, and television coverage on local and national levels. Residents and
visitors look forward to the Rod Run and the Balloon & Wine Festival each year. The well-known
attractions offer a tremendous audience for promoting Temecula's tourism-fiiendly environment.
Both events increase tourism revenue for the city's restaurants, hotels, shopping centers, wineries
and merchants in Old Town. The Rod Run as well as the Balloon & Wine Festival brought into the
community additional dollars to local merchants for goods and services used by each event.
Due to the fact that these activities promote tourism in Temecula, funding would come from the
Redevelopment Agency Economic Development budget. There will be no conunissions paid out to
any party for the City of Temecula's sponsorship.
Temecula Rod Run
Staff has received the annual sponsorship request in the amount of $10,000 for the Temecula Rod
Run, which is attached for your review.
The Rod Run is the largest event held within the City of Temecula and attracted approximately
50,000 spectators last year with 1,100 participants. Each year the event increases in size and
popularity. Car enthusiasts from throughout Southern California love to participate in the event and
activities offered. Others just spend the day browsing among the impeccable street rods displayed
throughout Old Town.
The '97 Rod Run will be held in Old Town on Friday, February 14th through Sunday, February
16th with a variety of activities planned. Activities will begin on Friday with Cruise Night in Old
Town and the Heart and Rod Dance at the Temecula Stampede. Saturday activities include the Rod
Run viewing, Poker Run Cruise, Open Header Cruise and ends the day with a barbeque at Pechenga
Indian Casino. Sunday's attractions will exhibit the Show and Shine and conclude with the awards
presentation.
KOLA radio broadcasted the event with live on-site coverage beginning Friday night and continued
throughout the weekend. The Rod Run received magazine and newspaper coverage that reached
areas in San Diego, Orange County, San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles, Inland Empire and the Los
Angeles area. Media coverage for the Rod Run is discussed further in the attached media report.
Temecula VAIW Balloon & Wine Festival
Staff has received the annual sponsorship request in the amount of $10,500 to sponsor the Tourism
Tent at the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival, which is attached for your review. The
Festival is requesting an additional $500.00 in sponsorship over last year to offset the costs for the
permit fees for the street banner and cold air balloons.
The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival has a balance due the City for $ 1 0,000 from the loan
acquired in 1992. The Festival will repay the loan as per the installment agreement of $5,000 per
year, or more, depending on the success of the event, due at the end of the event.
Last year over 50,000 guests attended this exciting event with more anticipated to attend this year.
The '97 Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival will be held Friday, April 25 through Sunday,
April 27 at Lake Skinner. Every year new entertainment and new venues are offered at the festival
bringing more excitement than the year before.
Every year the Festival enhances and expands its marketing programs to encompass a wider
audience base. Plans this year include a cooperative advertising campaign with the Inland Empire
Tourism Council, which will feature ads in Sunset Magazine and Southern California Guide.
The 1996 media campaign achieved over 3 million impressions in magazines, newspapers, and
periodicals. Radio promotions reached audiences of over 1.6 million and television coverage
included major networks ABC, NBC and CBS, as well as cable audiences and a live broadcast on
L.A.'s number one morning news station, KTLA.
FISCAL I[MPACT: Sufficient monies are budgeted in the RDA to fund these requests.
ATTACHMENTS: ARod Run Sponsorship Package for the City of Temecula
BRod Run Agreement
cTemecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Sponsorship Package for
the City of Temecula
DTemecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Agreement
ATTACHMENT A
Rod Run Sponsorship Package for the City of Temecula
1007
TEDAECULA
A?Op RIIAV
TEMECTJLA ROD RTJN 697
February 14,, 159 169 1997
INTRODUCTION
Celebrating it's rich heritage and the promise of the future, each year Old Town Temecula
sponsors this traditional event featuring street rods and antique cars. The Temecula Rod Run has
grown in stature and prestige since 1986. This regional event has become a favorite for Southern
Califomian's, as displayed by the 50,000 plus spectators that packed the streets of Old Town
Temecula last year.
Street Rodder Magazine defines a street rod as any pre-] 970 performance car. Customized 1927
Model-T Ford roadsters also fall into the street rod category, as do 1932 Highboy roadsters, '34
three-window coupes, Woodies, '55-'57 Chevy Nomads and many other makes and models.
Car enthusiasts from throughout Southern California love to participate or spend the day
browsing among the highly polished rods. Families can en oy this affordable event featuring fun
entertainment, the wonderful circa 1800's facade of Old Town Temecula, it's myriad antique and
craft stores and hot souped-up cars from a bygone era.
The Temecula Rod Run has experienced a major growth in recent years, both in spectators and
show cars. This event is sponsored by the Old Town Temecula Mainstrect Association, a
nonprofit organization, which is committed to the open, welcoming atmosphere of bygone years
and free admission. Without admission fees though, sponsorships are necessary to support the
event.
416S9 ENTrI-ZpRI-@-E CIRCLE NOIZTH - SUITV 21S TEMRCULA CA 92590
P,Ol) R"FJN HOTLINE: 909,506,1252
1*097
TEDAECULA
TEMECULA ROD RUN'97
"PROMOTION SPONSOR"'
$10,000
PRESENTED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA
The City of Temecula reached new heights last year in the attention they received throughout the state
and nationally. This event, the largest held within the City's boundaries, returns $11.13 for every $1.00
invested, into the pockets of local citizens (based on California Department of Tourism studies).
As the "Promotion sponsor" the City will receive-.
City name on all literature relating to the Temecula Rod Run '9 7.
City name/or logo on press releases, advertisements and flyers relating to the event.
City name on banner promoting the event displayed for several weeks in the
community.
Licensing rights allowing use of event logo in City's marketing program.
City name on event tee shirt signifying event is promoted by the City (if agreed
to by January 20, 1997).
City name recognition as "Promotion Sponsor" in Official Program.
First right of refusal for the 1998 Temecula Rod Run Sponsorship.
25 official Rod Run cars or 25 event tee shirts.
20 event tee shirts.
I 0 Hearts & Rods dance tickets.
IO Pechanga BBQ tickets.
41689 ENTEIZpRisE CIRCLR, NORTH . STJITE 218 TEMNCULA CA 92590
P,C)I) rZ'-fJN HOTLINE: 909-506.1252
1*997
TED4ECULA
A?Offl A?IIAV
OLD TOWN TEMECULA ROD RUN
Sponsorship packages sold to date
RanchoFord-PresentingSponsor-$10,000. (paidinfull)
*Pechanga - Entertainmnt Sponsor-$ I 0,000. (paid in full)
*Texaco - Hearts & Rods Dance Sponsor-$7,500. (paid in full)
*Community Little Book - Poster Sponsor-$2,500. (paid in full)
*Stadium Pizza - Park Avenue Sponsor-$1,000. (paid in full)
*Texaco - Sponsoring "2" Poker Run Stops-$ 1,000. (paid in full)
*Pala Mesa - Sponsoring "I " Poker Run Stop-$500. (paid in full)
*Swing Inn Cafe - Trophv Sponsor-$125.00. (paid in full)
Sponsorships in-kind to date
*Prime Equipment - $2,1 1 0.
*KATY Radio Station - $2,0 1 0.
*KRTM Radio Station - $2,000.
*Rigbtway Service - $4,200,
*KOLA Radio Station - $49.000.
41(389 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NC)RTH SUITE 218 TEMECULA CA 92590
PIOT) IZ"FJN I-IOTLINE: 909-506,1252
TEMECULA ROD RUN'97
BLJSINF-SS PI,AN
The purpose of the Temecula Rod Run '97 is to provide a quality event in Old Town
Temecula that will promote and enhance public awareness of "Old Town" as a tourism destination
and of the sponsoring organization, Old Town TEMECULA Mainstreet Association.
SITE:
The Temecula Rod Run '97 Committee intends to utilize Old Town Temecula as the site of the
1997 event subject to approval of the City. It is requested that Front Street be closed between
Mercedes and Second Streets Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and on Sundav from 5:00
a.m. to 4:00 p.m. It is also requested that Sixth, Fifth, Fourth, Main and Third Streets be closed
from Mercedes to Front and Main Street at the bridge on Saturday and Sunday, starting at 5:00
a.m. on Saturday until 4:00 p.m. on Sunday. Traffic will be one way northbound on Mercedes
between Second and Moreno during these hours. The Temecula Stampede will be used for the
Friday night dance from 6-00 p.m. to 12 midnight. All other activities will take place throughout
the community.
EVENT DATES:
Friday, February 14; Saturday, February 1 5; and Sunday, February 16, 1997.
ACTIVITIES:
Friday-February 14, 1997
4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Registration at south end of Temecula Stampede.
4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Cruise Night in Old Town.
6:00 p.m. to 12:00 p.m. Heart and Rod Dance at Temecula Stampede.
Saturday-February 15, 1997
6:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Registration, Temecula Stampede.
6:00a.m.to2:00p.m. RodRunviewing.PokerRunCruisebyK]ngofClubs.
2-00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Open I-lea,der Cruise in Old Town.
5:00 p.m. to 12:00 p.m. B.B.Q. at Pechanga Indian Casino
OLD TOWN TEMECULA MAINSTREET ASSOCIATION
28690 FRC)NT STREET - SUITE 370 - TEMECULA. CA 92590 - T (909) 699-8138 F (909) 699-1148
Page 2 - Rod Run '97 Business Plan
Sunday-February 16, 1997
6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. Registration - Temecula Stampede.
7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Show and Shine in Old Town.
3: 00 a. m. to 4: 00 p. m. Awards presentation in Old Town.
A. Beverages - Beer and Bloody Marys will be sold to those over the age of twenty-one. All
sales will be according to State of California ABC Code. Old Town Temecula Mainstreet will
handle all beverage sales. Hours on Saturday will be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ; Sunday, 6:00 a.m.
to 4-.00 p.m.
B. Classic Car Exhibits - On Sunday there will be approximately I 000 cars on display in Old
Town.
C. Entertainment - Friday, Saturday and Sunday entertainment will be provided featuring a D. J.
and selected radio stations will be broadcasting live all day Saturday and Sunday and Friday
evening.
D. Open Header Cruise - The "Open Header Cruise" will take place on Saturday, February 15,
from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Front Street between Mercedes and Second Street. Only those
rods that are pre-registered will be allowed to participate.
E. Poker Run Cruise - Saturday's Rod Run will provide the street rods an opportunity to cruise
the highways and byways of the Temecula Valley seeking just the right poker hand to win special
prizes. At each Poker Run stop a representative will have a deck of cards for participants to draw
from, which will be noted on the playing sheet. The Poker Run will begin and end at Rancho
Ford. Participants will arrive in Old Town at the conclusion of the run.
F. Hearts and Rod Dance - Friday evening from 6:00 p.m. to 12:00 p.m. at Temecula Stampede
in Old Town for event participants and the general public. The Stampede will host the party and
will provide bar service.
Page 3 - Rod Run '97 Business Plan
ATTENDANCE:
The planned attendance for each day is no more than 50,000 people at one time, or approximately
2000 cars.
PARKING:
It is planned that vehicles park on the streets of Pujol, Mercedes, Moreno and Front from
Santiago south to the Temecula Community Center. Offsite parking will also be available.
MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT:
Management of the event will be under the President of the Old Town Mainstreet Association
with assistance from the Over the Hill Gang car club. The marketing of the event is being handled
by the Business Resource Group.
SECURITY:
Security will be provided by a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff and volunteers.
INSURANCE:
Sponsoring organization will provide a general liability policy and liquor liability policy naming
the City of Temecula as additional insured.
PORTABLE TOILETS:
The committee will install 60 portable toilets, 6 wheelchair accessible portable toilets and
handwash stations. They will be responsible for the sanitation and multiple cleaning on a daily
basis. They will meet all health requirements as set by County Ordinance.
Page 4 - Rod Run '97 Business Plan
TRASH:
The committee will provide on-site continuous cleaning during and after the event. In addition
there will be 100 additional trash receptacles with liners provided that will be emptied regularly.
There will be a competent trash hauler for trash removal with total off-site removal within 24
hours following the event.
FIRST AID:
First-aid and emergency medical services will be provided by the Temecula Valley Volunteer Fire
Department at two sites [north and south end of Front Street] on a full time basis.
SITE PREPARATION SET UP AND DISMANTLING:
The City is requested to post "Temporary No Parking" signs on Friday morning, February 14.
The City should also set up the barriers to close the streets at appropriate locations on Saturday
afternoon. Front Street will be closed to through traffic on Saturday, February 15, from 2:00
p.m. to 4-00 p.m. at Moreno Road and Front (by Circle K) and at Front and Second Street. On
Sunday, February 16, the streets will be closed from 5:30 a,m, to 4:00 p.m.
PERMIT FEE-.
Non-profit Organization Special Event fees will be paid to the City of Temecula as requested.
The fee for the sheriff is to be worked out with the Police Department. The ABC will provide the
liquor permit.
TEMECULA ROD RUN
BUDGET FOR 1997
Revised January 15, 1997
INCONffi PROPOSED BUDGET-
Beer Sales 13 404.
Day of Event Entries 10,-)25.
Other Income 2,225.
Parking 0 Unless required by City
Pre-registered Entries 18,000.
Friday Night Event 2,500.
Souvenir Sales 1,500.
Sponsorships 50,000.
Vendor Space Rental 4,500.
TOTALFNCO@ $102,454.
EXPENSES
Advertising 1,500.
All Insurance 2,050.
Awards & Trophies 2,400.
Beer Expense 4,000.
Car Club Expense 6,500.
Charitable Donations 640.
Commissions 7,500. City of Tem & Rancho Ford exempt.
Contingency (5%) ',582.
Gifts & Souvenirs 10,110.
Legal & Prof Fees 250.
Office Expenses 3,880. Incl. phone, postage, copying, fax etc.
Permits & Fees 800.
Public Address / DJ 4,000.
Public Relations Firm 9,500.
Restroom Facilities 2,600.
Refunds 100.
Friday Night Event 5,000.
Security 9,000.
Signage 500.
Trash Pick-up/removal 1,300.
TOTAL EXPENSES 75,212.
OVERALLTOTAL 242
'I'ENiEcuLA ROD RUN'96
PROMOTIONS/MARKETING REPORT
FINAL REPORT
Prepared and sold sponsorship packages both to in-kind and cash sponsors totalling $93,875.
1
Prepared six special sponsorship kits and gave to City Council and Assistant City Manager.
I
0Sold 29 Trophy Sponsors and delivered their trophies following the event.
0Worked with Car Club to at-range Poker Run route. Sold four "Poker Run" stops at $200
each. Designed graphic material for Rod Run.
0Prepred Loiig-lead F,,ict slieet to be sciii to all magazine and newspaper calendar sections.
See attached list.
0Prepared sixteen press releases and submitted them to attached list.
0Arranged for Press Conference at Rancho Ford (with pictures).
0Arranged for Press Conference at Pecliaiiga Entertainment Center (with pictures).
0Worked with Rancho News, wrote all stories and submitted pictures for "Official Program"
40,000 copies were distributed with as an insert in their paper and they deliver an ovet-run
of 8,000 copies to be given out at event.
0Worked with Californian for special tab distributed during the week before event. Also
designed special 8 1/2 x I I folded progratn that was itiserted in their paper. They gave the
Ol'TMA an over-ruii of the special pi-ogratii distributed in Old Town during the event.
0Arranged for plastic ba,,s to be donated for stuffing material given to drivers. Secured
material given by sponsors for bags,
Arranged for sniall bottles of water to be donated for staff and volunteers during the event.
Worked with General Manager of 0l'TMA and Insurance Coinp'any to secure Cancellation
Insurance.
Arranged for two direct phone lines for KOLA broadcasts.
Arranged for Pi-ii-ne Equipiretit to put up and take down signs and hell) sound company put
up sound towei-s.
- tiiote -
Arranged for i-adios foi- committee and security to use at no cost to the event.
Arranged for Iii-kiiid sponsorship with Temecula Creek Itin for golf carts for committee.
Arranged for Blacks Auto Towing ror pick up and return of golf carts.
Arranged for Riglitway to give $ 1,000 off cost to rental of porta-poties.
0Met with committee on monthly basis and was on call when needed.
0Arranged for KOLA and KRTM to have interviews with Noel Blanc
0Designed 1997 application for Rod Run Participants so that they could register during '96
Rod Run for next year,
0Sold $ 1 0,000 "Presenting Sponsor" for 1997 Rod Run. Commission to be collected when
Ford pays this year.
0Contacted Ai-nericail Automobile Centennial Commission regarding becoming a
"sanctioned event" . Because of cost , Committee choose not to participate
0Arranged for 259 television spots to fulfil commitment to "Presenting Sponsor" contract.
Reduced price from $2000.00 to $892.00.
0Worked with Fast Signs to assist with placing of signs.
0Designed label to ,o on matchbox car box for "Presenting Sponsor".
0 Designed an(] produced point of sales signs foi- matchbox cars.
TEMECULA ROD RUN'96 SPONSOR REPORT
Cash
Anheuser-Busch $ 500
LA Cellular $1,000
Rancho Ford $10,000
Pechanga $ 7,500
Callaway $ 200
Maurice Carrie $ 200
Cowboy Catering $ 700
City of Temecula $10,000
Big A Auto $250
High Society Billiards $250
On the Farm $125
Swing Inn $125
NAPA $125
Butterfield Sq. $125
Bank of Mexican Food $125
Colombo's Vineyard Restaurant $125
Chesher Custom Embroidery $125
Chaparral Antique Mail $125
Ziggy's Restaurant $125
Temecula Shuttle & Greyhound $125
Old Town Antique Fair $125
Pirates of Caribbean $125
Classic Spray $125
Silver Spoon $125
G&J Collectibles $125
4th Street Auto $125
Auto Doctor $125
999 Company $125
Sunrise Market $125
Texas Lil's $125
Commerce Bank $125
North County Bank $125
Corner Deli $125
Lewis Cleaners $125
Jan Wielert $125
Grannies Attic $125
Pro Tec Auto $125
The Shire $125
High Society Billiards $125
American Air Valet $200
Forecast Group $200
Hot Rod Heaven $200
TOTAL CASH $34,825
MORE -
TEMECULA ROD RUN'96 SPONSOR REPORT - PAGE 2
0 In-Kind Trade value:
Anheuser-Busch $ 500
Ramada Inn $ 1,000
Embassy Suites $1,000
Pvlaurice Printers $ 1,000
Californian $ 2,500
Press-Enterprise $ 2,500
KOLA $25,000
KRTM $ 1,000
Bargain Bulletin $ 1,000
Harte Hanks Pennysaver $ 1,000
Rancho News $ 5,000 ads & tab
Adams Advertising $ 3,000
G & J Collectibles $ 1,000
Rightway $ 2,000
HTT Headwear $ 750
Stampede $ 2,500
Vineyard $ 2,500
Chesher Custom Embroidery $ 300
Temecula Golf Resort $ 500
Carls Junior $3,000
Prime EqUiprTient $2,000
TOTAL IN-KIND $59,050
TOTAL CASH AND IN-KIND SPONSOR MONIES - $93,876
G) -u z m -u > U) U) uu uj >
0 < I D -0 -0 w
m (D Zy- 0 (D r"
0 3 (n Z3 :3 m (D m -0 -, (D Cn
0 C-) 0. 0 =3
(n CL 0
c: 3 (D (n C)
(0 -0 0 0 0 D u w, ' ' ;u
0 O- cn (D
cn
=3 < (D
(D u 7, Z3
;u 6 M- 3
(n m m (D 0
(D cn (O Z3
5 U:) :E
CD (n
cn < z
(0 cn 0 (D
Z3
(n z
0
rQ z
-0 (31 CD C-T, CZ
0 0 CA) 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 000 ;z
C:) 0 0 cn C:) 0 000 ;u
0 0 0 00 uu
0 rTi
3 3
0 0
3
73
0
(0 r-
(n z
9:
m
UD
6 'O iD '0 0 iD 6 'o 'CD > 0
0 0 0 C:) C) ri C:) C:)
0
(n cn 0
3 -o 0 ;u
E 01 C" 3 3 c;i C" 33 C:
3 3 3 3 z
(D cn. 70 70 CD -0 -o (D CD CD lu
(n -1 @ cn -1 -I (/) cn (n
0 CD (D cn tn. (0 (D Ln. (n. n. ;u
(1) cn fi) cn (n
0 000
c,). cn. E)-' :3 (n. (n. 0
0 0 :3 0 0
Z3 ::3 Z) ig
cn 0
0
z
N) ti C:) C:) (31 CD C) <
0 @l@ @ x -ctl > >
0x w C:) CD C:) 0 -u 0 -U i@ 0 0 0 r-
C:) 0 (31 x CD C:) 0 11 x C:) 0 0
x CD C:) 0 M t\J (D CD
>< x _x -N x
0 fn co >< x OD
(n "D -C:) <
-A (n tn (O >
C:) x CD (D w
C:) C) w C:) C) 3 x C:) CD (D (D
x 1: r\j En
CD x C)- 0 0
010 W X
0 - - :1
CD x C:) (n
(31 -0 " w
CD (D 0 C:)
3 (Ji
0 0 ;u
C:)
(n (D 0
> iD
CD
t\i ;u
z
En tn (O (n tq En (n <
Cti PO 00 >
-N (1) OC) co -
-t\) -CD 0 C:) -N
0 0 0 0 'N (A) r\) cri 0 0
0 0 (D CD C:) 0 01) C:) C:) rTi
0 C:) C)
00 co
CYI
rn > w U) w
T z > G),;!
0 0) w < rn
(D Zy- -0 (D --
0 cn Z3 0 (D m Z) w -0 Zs (D (n
0 0 0 0
(n
O- 0 .1... ;u
0. m (0 C)
-o 0 0
w 0 CL tn (D W
ou Z3 cn < w m -u
Z
cn C)
(D
5
IP (n
cn z
(0 0 (D
(n
::3
C)'l r\) -N -N -A @ z
rNi -0 C:) ti cn 01) r\j 0 0 CZ
0 C) C.A) 0 10 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 C:) CD CT1 C:) 0 0 0 0 uu
0 C:) 0 C:) C:) 0
0 m
3
c: 0 0
3
Z3 m
zr rn
(D
cn 0
lu
o o C) 0 0 0 (D CD >
0 0 C) C:) 0
0 C:) C:)
(n 0 ri 0
3 VI Ul Ul 9
E Ln 3 3 3 3 3 cz
3 -o -o -0 -a -o 0
cn 3 3 -a 3 3 -1 @ In z
cn (D m (D
(n cn cn cn cn
0 (D (D (f) (n (D CD (n. fn. cn.
=3 C) cn cn (n FD' cn cn 0 0 0 0
0 ZT cn. (1). 5' n Ln. Ln. i) ::3 z
:3 6 FD :3 0 0
Z3 :3 ::3 :3 <
fl) )>
cri
rQ 0 0 rl\) CTI C:) r\) x -cn
0 0 co 0 - - - -u
C:) x 0 0 0 -U C:) 0 0 r-
C:) C:) C:) Ul x 0 0 C:) X II 0 C:) CD C-)
>< x x 0 0 C:) rj I-u 0 0 (Z
fd) 00 x (-n 00 x >< -
Cn 0 r
(.C) -o cn (D > cr)
(D Ul iD - -
0 0 x 0 C:) C:) 3 0 C) C:)
0 0 -0
CD x 0
0 >< z
0 x
(n tn
cn Co 0
0 ;u
tQ c
(n < cn z
x 0
0 C:)
(D
(D
> C:) 0
r
O'l
co
< tn
40 (31 co >
r-
- co co
N3 0 c
0 C:) 0 0 C:) 0 (A) r\) cn 0 0 m
0 C:) C:) 0 C:) 0 0 OC) 0 0 0
t\) C:)
co
Rod Run Releases
NAME
-------------------------------------
AHORA NOW
Alpine Sun
ANAHEIM BULLETIN
Banning Record Gazette
BEACH & BAY PRESS/COMM. NEWS GROUP
BEACH NEWS
BEVERLY HILLS AND WEST HOLLYWOOD POST
BEVERLY HILLS COURIER
Big Bear Life & Grizzly
BLADE-CITIZEN
BORREGO SUN
BRAWLEY NEWS
BUENA PARK/AIIAIIEIM INDEPENDENT
BURBANK LEADER
CALIFORNIAN
JLTON COURIER
Community Flyer/PR Productions
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE-SD
CORONA INDEPENDENT
CORONADO EAGLE
CORONADO JOURNAL
Daily Breeze
Daily Californian
DAILY NEWS
DAILY STAR PROGRESS
Daily Sun Post
DESERT SUN
Fallbrook Enterprise
FAMILY LIVING
ight Jacket/S.Orange Cty.News
FONTANA HERALD NEWS
Glendale News Press
EDITOR
-----------------------------------
EDITOR
Editor
ASSIGNMENT:JERRY SINGAL
EDITOR: JOHN SWANSON
Features Editor: Tim Sosbe
Editor
EDITOR:JOHN GREGORY
Editor: Jim Kydd
EDITOR
Editor: March Schwartz
Editor
Auto Editor
Debra Rosen, Lifestyles
Lynn Boggs, Calendar
Rusty Harris, Ed.
Judy Meier, Editor
J.R.FITCH, ED.
EDITOR: DAVE ROQUE
Al Friedenthal, Editor
Jeff Tully
Angela Geiser,BUS.Ed.
Bruce Singer
James Folner, Ed.
Lynette, Ed.
Paul Johnson, Ed.
Editorial Director: Nanette wiser
Auto Editor
EDITOR: JOHN ORR
DEAN ECKENROTH,ED.
Editor: Kelly Pyrek
James Box, Ed.
Jim Brooks, Enter.
Auto Editor
Jim Schumacher, Ed.
EDITOR
Editor
Auto Editor
Editor: Scott Moore
Jim Breen, Ed.
Kacey Jordan, Spectrum
Auto Editor
Bruce Fessier, Living & Enter.
Fielding Buch, Travel
Managing Editor: Ray Griffith
Auto Editor
Betty Johnson, Cal.
Editor: Don Lowry
Editor: David Baker
Editor
Editor
David Sweet, Sports
Page I
Rod Run Releases
NAME EDITOR
------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Editor: Phil Drake
Features Editor: Cynthia Takano
HARBOUR SUN Editor: Lynn Phillips
HEMET NEWS EDITOR
HERALD DISPATCH PUBS. Editor: Lela Ward
IIOLTVILLE TRIBUNE/IMPERIAL WEEKLY CESAR SOTO, ED.
Huntington Beach Independent Auto Editor
Editor:Bill Lobbell
Imperial Valley Press J.R.FITCH, ED.
Inland Empire Tourism Council June Trudel
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin Auto Editor
Editor: Mike Brossart
Jerry Rice, Entertainment
JULIAN NEWS EDITOR
La Jolla Light Auto Editor
Brad Graves, Calendar
Rod Presly, Ed.
LA MESA FORUM Editor: Pete Kaufman
LA PRENSA Editor: Dan Munoz Jr.
LEMON GROVE REVIEW Editor: Lisa Parsons
LONG BEACH PRESS TELEGRAM Editor: Jim Crutchfield
Elena Howe, Lifestyles
'OS ANGELES INDEPENDENT Brian Lewis, Editor
JS ANGELES TIMES ATTN: CHRISTINE CADDEY
LOS ANGELES TIMES (VIEW) ATTN: CINDY MURPHY
Los Angeles Times Auto Editor
LOS ANGELES TIMES-SAN DIEGO EDITOR: DALE FETHERLING
LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITOR: SHELBY COFFEY III
Entertainment
ENTERTAINMENT DIRECTOR: RANDY LEWIS
George Cotliar, Ed.
John Arthur, Mng.Editor
Laura Schendon,54 Hours
Marti Baron, Ed.
LOS ANGELES TIMES RAY TESSLER, ED.
NORTH CTY BUREAU
LOS ANGELES WEEKLY Editor: Kit Rachlis
MANAGING EDITOR: DAVE DAVIS
MENIFEE VALLEY/SUN CITY NEWS Charles Hand, Ed.
MOBILE HOMES COURIER NANCY RICHARDS, EX.ED.
MONTEBELLO MESSENGER John Marty,Ed.
NEWHALL SIGNAL Andrea Moret, Features
Tim Whyte, Ed.
NEWS ENTERPRISE Editor: RuthAnn Bingham
NORTH COUNTY ENTERTAINER DONOVAN ROCHE, ED.
NORTHEAST NEWSPAPER GROUP Editor: Roger Swanson
ORANGE COAST DAILY PILOT Editor: William Lobdell
Matt Coker, Entertainment
Tony Cox, Bus.
URANGE COUNTY NEWS Dave Rogue, Editor
ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER Angela williams,Events
Page 2
Rod Run Releases
NAME EDITOR
------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Auto Editor
Editor: Tonnie L. Katz
Gary Warner,Travel
Steve Plesa, Lifestyle
outlook Auto Editor
City Editor: Kerry Webster
PALO VERDE VALLEY TIMES Randy Sherman, Ed.
PARAMOUNT JOURNAL Editor: Don Plunkitt
Park La Brea Press Editor: Brian Boye
Pasadena Star News Auto Editor
Joe Blackstock I Editor
Luaine Lee, Amusements
PERRIS PROGRESS Attention: Editor
POMERADO PUBLICATIONS EDITOR
POST NEWSPAPERS Editor: Margaret Harris
PRESS ENTERPRISE Auto Editor
FEATURES:Sally Ann Maas
LIFESTYLES: Judith Griffam
Managing Editor: Mill optowski
METRO: Richard Fisher
Richard De Atley, Enter.
The Guide: Michael Cisneros
-amona Sentinel Editor
Editor:Maureen Robertson
RANCHO BERNARDO JOURNAL Editor: Nancy Richards
RANCHO SANTA FE REVIEW Lorine Wright, Ed.
REDLANDS DAILY FACTS Editor: Jim Mattson
San Diego Daily Transcript Auto Editor
Editor:Martin Kruming
SAN DIEGO THIS WEEK HARRIET KING, ED.
San Diego Union TribuneAlison Da Rosa, Travel
Auto Editor
Editor:Gerald Warren
SAN DIEGO UNION ENTERTAINMENT: LEE GRANT
San Diego Union Tribune Lisa Mitchell, Calendar
Susan Choney, Currents
SAN DIEGO WEEKLY NEWS Editor: Marti Sterton
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE Editor: Frances Young
SAN MARCOS NEWS-REPORTER Editor: William Willoughby
SAN PEDRO NEWS PILOT City Editor: Tim Lemm
Santa Barbara News-Press Melinda Johnson,Enter.Ed.
SENTINEL Editor., Sarah Haggerty
SIERRA MADRE NEWS Editor: Jan Reed
SIGNAL BRIDGE-NAVAL STATION EDITOR
SO. CALIFORNIA PUBLISHING Editor: Art Aquliar
SOUTH PASADENA REVIEW Editor: Norma Le Valey
SPRING VALLEY BULLETIN Editor: Pete Kaufman
STAR-NEWS Features Editor: Ruth Lepper
Managing Editor: Charles Walker
Sun Auto Editor
Editor: Arnold Garson
Page 3
ATTACHMENT B
Rod Run Agreement
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND OLD TOWN
TEMECULA MAINSTREET ASSOCIATION
This Agreement, made this 231 day of January, 1997, by and between the TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a Municipal Corporation, duly organized and existing under and
by virtue of the laws of the State of California, (hereinafter referred to as "RDA"), and OLD
TOWN TEMECULA MAINSTREET ASSOCIATION, a California nonprofit corporation
(hereinafter referred to as ("OTTMA").
A. O@A will operate the "Temecula Rod Run" on February 14, 15 and 16, 1997.
The Temecula Rod Run is a special event located in Old Town Temecula involving the display
of classic cars. Attendance in previous years has been between 20,000 to 50,000+ people for the
3 day event.
B. The Temecula Redevelopment Agency desires to be a Promotion Sponsor of the
1997 Temecula Rod Run.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
A. In exchange for the payment of $10,000, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency
shall be designated as a "Promotion Sponsor" of the 1997 Temecula Rod Run. In exchange for
being a Promotion Sponsor, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency will receive the benefits as
listed in Attachment A.
B. Following the Rod Run, OTRMA shall prepare and submit to the City Manager a
written report evaluating the Rod Run, its attendance, and describing the materials in which the
RDA was listed as a Promotion Sponsor.
C. OTTMA agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold RDA and its elected
officials, officer, agents, and employees free and harmless from all claims for damage to persons
or property by reason of 0 's acts or omissions or those of OTTMA's employees, officers,
agents, or invites in connection with the Temecula Rod Run to the maximum extent allowed by
law.
D. OTTMA 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 RDA is named insured or is named as an additional insured with OTTMA and shall furnish
a Certificate of Liability by the RDA. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy
or any subsequent endorsement attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall;
1. Include the RDA as the insured or named as an additional insured covering
all claims arising out of, or in connection with, the Temecula Rod Run.
2. Include the RDA, 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
Temecula Rod Run.
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.
(B)Liquor Liability: $1,000,000 combines single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
4. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the RDA,
its officer, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from the Temecula Rod Run.
5. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided
that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever,
the RDA shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less
than thirty (30) days beforehand.
6. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved
by the RDA. At the option of the RDA, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductible or self-insured retention as respects the RDA, its officers, officials and employees or
OTTMA shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration and defense expenses.
E. 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 attomey's fees, in addition to
any other relief to which it may be entitled.
F. OTRMA shall promptly furnish RDA, upon the completion of OTTMA operating
year, certified copies of annual operating statement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the RDA has caused its corporate name and seal to be
hereunto subscribed and affixed by Chairperson and attest to by the City Clerk, both thereunto
duly autho@, and the Old Town Temecula Mainstreet Association has hereunto subscribed this
Contract day, month, and year hereinabove written.
DATED:
OLD TOWN TEMECULA CITY OF TEMECULA
MAINSTREET ASSOCIATION
Steven J. Ford, Chairperson
Temecula Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
June S. Greek
City Clerk / Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT "A"
TENIECULA
A?61#
TEMECULA ROD RUN'97
"'PROMOTION SPONSOR9'
$10,000
PRESENTED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA
The City of Temecula reached new heights last year in the attention they received throughout the state
and nationally. This event, the largest held within the City's boundaries, returns $11.13 for every $1.00
invested, 'into the pockets of local citizens (based on Califoniia Department of Tourism studies).
As the "Promotion sponsor" the City %ill receive:
City name on all literature relating to the Temecula Rod Run '97.
City name/or logo on press releases, advertisements and flyers relating to the event.
City name on banner promoting the event displayed for several weeks in the
community,
Licensing rights allowing use of event logo in City's marketing program.
City name on event tee shirt si@ng event is promoted by the City (if agreed
to by January 20, 1997).
City name recognition as "Promotion Sponsor" in Official Program.
First right of refusal for the 1998 Temecula Rod Run Sponsorship.
25 official Rod Run cars or 25 event tee shirts.
20 event tee shirts.
10 Hearts & Rods dance tickets.
IO Pechanga BBQ tickets.
41669 ENTERPIZISE CIRCLE NORTli . SUITE 218 TEMECULA CA 92590
"@'M "',Y'TI\T T;NTLINE: 909.506.1252
ATTACHMENT C
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Sponsorship Package for the City of Temecula
1997 TEMECULA VALLEY
BALLOON AND WINE FESTIVAL
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT
I N A -fl-
CITY OF TEMECULA
TOURISM TENT SPONSOR
OVERVIEW
The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival invites The City of Temecula to sponsor
the Festival's Tourism Tent. The Tourism Tent was a great success in 1996 with the
efforts put forth by the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce. The Tourism Tent
looks to be another exciting attraction to offer the 50,000+ Festival guests and
complement the marketing efforts by the City of Temecula.
April is the Festival's "coming out party" with a street banner and cold air balloons atop
local business' as ticket outlets and such. The Festival is requesting an additional
$500.00 in sponsorship over last year to off set the costs for the permit fees for the street
banner and cold air balloons.
Total sponsorship request is $10,500.00.
AS THE MARKETING AND TOURISM TENT SPONSOR, THE CITY OF
TEMECULA WILL RECEIVE:
* RECOGNITION IN FESTIVAL NEWSPAPER DISPLAY ADVERTISING THE
FINAL TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE EVENT.
Press Enterprise (141,148 Circulation), The Californian (14,000 Circulation), The
Pennysaver, The Bargain Bulletin
*ADVERTISEMENT IN THE OFFICIAL PROGRAM (1/2 COLOR PAGE), 60,000
PROGRAMS WILL BE PRINTED AND DISTRIBUTED WITH 36,000 INSERTED
INTO THE PRESS ENTERPRISE.
*RECOGNITION IN FES-VVAL PRESS RELEASES AND PUBLICITY WHERE
APPLICABLE.
*LARGE BANNER AT ENTRANCE OF THE TOURISM TENT SPOTLIGHTING
THE CITY AS THE SPONSOR.
'@7403 Yiiez l@oaci, Siiite ?-08 & 209 1 'I'ciiic(-Lila, C,aliforiiia 9'@591 - (900) 6-/,6-4-1713
*CITY WILL RECEIVE 25 ADMISSION TICKETS FOR EACH SATURDAY AND
SUNDAY.
*8 VIP PARKING PASSES TO PARK INSIDE THE FESTIVAL GROUNDS FOR
BOTH SATURDAY AND SUNDAY.
*16 VIP PASSES FOR ENTRANCE INTO THE VIP TENT FOR SATURDAY AND
SUNDAY.
*8 COMPLETE SETS OF OFFICIAL FESTIVAL SOUVENIRS.
*8 VALLEY GLOW PASSES FOR FRIDAY NIGHT
*CITY REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE INVITED GUESTS AT ALL MEDIA
EVENTS.
*CITY WILL RECEIVE A 15% DISCOUNT OR THE SALE PRICE, THE LOWER
OF THE TWO, ON SOUVENIRS PURCHASED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
FOR CITY OFFICIALS AND GUESTS.
*FIRST RIGHT-OF-REFUSAL FOR THE 1998 TOURISM TENT SPONSORSHIP.
Please sign the enclosed sponsor agreement and return to our office. Thank you for
your continued support.
Sinc@rely,
Teresa Kolbas
General Manager
27403 @'iiez l@Oad, SLlite 208 & 209 'I'ciiiecul@i, (,aliforiiia 1)2i9l (')09) 6/6-4713
Jantiar,.! 13, 1997
A
CITY OF TEMECULA
Gloria Wolneck
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92591
Dear City of Temecula Staff and Gloria,
Thank vou for being an integral part of one of Riverside County's favorite family events! The
Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival, April 25th, 26th and 27th, 1997, with it's
colorful sights, scrumptious tastes, and extraordinary entertainment offers a weekend of fun
to over 50,000 guests each year.
As you might expect from us, we're adding some new surprises and making some exciting
improvements to guarantee another phenomenal success! At "Temecula Extreme" guests will
find musical entertainment spanning the 20th century from ragtime to alternative rock. Our
Kid's Faire features Kids from Around the World, with a multi-cultural selection of musical
performers, children's plays, and an interactive hands-on craft workshop where children
learn crafts of other countries.
But our number one specialty is in our title - hot air balloons and premium wine tasting.
Designed as a celebration of Temecula's recreational and agricultural resources, the Festival
greets guests at 7 a.m. with hot air balloon mass ascensions, and puts them to bed with
visions of our luminescent evening balloon glows. During the day we keep their feet tapping
as they listen to the musical renderings of top classic rock and jazz performers. Afternoons
are a taste sensation with samples of Temecula's finest wines perfectly complemented with
morsels of gourmet cheese and foods.
There is so much to share and do for the entire family and we bring out the best of the
Valley. Many of our guests stay for the entire weekend in the adjacent campgrounds or local
hotels. In fact, 50 percent of our guests come from outlying Orange, San Diego and Los
Angeles Counties. The remainder of the guests are Riverside San Bernardino residents.
Studies show that our audience is comprised largely of 25-54 year old middle income
professionals with gourmet tastes.
Summed up, the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival offers the perfect audience for
marketing tourism in the CITY OF TEMECULA. In addition to the logo and product
exposure to our 50,000 elite guests, you will also reap the benefit of the Festival's aggressive
public relations 4,p4 marketing campaign. The 1996 campaign achieved over 3 million
impressions in azines, newspapers, and periodicals, Radio promotions reached audiences
'-'/403 Yiacz P.oi(l, Stiite 208 & @-09 - 'I'eiTICCLIII, C,,iliforiiia 0.1@91 - '@909) 6"76--+713
of over 1.6 million and television coverage included major networks ABC, NBC AND CBS,
as wells as cable audiences and a live broadcast on L.A.s number one morning news station,
KTLA.
A tradition of excellence since 1983, The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival
expands every year with new entertainment, new venues and new opportunities for sponsors
to maximize their marketing exposure. The Festival is produced by the Temecula Valley
Balloon and Wine Festival Association, a non-profit organization. Each year proceeds from
the event help numerous charities and organizations in the community such as, the Boy
Scouts, 4-H, The Rotary Club of Temecula, Wine Society, The Temecula Valley Art League,
and scholarships to local high schools.
I have prepared a marketing proposal for your review which includes sponsorship amenities
and marketing exposure. Since you are the expert, I will be calling to discuss any of the
marketing options that you feel will enhance THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S exposure to our
guests. Please review the enclosed package and feel free to call us with any suggestions,
comments or questions.
Thank you for taking the time to consider the 1997 Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine
Festival sponsorship with us. I look forward to many more conversations.
Sincerely,
Teresa Kolbas
General Manager
27403 Yi)e7 Road, Siiite '-08 & 209 'I'eiiiecLila, Cjliforiii@i 92;91 (909) 676-4713
January 13, 1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
Gloria Wolneck
Dear Gloria,
The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival has a balance due
the City for $10,000 from the loan acquired in 1992. The
Festival has every intention to repay the loan as per the
installment agreement of $5,000 per year, or more, depending on
the success of the event, due at the end of the festival.
Resnectfully,
T@e esa Kolbas
General Manager
2740@ Yiiez Foa(l, Siiite'-108 & -109 - 'I'eiiicctil;i, (,Liliforiiia 9?-;91 - (009) 676-4713
APPRL,VAL
CITY AT70RNEY
FINANCE OFF
CITY MANAG
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Manager/City Council
FROM:Mary Jane McLarney, Assistant City Manage,
DATE:December 13,1994
SUBJECT: Extension of Loan for Balloon and Wine Festival
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve a one year extension for repayment of the Temecula Valley
Balloon and Wine Festival Loan.
BACKGROUND:
On November 19, 1992, the City Council approved repayment terms for a $25,000 loan to
the Balloon and Wine Festival. The loan was to be repaid in $5,000 installments over five
years beginning in May 1993. The General Manager of the Balloon and Wine Festival has
indicated that the 1 993 Festival was not as profitable as expected and is requesting a one
year extension for repayment of the loan. The 1994 payment was made in accordance with
the loan terms.
7/2i/13 @t2Sq
(5,ooo-
Melody'sAd Viorks
1996 Temecula Valley
Balloon and Wine Festival
Report
MARKETING/PUBLIC RELATIONS
OVERVIEW:
The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival marketing reached new heights this year
with the cooperative efforts of Von's Grocery Store in Temecula, KLOS, KOLA, KCBS -
ARROW, and KNX Radio. This relationship had the Festival on display in Von's Grocery
Stores in Riverside County and radio commercials from Ventura to San Diego.
Estimated radio cumulative audience for adults ages 25-54 (paid advertisements) 1.641
'Ilion. Estimated audience with promotional giveaways and/or guest deejays at Festival
rn 1 1
totaled 823,000.
The Publicity Campaign resulted in national newspaper and magazine coverage with a
greater intensity placed in southern California newspapers. Coverage included William
Tomicki's nationally syndicated travel column, Southwest Spirit and American Airways
magazines, plus coverage in newspapers totalling over 3 million impressions.
TELEVISION COVERAGE:
KTLA - MORNING NEWS - GAYLE ANDERSON -
FRIDAY, APRIL 26TH 7 a.m. - 9 a.m.
A NATIONAL BROADCAST AND THE #1 MORNING NEWS
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
Coverage began at 7 a.m. with balloons inflated. Several interviews included the
assistant winemaker of Callaway, Balloon and Wine Festival's Secretary Diana
Stead, and balloonists Dominic Chemello and Rusty Manning. The feature
concluded with Gayle Anderson flying from Lake Skinner in the NEW Temecula
Balloon.
KCOP - LOS ANGELES, CHANNEL 13 - UPN
SATURDAY, APRIL 27TH. 10 P.M. NEWS
KGTV- SAN DIEGO, CHANNEL 10, ABC
FRIDAY, SATURDAY, APRIL 27TH - EVENING NEWS
KUSI - SAN DIEGO, CHANNEL 51 - UPN
SATURDAY, APRIL 2/-TH - EVENING NEWS
KNSD- SAN DIEGO, CHANNEL 39 - NBC
FRIDAY, SATURDAY, APRIL 26TH, 27TH - EVENING NEWS
KNBC - LOS ANGELES, CHANNEL 4 - NBC
FRIDAY, APRIL 26TH - MORNING NEWS 5:30 - 7:00 A.M.
INLAND VALLEY CABLE VISION,
I 00 SPOTS/DAY
CONTEST THROUGHOUT HEMET, TEMECULA
PROMOTING VIP DAY AT THE FESTIVAL
CONTINENTAL CABLE -
SARAH COLEMAN SHOW
2 INTERVIEWS - I IN MARCH, I-APRIL
PLUS 20-30 SPOTS/DAY
KCSB - SAN BERNARDINO INTERVIEW
APRIL 20, 23, 25TH
KOREAN NEWS
COVERED AND TO BE PLAYED IN KOREA
OCN - ORANGE COUNTY NEWS/CABLE
18 SPOTS/DAY DURING WEEKEND
RADIO ADVERTISING SCHEDULES:
LOS ANGELES DATES AIRED/# COMMERCIALS
KCBS - ARROW 4/22-4/26/96
16 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
KLOS -95.5 FM 4/22-4/26/96
40 PROMOS
4/22-4/26/96
13 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
KNX 10.70 AM 4/8-4/27/96 - CHURNY CO SPLIT
60 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
4/8-4/27/96 - ROD'S FOOD SPLIT
30 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
4/8-4/27/96 - ROD'S FOOD SPLIT
30 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIAL
4/8/-4/27196 - LA TAPATIA SPLIT
30 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
INLAND EMPIRE DATES AIRED/# COMMERCIALS
KOLA 99.1 FM 4/22-4/26/96
60 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
4/1 7-4/26/96
90 PROMOS
KRTM 88.9 FM 3/19-4/26/96
288 X 30-SECOND COMMERCIALS
4 REMOTE BROADCASTS
KATY 101.3 FM 3/1 9-4/26/96
120 X 30-SECOND COMMERCIALS
SAN DIEGO DATES AIRED/# COMMERCIALS
KBEST 95 FM 41'2,LlI 6-4/26/96
-@10 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
KSETS FM 102.3 FM 4/22/96-4/26/96
40 X 60-SECOND COMMERCIALS
PRINT MEDIA SPONSORSHIPS
PennysaverAdvertising,
200,000 Circulation, in Riverside County from
2/28/96 to 4/24/96.
1 million circulation in L.A., Orange and Riverside from
4/3/96 to 4/24/96.
Directional signage at Event
Bargain BulletinAdvertising
284,000 Circulation from
3/6/96 to 4/24/96.
Press EnterpriseAdvertising
141,148 Circulation
from 3/29/96 to 4/26/96
CalifornianAdvertising
13,121 Circulation
from 3/6/96 to 4/26/96
*See advertising schedules
RADIO TICKET GIVEAWAYS AND OTHER PROMOS:
RADIO STATION TICKET GIVEAWAYS
The following stations distributed tickets "on-air" in ticket giveways the final
two weeks prior to the Festival
KRTN,A - LOCAL
KPSL - PALM SPRINGS
KATY - LOCAL
KGB - SAN DIEGO
Q106 - SAN DIEGO
KIEV - LOS ANGELES
KPCC - PASADENA
KBEST - SAN DIEGO
KKLA - BURBANK
KMET - BAN,@ING
KCBS - LOS ANGELES
KDES - PALM SPRINGS
KKBH SAN DIEGO
KLKX PALMDALE
KSON SAN DIEGO
ROCK 103 SAN DIEGO
KEZN PALM DESSERT
KUOR- REDLANDS
KOLA REDLANDS
KOW SAN DIEGO
KSPA SAN DIEGO
KGER- EL CAJON
KLOS- LOS ANGELES
PROMOTIONS:
INTERVIEWS -
KIEV -CHEF PIERO
APRIL 10, 17 AND 24 CALLAWAY, THORNTON, BAILY,
TEMECULA CREST AND MAURICE CARRIE WINERIES
KLOS-COOL PATROL PROMOS ANNOUNCING FESTIVAL
KOLA -INTERVIEWS OF GUESS WHO
KKLA -INTERVIEWS OF GUESS WHO
KRT,@I -INTERVIEWS OF GUESS WHO AND MAJOR SPONSORS
PLUS RE,@IOTES
KPSL -INTERVIEW OF (J-UESS WHO
OTHER
KNX -Radio Sponsor Tie-ins totalling $35,000
KABC -Melinda Lee appearance and Food News show promotions.
KSETS -Make a Wish Foundation and Dream Catcher Balloon
KFIMike Nolan as Honorary Balloonmeister promoted on air.
Bill Handel promoted along with any Thornton promos, plus
talked up based on media day.
PSAs
KLOS -LOS ANGELES
KXEZ -LOS ANGELES
Q106 -SAN DIEGO
KPSA -SAN DIEGO
KOW -SAN DIEGO
KRTM -LOCAL
KPSL -PALM SPRINGS
KATY -LOCAL
KBEST -SAN DIEGO
KUOR -REDLANDS
KPCC -PASADENA
KYSR -SAN DIEGO
And the AMI Stations including the following stations from Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, Bakersfield, Victorville, Fresno, King City,
San Luis Obispo, Modesto, Stockton, Santa Rosa, Yuba and Ukia in California:
KMGX, KKLA, KMPC, KWRP, KCKC, KORG, KGMG, KDFC AM/FM, K101,
KFBK, KAHI, KFIA AM/FM, KKZZ, KNZR, KCIN, KKTR, KRKC AM/FM, KPRL,
KVEC, KFIV, KJAX, KFMR, KKBN, KMGG, KUKI, KXCL, KORV, KPCO, KWSD,
KEDY.
PRINT COVERAGE
Bill Tomicki's Syndicated Column -
Nationwide exposure:
Times Daily, Alabama
Tuscaloosa News, Alabama
Anchorage Times, Alaska
Arizona Republic, Az
Phoenix Gazette, AZ
Arkansas Democrat, AR
The Star, Camarillo, CA
Appeal Democrat, Marysville, CA
The Moorpark Star, CA
Sacramento Bee
San Diego Union
Santa Maria Times
Orange County Register
The Star, Thousand Oaks
Desert Sun, Palm Springs
Santa Barbara News Press
Santa Maria Times
The Press Democrat, Santa Rosa
The Star, Ventura
The Ledger, Florida
Daily Commercial, Florida
Loafer's Choice, Florida
Miami Herald, Florida
Goin Places, Boise Id
Champagne Urbana News Gazette, IL
Chicago Tribune, 11
Grand Rapids Press, Ml
Times News - Hendersonville, NC
Plain Dealer, Cleveland, OH
Traveller's Digest, Or
York County Times, PA
Spartburg Herald, SC
Houston Chronicle, TX
Dallas Times-Herald, TX
Milwaukee journal, WI
Richmond Times, VA
Plus a variety of Canadian newspapers.
NEWSPAPER COVERAGE
PUBLICATION DATE CIRCULATION
San Diego Union Tribune 4,18, 4/28 (467,287)
Orange County Register 4/21, 3/22 (415,429)
Los Angeles Times 3/22,
/Best Bets Festival, 4/21 (1,531,527)
AAA Travel Tipster Feb. - April (40,000)
Press Enterprise Numerous dates
9/95-5/96 (141,148)
Californian Numerous dates
9/95-5/96 (13,121)
Rancho News (13,000)
Lake Elsinore Sun Tribune Numerous dates
9/95-6/96 (10,691)
Menifee News Numerous dates
1/96-4/96 (7,900)
Hemet News Numerous dates
3/96-4/96 (14,798)
Rancho Bernardo News April
(2,500)
North County Times April
(21,761)
Desert Sun 4/21 (33,227)
inland Valley Daily Bulletin 4/25
(100,200)
Victorville Daily Press 4/14, 4/26 (30,433)
San Bernardino Precinct Reporter 4/25 (55,000)
Chino Champion 4/23 (4,086)
Beverly Hills Beverage Bulletin March (12,412)
San Diego Navy Dispatch 4/18, @@5 (25,000)
Ventura County Star April
Pasadena Star April 19 (43,000)
Whittier Daily News April 1 9 (16,700)
San Bernardino Sun March 1 9 (88,328)
Los Angeles Daily News March 24 (145,757)
Star News/Chula Vista, Coronado 4/25
Daily Breeze 9/1 9/95
Daily Bulletin April (100,000)
TOTAL NUMBER OF NEWSPAPER IMPRESSIONS (EST) 5.7 Million
(ma'or publications multiplied by number of weeks covered.y
i
MAGAZINES
Today in San Diego
San Diego Magazine
San Diego Home & Garden
Senior World
Orange Coast Magazine
Where Magazine
Inland Empire Magazine
Palm Springs Life
Coast to Coast Magazine
American Way
Southwest Spirit
RV WEST Magazine
San Diego Business journal
Valley Business Journal
Country Review Magazine
Western Association News
Vittles and Vines
April 46,000
April
April 45,000
April 500,000
April 40,000
April
April
April
April 300,000
April
April 35,000
April 10,000
April 5,000
April 5,000
April
April
TOTAL MAGAZINE IMPRESSIONS (EST.) 930,000
OTHER MARKETING
VON'S GROCERY STORE DISPLAYS, FLYER DISTRIBUTION & SHELF TALKERS
Riverside County
50,000 Flyers distributed through Von's Grocery Stores in Riverside County's 22
stores. Shelf talkers for Festival's food sponsors in 22 stores.
In store displays with products, hot air balloon and souvenirs for two weeks prior
to event.
PENNYSAVER & BARGAIN BULLETIN FLYERS
Inserts into the Pennysaver and Bargain Bulletin direct mailed pieces
Total numberof flyers printed and inserted
15,000Prior to the Bargain Bulletin and Press Enterprise
16,000Bargain Bulletin
11,000Pennysaver
100,000Printed and distributed throughout Riverside County,
Wineries and through Von's Grocery Stores
COLD AIRBALLOONS ON ROOFTOPS
Sun City, Temecula Sponsors
TABLE TENTS IN RESTAURANTS
PORTS 0"CALL TRAVEL BONANZA
Three week promotional campaign supporting a travel festival at Ports O' Call.
A cooperative effort between KNX News Radio, Montrose Travel, Ports O'Call,
Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival, Daily Breeze, San Gabriel Valley
News and The Press Enterprise resulted in a three-day Consumer-Based Travel
Convention at Ports O'Call. Promotions included print advertising in the three
sponsoring newspapers, 40,000 direct mailed circulars to high-end consumers in
the Hollywood Hills and Montrose areas, plus three-weeks on-air promotions
featuring Temecula Creek Inn, Embassy Suites Hotel, The Temecula Valley
Chamber of Commerce, Thornton Winery, Callaway Winery, Maurice Carrie
Winery and Van Roekel Winery.
Commercials and advertisements encouraged calls to the Temecula Valley
Chamber of Commerce and the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival for
travel information.
ValleY
97 T@m
Balloon and Wine
Festival
Marketing Outline
ADVE TTISING:
FLYERS/BROCHUR-ES:
Event flyers and brochures are distributed beginning in September 1996.
Flyers are distributed through the Temecula Valley wineries, and other retail
outlets beginning in January.
Four color brochures are mailed to inquiries and distributed through various
tourist related outlets in the Southwest Riverside county area beginning in
October. Additional brochures are mailed to phone-in inquiries.
Over 160,000 flyers are distributed beginning in January. The first phase of
20,000 is distributed through hotels, wineries and local retail establishments.
25,000 is inserted in the Pennysaver and Bargain Bulletin two weeks prior to
the event. 1 15,000 is distributed through local fast food restaurants and Von's
Grocery Store Bag Stuffers.
PRINT MEDIA
An aggressive multi-media advertising campaign begins in March, 60 days prior
to the event in the following publications.
AAA TRAVELSAVERS - 40,000 CIRCULATION, promoting pre-sale tickets.
PENNYSAVER - Harte Hanks owne4 Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Diego Counties. I
million circulation.
THE BARGAIN BULLETIN - Temecula/Southwest Riverside Counties, San Diego, South Orange
County. Orange and San Diego Counties the publication is ABC/Cap Cities Pennysaver. 284, circulation.
THE PRESS ENTERPRISE - Temecula/Murrieta zone, Festival updates beginning March 6th and
continuing weekly, thereafter. Full circulation advertising beginning March 20th. - Circulation
141,148
THE CALIFORNIAN - Temecula/Murrieta local daily, Advertising begins March 7th, 1997. Circulation
= 13,000.
SUNSET MAGAZINE - In cooperation with the Inland Empire Tourism Council the Festival will
advertising in March in Sunset Magazine.
1997 Tememrula Vai
Balloon & tvine
RADIO AND TELEVISION
Local radio and television advertising begins March 3, 1997 on local stations,
KATY 101.3 FM, and 88.9 KRTM FM. Cooperative radio campaigns on
KLOS, KOLA, KCBS, KSETS, KBEST and KNX radio begin three weeks
prior to the event.
Local cable promotional contests and advertising begin March 10 on TCI/
Inland Cablevision and COX/Continental Cable.
Total audience = 1.6 million
ADDITIONAL MARKETING/EXPOSURE
VONIS GROCERY STORES - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
Von's Grocery store will begin promoting the Festival with in-store banners
April 1. The Festival will also be advertised in Von's circular with 2.8-5
'Ilion circulation, two weeks prior to the Festival. In addition, Festival food
ml 1
products and official products will be identified in the Southern California
Von's Stores with Festival Shelf Talkers for two weeks prior to the event.
Von's will also promote and sell tickets to the Festival at a discount to Von's
Club Card holders, and in some cases establish seasonal
displays for the Festival.
TABLE TENTS - TEMECULA VALLEY
Table tents will be placed in local restaurants, wineries
and hotels, three weeks prior to the event.
BOTTLENECKERS - INLAND EMPIREI
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Samuel Adams beer will be placing bottleneckers on
their product throughout the Riverside County, Inland
Empire area.
1-99 7 Tememcm, la Valley
Ballovn & tvine
PUBLICITY
MAGAZINES AND TRAVEL WRITERS
Publicity for the Festival in travel, food,
wine and general interest publications
begins in November with calendar notices and media kits. Over I 00 publica-
tions are solicited. The 1996 Festival received coverage in Southwest Spirit,
Senior World, RV West, American Way, San Diego Business Journal, San
Diego Magazine, San Diego Home & Garden, Where Magazine, Coast to
Coast Magazine, Palm Springs Life, Southern California Guide, and New
York Times Syndicated columnist William Tomicki's Entree Travel column.
NEWSPAPERS
Over 100 dailies, weeklies and
entertainment related newspapers
are sent Festival media kits begin-
ning six weeks prior to the event.
Coverage in 1996 included the Los
Angeles Times "Best Bets", Or-
ange County Register, Los Angeles
Daily News, and the San Diego
Union. Total impressions of over
25 Southern California Newspa-
pers was 5.7 million.
RADIO
PSNs and concert hotline notices are sent to radio stations in the Los Ange-
les, Orange, Riverside and San Diego Counties. In addition, ticket giveaways
are conducted on numerous radio stations throughout Southern California.
TELEVISION
B-rolls are distributed to all network television stations in San Diego and the
L.A. Metro area. In addition, a media event is scheduled for Friday, April
25th where television stations can cover the event live, and preview the new
additions to the Festival. Each year the Festival is viewed on major networks
in San Diego and the L.A. metro area. 1996 had a two-hour on-site broadcast
with KTLA - Warner Bros network. 1995 had a two-hour on-site broadcast
with Fox.
Local weather men are also sent b-rolls for coverage of the balloon launch
during the weather broadcast. Over the past three years the Festival is seen
regularly on KNBC, KABC and KCBS in both L.A. and San Diego Counties.
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
Adrrdssions Arts & Crafts Balloons Beverage Comnund,Safety
jui'% - Jun'97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Ordinary lncometexpense
Income
Admiaskma 323,000.OC)
Beverage lnconie 96,333.00
Parking lncorne
RV lncon* 22,125.00
Souvenir Sales
Sponsorship 4,250.00 11,000.00
Venues Income 19,100.00 4,000.00
Miscellaneous lncorm
Total lncoffm 345,125.00 23,350.00 15,000.00 96,333@00
Cost of Goods Sold
Souvenirs Expenses
Total COGS
Gross Profit 345,125.00 23,350.00 15,000.00 96,333.00
Expense
Sales Tax 7,465.80
Volunteer Expenses
Accomodations E 6,750.00
Admissions Expense 37,800@00
Beverage Expense 30,250.00
Connond 5,200.00
Donation 2,500.00 5,000.00 2,500.00
Entertainrmnt Expense 1,500.00
Facilities Expenses 1,800.00 6,850.00 150.00 6,500.00 12,50D.00
Markefing Expense
Public Safety Expenses 39,5W.00
Sig"" 350.00 150.00 250.00 1,500.00 250.00
Sponem Expenses 5M.00
Traffic Expense
Transportaion Expense
Venue Expenses 3,000.00 16,750.00
Operating Expenses 250.00 3,500.00 350.00 3,75D@00
Total Expense 42,700.00 18,500.0@0 25,900.00 -48,565.80 -,61,200.00
Net Ordinary lnconie 302,425.00 4,850@00 -10,900.00 47,767.20 -61 =.OD
Other lncometexpense
Other lncorne
1996incorm
Total Other lnconie
Other Expense
Prior Year Costs
Page I
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
Admi@ons Arts & Crafts Bal@s Beverage ComniancLSafety
J 1 '"9 -Jun '97 ul '96 - Jun -9i Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 -Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Total Other Expense
Net Other Income
Net Income 302,426.00 4,860.00 -10,900.00 47,767.20 -61,200.00
Page 2
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
rcial Court Extr@ T la Food Vendors General Ope ration Kids Farle
Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Ordinary lnconwJExpense
tncon,ie
Adrrdscions
Beverage lncoffm
Parking lncorm 9,500.00
RV lncorrw
Souvenir Sales
Sponsorship 15,000.00 4,000.00
Venues lriconw 35,750.00 16,750.00 4,500.00
Miscellaneous lnconm 3,500.00 500.00
Total Inconie 35,750.00 18,500.00 16,750.00 10,000.00 8,500.00
Cost of Goods Sold
Souvenir$ Expenses
Total COGS
Gross Profit 35,750.00 18,500.00 16,750.00 10,000.00 8,500.00
Expense
Sales Tax
Volunteer Expenses 500.00
Accomodat@ Expense
Adn,dsWons Expense
Beverage Expense
Command
Donation 1,750.00 15,500.00
Entertainment Expense 10,500.00 10,550.00
Facilities Expenses 13,555.00 5,100.00 9,800.00 33,750.00 10,440.00
MarkeOng Expense
Public Safety Expenses
Skjoage 500.00 3,000.00 250.00
Sponw Expenses
Traffic Expense I O,OOC).OD
Transportalon Expense 32,000.00
Venue Expenses 850.00
Operating Expenses 3,570.00 1,650.00 93,767.00 700.W
Total Expense 17,125.00 17,850.00 11,450.00 188,517.00 22,790.00
Net Ordinary Income 18,625.00 650.00 5,30C).DD -178,517.00 -14,290.00
Other Income/Expense
Other Income
1996 Inconie 40,000.00
Total Other Income 40,000.00
Other Expense
Prior Year Costs 16,063.00
Page 3
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
cial Court Extrerrie Teffiecula Food Vendors General Operation Kids Farle
Jul '99 - Jun 197 tul '96 - J n '97 Jul '96 - Jun 197 Jul '96 -Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Total Other Expense ----I-6,-063.00
Net Other lrkcorm 23,937.00
Net Income 18,62&00 650.00 5,300.00 -164,5w.OO -14,290.00
Page 4
TemecLila Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
Ci/13197 Buclget Repoft
July 1996 through June 1997
Main Stage Marketing & PR ParWng Souvenirs Sponsms
Jtg'N - Jun 17 Jul96 -Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul'OS - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun 197
Ordinary Expense
Income
AdrW@ns
Beverage
Parking l@
RV tnconie
Souvenir Satw 40,79D.OD
SponsoreMp 7,500.00 50,000.00 3,5W.OD 30,000.00
Venues tmoffm
Miscellaneous Income
Total lncom 7,5M.00 50,000.00 44,25D.00 30,000,00
Cost of Goode Sold
Souvenirs Ex 25,ODD.00
Total COGS --25,000.00
Gross Profft 7,500.00 50,000.00 19,25D.00 30,OOD.00
Expense
Sal" Tax 3,157.50
Volunteer Ex 6,OOD.00
Acc Experm 4,500,00
AdniieWons Expense
Beverage Expense
Cormwd
Donation 8,000.OD 1,500.OD
EntaW Expense 85,500,00
Facilft*s Expenses 8,390.00 2,175.00 6,490.00 1,090.DD
Markeflng Expense 83,247.00 1,500.00
PubNc Safety Expenses
Skjnage 1,325.00 3,000.00
Sponsor Expenses 75D.00 1,000.00 19,ODD.00
Traffic Expense
Tr Ion Expense
Venue Expenses
oper@ 'Experms 850.00
Total Expense 98,390.00 87,497@IDO 18,340.00 14,247.5D 19,OOC).OD
Not Ordinary lmonie -90,890.00 -37,497.00 -18,340.00 5,002.50 11,000.00
Other imometexpe-nee
Other Income
1996
Total Other tncorne
Other Expense
Prior Year Costs
Page 6
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
Oltl3/g7 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
main stage MarkeWg & PR pamng s $8
Jui'96 -Jun '97 Jul VS - Jun97 -- - Jun97 Jul 'M - Jun '97 Jul 196 - Jun97
Total Other Expense
?W Other Income
Net Incorm .37,497." -18,340.00 B,m.so 11,000.00
Page 6
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
Tourtsm Tent WVirte Tasting TOTAL
Jul '96 - Jun'97 Jul '96 - Jun '97 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Ordinary lncometexpense
Incom
AdrfAssiofte 323,000.00
Beverage lricoffie 69,500.00 165,@-OC)
Parking fncofm 9,500-00
RV Income 22,125.00
Souvenir Sales 40,750-00
Sponsorship 10,000.00 135,250-00
Venues lncoffm 7,100.00 87,200.00
Mi=Miarmous lriconw 4,000-OC)
Total lncoffie 17,100@00 69,500.00 787,65B.00
Cost of Goods Sold
Souvenirs Expenses 25,OOD.OC)
Total COGS 25,000.00
Gross Profit 17,100.00 69,500.00 762,658.00
Expense
Sales Tax 1,885.18 12,508.48
Volunteer Expenses 6,500.00
Accomodations Expense 11,250.00
Admissions Expense 37,800.00
Beverage Expense 3,500.00 33,750.00
c 5,200.00
Doruktion 4,9M.00 5,000.00 46,675.00
Entertalnn*nt Expense 12,500.00 120,550.00
Faoc-dities Expenses 1,700.00 7,855.00 128,145.00
Marketing Expense 84,747.00
Pubk Safety Expenses 39,500.00
Sigriage 400.00 250.00 11,225.00
Sponsor Expenses 21,250.00
Tratk Expense 10,000.00
Transportalon Expense 32,000-00
Venue Experms 2,800.00 20,000.00 43,400.00
Operating Expenses 108,387.00
Total Expense 9,825.00 50,990.18 752,887.48
Net Ordinary lncom 7,275.00 18,509.82 9,77a52
Other IncometExpense
Other lnconis
1996 lncorrie 40,000.00
Total Other Incoffm 4C),000.00
Other Expense
Prior Year Costs 16,063-00
Page 7
Temecula Valley Bal@n & Wine Festival
01113197 Budget Report
July 1996 through June 1997
Tourism Tent-- Wine Tastlng- ",.---TOTAL
Ju['N - Jun'97 Jul'96 - Jun '9 7 Jul '96 - Jun '97
Total Other Expense 16,063.00
Net Other Income 23,937.00
Net Inconie 7,276.00 l8,5N.82 33,707.52
Page 8
ATTACHMENT D
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Agreement
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND TEMECULA
VALLEY BALLOON & WINE ASSOCIATION
This Agreement, made this 2JU day of January, 1997, by and between the TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a Municipal Corporation, duly organized and existing under and
by virtue of the laws of the State of California, (hereinafter refeffed to as "RDA"), and
TEMECULA VALLEY BALLOON & WINE ASSOCIATION, a California nonprofit corporation
(hereinafter referred to as ("TVBWA").
A. TVBWA will operate the "Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival " on April
25@ 26 and 27, 1997. The Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival is a special event located at
Lake Skinner featuring over 50 hot air balloons, main stage headline entertainment, western
village, Idds faire, commercial court, arts and crafts fair, and wine tasting from Temecula Valley.
Attendance in previous years has been over 50,000 people for the 3 day event.
B. The Temecula Redevelopment Agency desires to be the Tourism Tent Sponsor of
the 1997 Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
A. In exchange for the payment of $10,500, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency
shall be designated as a "Tourism Tent Sponsor" of the 1997 Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine
Festival. In exchange for being a Tourism Tent Sponsor, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency
will receive the benefits as listed in Attachment A.
B. Any media visits prior to the Balloon and Wine Festival event need to include visits
to all Temecula entities ( i.e. Old Town, wineries, golf ) as the City of Temecula should be
recognized as a whole. Secondly, our material on the City of Temecula ( press kits, information
on Old Town, fact sheets, wineries, golf, etc. ) should be included as part of all media packages.
Thus, giving the media background an overview on Temecula plus Balloon and Wine Festival
event.
C. Following the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival, TVBWA shall prepare
and submit to the City Manager a written report evaluating the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine
Festival, its attendance, and describing the materials in which the RDA was listed as a Tourism
Tent Sponsor.
D. TVBWA agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold RDA and its elected
officials, officer, agents, and employees free and harmless from all claims for damage to persons
or property by reason of TVBWA's acts or omissions or those of TVBWA's employees, officers,
agents, or invites in connection with the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival to the
maximum extent allowed by law.
E. TVBWA 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 RDA is named insured or is named as an additional insured with TVBWA and shall furnish
a Certificate of Liability by the RDA. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy
or any subsequent endorsement attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall;
1 . Include the RDA as the insured or named as an additional insured covering
all claims arising out of, or in connection with, the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival.
2. Include the RDA, 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
Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival.
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.
(B)Liquor Liability: $1,000,000 combines single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
4. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the RDA,
its officer, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from the Temecula Valley
Balloon & Wine Festival.
5. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided
that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever,
the RDA shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less
than thirty (30) days beforehand.
6. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved
by the RDA. At the option of the RDA, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductible or self-insured retention as respects the RDA, its officers, officials and employees or
TVBWA shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration and defense expenses.
F. 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 prevaibg party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attomey's fees, in addition to
any other relief to which it may be entitled.
G. TVBWA shall promptly @sh RDA, upon the completion of TVBWA operating
year, certified copies of annual operating statement.
IN WITNESS YVIREREOF, the RDA has caused its corporate name and seal to be
hereunto subscribed and affixed by Chairperson and attest to by the City Clerk, both thereunto
duly authorized, and the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Association has hereunto subscribed
this Contract day, month, and year hereinabove written.
DATED:
TEMECULA VALLEY BALLOON CITY OF TEMECULA
& WINE ASSOCIATION
BY:
Teresa Kolbas, General Manager Steven J. Ford, Chairperson
Temecula Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
June S. Greek
City Clerk / Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT "A"
1997 TEMECULA VALLEY
BALLOON AND WINE FESTIVAL
SPONSORSMP AGREEMENT
",'k Traditwn Since 1983"
CITY OF TEMECULA
TOURISM TENT SPONSOR
OVERVIEW
The Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival invites The City of Temecula to sponsor
the Festival's Tourism Tent. The Tourism Tent was a great success in 1996 with the
eff,orts put forth by the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce. The Tourism Tent
looks to, be another exciting attraction to offer the 50,000+ Festival guests and
complement the marketing efforts by the City of Temecula.
April is the Festival's "coming out party" with a street banner and cold air balloons atop
local business' as ticket outlets and such. Tle Festival is requesting an additional
$500.00 in sponsorship over last year to off set the costs for the permit fees for the street
banner and cold air balloons.
Total sponsorship request is $10,500.00.
AS THE MARKETING AND TOURISM TENT SPONSOR, THE CITY OF
TEMECULA WILL RECEIVE:
* RECOGNITION IN FESTIVAL NEWSPAPER DISPLAY ADVERTISING THE
FINAL TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE EVENT.
Press Enterprise (141,148 Circulation), The Californian (14,000 Circulation), The
Pennysaver, ]Me Bargain Bulletin
*ADVERTISEMENT IN THE OFFICIAL PROGRAM (1/2 COLOR PAGE), 60,000
PROGRAMS WILL BE PRINTED AND DISTRIBUTED WITH 36,000 INSERTED
INTO THE PRESS ENTERPRISE.
*RECOGNITION IN FESTIVAL PRESS RELEASES AND PUBLICITY WHERE
APPLICABLE.
*LARGE BANNER AT ENTRANCE OF THE TOURISM TENT SPOTLIGHTING
THE CITY AS THE SPONSOR.
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 208 & 209 - Temecula, California 92591 - (909) 676-4713
"A I'Taditimi Siiice i983"
*CITY WILL RECEIVE 25 ADMISSION TICKETS FOR EACH SATURDAY AND
SUNDAY.
*8 VIP PARKING PASSES TO PARK INSIDE THE FESTIVAL GROUNDS FOR
BOTH SATURDAY AND SUNDAY.
*16 VIP PASSES FOR ENTRANCE INTO THE VIP TENT FOR SATURDAY AND
SUNDAY.
*8 COMPLETE SETS OF OFFICIAL FESTIVAL SOUVENIRS.
*8 VALLEY GLOW PASSES FOR FRIDAY NIGHT
*CITY REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE INVITED GUESTS AT ALL MEDIA
EVENTS.
*CITY WILL RECEIVE A 15% DISCOUNT OR THE SALE PRICE, THE LOWER
OF THE TWO, ON SOUVENIRS PURCHASED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
FOR CITY OFFICIALS AND GUESTS.
*FIRST RIGHT-OF-REFUSAL FOR THE 1998 TOURISM TENT SPONSORSHIP.
Please sign the enclosed sponsor agreement and return to our office. Thank you for
your continued support.
c
Teresa Kolbas
General Manager
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 208 & 209 - Temecula, California 92591 - (909) 676-4713
OLD TOWN WESTSIDE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
FINANCING AUTHORITY
ITEI\4 I
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE OLD TOWN WESTSIDE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY
HELD JANUARY 14, 1997
A regular meeting of the Old Town Westside Community Facilities District Financing
Authority was called to order at 7:46 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 30875 Rancho
Vista Road, Temecula, California. Chairperson Karel F. Lindemans presiding.
PRESENT:5 BOARD MEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans
ABSENT:0 BOARD MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson and
Authority Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
FINANCING AUTHORITY BUSINESS
1Minutes
It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Birdsall to
approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1 as follows:
1.1Approve the minutes of the meeting of December 10, 1 996.
1.2 Approve the minutes of the meeting of December 1 7, 1 996.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Board Members Birdsall and Roberts
abstaining on Item 1 . 1.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Roberts to adjourn at
7:46 PM to a meeting on January 28, 1 997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried.
Karel F. Lindemans, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC,
City Clerk/Authority Secretary
Minutes. fa\O 1 1497 -1-
OLD TOWN WESTSIDE
IMPROVEMENT
AUTHORITY
ITEI\4 I
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY
HELD JANUARY 14, 1997
A regular meeting of the was called to order at 7:47 P.M. at the Temecula City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chairperson Karel F.
Lindemans presiding.
PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone,
Lindemans
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, Authority General Counsel Peter
Thorson and Authority Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Birdsall to approve
Consent Calendar Item No. 1 as follows:
1 . Minutes
1.1Approve the minutes of December 10, 1996.
1.2 Approve the minutes of December 1 7, 1 996.
The motion was unanimously carried with Board Members Birdsall and Roberts
abstaining on Item 1 . 1
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Roberts to adjourn at
7:46 PM to a meeting on January 14, 1 997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Karel F. Lindemans, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC
City Clerk/Authority Secretary
Minutes.ia/01 1497 -1
ITEI\4 13
APPRO
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF Fl E
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council/City Manager
FROM:Gary Thornhill, Community Development Director'
DATE:January 28, 1996
SUBJECT:Appeal of the Planning Commission Approval of Planning Application No. PA96-
01 57, the Development of an 1 1 Acre Commercial Shopping Center Consisting
of 102,632 Square Feet of Building Area.
Prepared By: Craig Ruiz, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
AFFIRM the decision of the Planning Commission to approve
Planning Application No. PA96-0157 (Development Plan), an 1 1
acre commercial shopping center consisting of 102,632 square
feet of building area
BACKGROUND
On November 18, 1996, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA96-
01 57. PA96-0157 is a request to develop an 1 1 acre commercial shopping center located
within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan at the northeast corner of Margarita Road and Highway
79 South. The 102,632 square foot project will include a grocery store, a drug store, retail
shops and a drive through restaurant.
In a separate action at the same meeting, the Commission voted to recommend that the City
Council adopt an amendment to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. One provision of the
amendment would impose the requirements of the Village Center criteria on the shopping center
site. The amendment will not take effect until adopted by the Council.
On December 2, 1996, Councilmember Ford filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's
decision. Councilmember Ford's appeal states that the site design is inconsistent with the
proposed amendment which applies the Village Center criteria to the project site.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission reviewed this project on two occasions. At the first meeting, the
Commission expressed concerns regarding the site design. Specifically, the Commission was
concerned that the site design, public gathering areas, and connections to adjacent properties
shown on the site plan were inconsistent with the Village Center Goals and Objectives.
At the November 18, 1996 public hearing, the Commission found that the revised site plan
adequately addressed their concerns. The Commission felt that limited size of the property
prevented the project from satisfying all of the goals and policies of the Village Center concept.
R:\STAFF@\157PA96.APL 12/26196 ldb 1
However, the Commission found that the site design did meet the Village Center goals and
policies regarding pedestrian amenities and connections. Further, the pedestrian connections
to adjacent properties will help to further realize the Village Center concept on surrounding
properties.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Attachments:
1 . Planning Commission Staff Report Dated November 18, 1996 - Page 3
2. CC Resolution No. 96- - Page 4
3.Planning Commission Minutes, September 16, 1996 - Page 9
R:\STAFFM\157PA96.APL 12/26/96 klb 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
NOVEMBER 18, 1996
R:\STAFF@\157PA96.APL 12119/96 cdr 3
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1996
Planning Application No.: PA96-0157, Development Plan; and
PA96-0158, Tentative Parcel Map 28384
Prepared By: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
1 .AL20PT the Negative Declaration for PA96-0157,
Development Plan and PA96-0158, Tentative Parcel Map
28384;and
2.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- approving PA96-0157,
Development Plan, based upon the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report; and
3.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- approving PA96-0158,
Tentative Parcel Map No. 28384, based upon the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report; and
4.APPROVE Planning Application No. PA96-0157,
Development Plan, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval, and;
5.APPROVE Planning Application PA96-0158 Tentative
Parcel Map 28384, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval, and;
6.MAKE a Finding of Public Necessity or Convenience for
Lucky's Supermarket and Sav-On Drug Store,-
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:Jim Costanzo, Pacific Development Group
PROPOSAL:PA96-0157 consists of the development of an approximately 1 1
acre commercial shopping center consisting of 102,632 square
feet of building area. PA96-0158 is a request to subdivide the
property into 7 parcels.
LOCATION:Northeasterly corner of Margarita Road and State Highway 79
South
R:%STAFFMM157PAOS.PC2 11/14/96cdr
EXISTING ZONING: SP (Specific Plan)
SURROUNDING ZONING: North: SP (Specific Plan)
South:Riverside County
East: SP (Specific Plan)
West:HTC (Highway Tourist Commercial) &
PO (Professional Office)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:Community Commercial (With Village Center Overlay
Designation)
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Single Family Residence\Vacant
South:Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Gas Station\Single Family Residence
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area
10.99 net acres
478,921 net square feet
Total Site Area
Building Area( Ground Floor) 102,632 square feet (22%)
Landscape Area 114,941 square feet (24%)
Hardscape 257,969 square feet (54%)
Parking Required 350 spaces
Parking Provided 391 spaces
Standard 348 spaces
Compact 33 spaces
Handicap 10 spaces
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Planning Application No. PA96-01 57 is a request for a Development Plan to construct a
commercial shopping center. The ultimate development of the site will consist of approximately
102,000 square feet of building area. The development will include a grocery store, a drug
store and other retail development. Both the grocery store and drug store are also requesting
the Commission make a finding of public necessity or convenience to allow both uses to sell
alcohol.
Planning Application No. PA96-01 58 is a request for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide
approximately 1 1 acres into seven parcels which will facilitate the development of the center.
The project is located within Planning Area No. 1 of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan. The
development of the project is governed by the Development Agreement for the Specific Plan
and County Zoning Ordinance No. 348. The City's General Plan designates the site and
surrounding property as a Village Center. The designation does not currently apply to the area
R:ISTAFFWM157PA96.PC2 11114i9B c& 2
due to the existence of the Development Agreement. However, an amendment to the Specific
Plan is being processed in concurrence with the center. As part of the amendment, staff is
recommending the inclusion of the Village Center requirements to this project.
ANALYSIS
This project was previously before the Commission on September 16, 1996. The applicant had
requested a workshop with the Commission to receive informal input and direction regarding
the preliminary site, landscape and elevation plans, prior to preceding further with the project.
At this meeting, the Commission had four primary concerns. These items were compliance
with the Village Center Goals and Objectives (site design, public gathering areas, connections
to adjacent properties) and parking. These items were addressed by the applicant as follows:
Site Design/ Public Gathering Areas
The site plan previously reviewed by the Commission included in-line retail stores (Retail
Building S) adjacent to the Lucky store, two pad buildings with drive-through windows, a
17,000 square foot -tav-On Drug Store building orientated towards Highway 79 South, and
one public plaza area. To address the Commission's concerns, the applicant has rotated the
Retail Building B 90 degrees with the store fronts orientated to the west. The applicant has
also removed the drive-through of Pad C. These two changes have allowed for the enlargement
of the plaza area adjacent to Retail Building B and the addition of a second plaza area adjacent
to Pad C. In addition, the applicant has changed the orientation of the Sav-On building from
the highway to the parking lot area. Staff feels that these changes have adequately addressed
the Commission's previously stated concerns.
Connections to Adjacent Proigertoes
The previous site plan showed a pedestrian and vehicular connection from the project to the
adjacent commercial property to the east. The proposed General Plan Amendment also includes
a pedestrian and vehicular connection from this adjacent easterly commercial property to
Campanula Way. In addition, the new site plan also includes a pedestrian connection to the
adjacent multifamily property to the north. Staff feels that these additional linkages
adequately address the Commission's previously stated concerns.
Village Center Consistency
As stated above, staff is recommending that the site be required to be developed under the
requirements of the General Plan Village Center criteria. The intent of the Village Center
concept is to provide opportunities for development of a mixture of commercial and (ultimately)
resi 'dential uses that will minimize vehicular circulation trips, avoid sprawling of commercial
development and offer incentives for high quality urban design. The development of beneficial
mixtures of uses, shared parking facilities, and pedestrian oriented design are examples of the
concepts that should be encouraged throughout the community.
The proposed commercial development consists of approximately 1 1 acres. The Village Center
designation will also apply to approximately 70 acres of adjacent property (see Exhibit 5c). The
project will have a primary pedestrian plaza area in the vicinity of the Lucky Market and Retail
Building B with a second plaza adjacent to Retail Building C (See Exhibit A - Site plan). The site
plan also provides for pedestrian linkages to adjacent residential and commercial properties as
R:%STAFFWM157PAOG.PC2 11/14/96 o& 3
well as the outlying pad buildings. Staff feels that the limited size of the property prevents the
project from satisfying all of the goals and policies of the Village Center concept. However,
staff does feel that site design does meet several of these goals and policies. Further, the
connections to adjacent properties will help to further realize these Village Center concepts.
Parking
The previous site plan indicated the project was providing 428 parking spaces, resulting in 78
more spaces than required by Ordinance. The new proposal indicates the applicant will provide
391 spaces, resulting in an excess of 41 parking spaces. The applicant has stated to staff that
,the excess parking spaces are necessary to meet the needs of the Lucky and Sav-0n.
OTHERISSUES
Arch*tp,cture
The design of the project provides common design themes relating to building massing, detail
and scale, building heights and setbacks, roof pitches and building materials (see Exhibits 'D-1,
D-2, and D-3') for all buildings. As the individual pad users develop (Pads C and E), they will
be required to conform to the design theme of the center. Staff feels that the elevations are
consistent with the requirements of the Design Guidelines of the Specific Plan.
Landscar)*n.g
The project has been designed to meet the landscaping requirements contained in the Specific
Plan. The project will provide a 35 foot landscape buffer area with a meandering sidewalk
along Highway 79 South and Margarita Roads. This design feature will continue the thematic
plantings established along Margarita Road. It is staff's opinion that the proposed landscaping
meets the City's requirements and provide an adequate visual buffer from future surrounding
residences.
Signage
The Village Center concept requires a comprehensive signage plan to assure a coordinated
visual image. The details of the signage plan can be formulated based upon the special design
character and theme of the particular center. To that end, the applicant has prepared exhibits
detailing the size and location for all signs within the center (See Exhibits "D-1, D-2, D-3, E, H-
1, H-2 and H-3'). Exhibits D-1, D-2, D-3, E, H-1, H-2 and H-3 show the size and location of
signs for Lucky's and Sav-On and the location, style and maximum size for the retail and pad
buildings. The applicant has also prepared Exhibit H which details the size and style of the
monuments signs for the center.
Circulation/Traffic
A traffic study was performed for this project and reviewed by the City's Public Works
Department. In general, the design of the project, with required improvements, will have
adequate circulation. However, the driveway entrance located at Dartolo Road will be
conditioned to provide a traffic signal at Dartolo Road, interconnect the proposed signal with
the signals located at Highway 79 South and Margarita Road and provide for a deceleration lane
of not less than 120 feet prior to the entrance of the driveway. Prior to the issuance of
R:\STAFFWMI57PA98.PC2 11/14190 odr 4
occupancy permits for any building within the project, the required improvements to these
roads will be required to be completed.
Area Compatib*iity
The site is located within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The project site is designated by
the plan as a Community Commercial Development. The project site is currently graded and
vacant. The areas to the south, west and east of the project are also currently vacant. The
land to the north is occupied by a gas station and a single family residence. Staff feels that the
use will be compatible with the surrounding existing and future planned land uses.
Alcohol Uses
The Lucky Supermarket and the Sav-On Drug Store have both requested that the Commission
make a finding of public necessity or convenience to allow both uses to sell alcohol. Staff has
reviewed the criteria established by the Commission to determine said findings (See Attachment
No. 5). Staff has determined that one of the criteria to justify making a finding of convenience
or necessity has been met and none of the criteria to justify not making a finding have been
met. Staff feels that Highway 79 South provides a geographical boundary and a traffic barrier
separating the proposed establishment from other establishments. Further, staff feels the
licenses would be a convenience to residents to the north and west who would not be required
to enter or cross the Highway.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The site has a zoning designation of Specific Plan and a General Plan Land Use Designation of
Community Commercial. Staff is recommending that the General Plan Village Center overlay
designation be applied to this site. It is staff's opinion that the proposed commercial center has
been designed to be consistent with the applicable zoning, General Plan Land Use Designation
and the Village Center Land Use Overlay.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project which determined that although the proposed
project could have a significant effect on the environment in terms of air quality, no
unanticipated significant impacts would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to
the project and a Negative Declaration has been recommended for adoption.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
In general, the project is consistent with the all applicable City requirements and staff is
therefore recommending approval.
FINDINGS
Development Plan (PA96-0157)
1The proposed use conforms to all General Plan requirements and with all applicable
requirements of State law and City ordinances. The project is a permitted use within
R:ISTAFF@157PA96.PC2 11114/90 o* 5
the General Plan Land Use designation of Community Commercial. In addition, the
project is permitted with the approval of a Development Plan.
2.The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and intensity of use due to
the fact that the proposed development complies with the standards contained within
the previously adopted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
3.The project is consistent with the General Plan due to the fact that the project has been
designed to be consistent with the Village Center Concept of the General Plan.
Development of this type will meet and further the overall goals of the General Plan.
4.The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include measures which will
ensure that public health and welfare will be maintained.
5.The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk,
height, intensi@, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining
properties due to the fact that the proposed development is compatible with current
surrounding development and future potential development.
6.The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic due to the fact that the interior circulation is suitable and
connects with Margarita Road and Highway 79 South.
7.The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project due to the fact
that the Conditions of Approval provide necessary mitigations for the project.
8.The proposed use or action complies with all other requirements of state law and local
ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section
65360, Section 18-28 (Development Plan) of Ordinance No. 348, Ordinance 460, and
Ordinance No. 94-22 (Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance).
9.Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated
with these applications and herein incorporated by reference.
Tentative Tract Map No. 28384 (PA96-0158)
1.The proposed land division is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, which
was adopted November 9, 1993. The General Plan land use designation is Community
Commercial. All future development has been conditioned to be consistent with the
Community Commercial Land Use Designation of the General Plan.
2.The proposed land division is consistent with City of Temecula Ordinance No. 460. The
parcels meet the requirements of Section 1 0. 1 0 of Ordinance No. 460 for Schedule "E'
Parcel Map Divisions.
3.The lot design is logical and meets the approval of the City's Planning and Public Works
Departments. Each parcel provides for appropriate building location, access and parking.
R:ISTAFFFfMI57PAOO.PC2 11/14/90cdr 6
4.The project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. A Negative
Declaration has been prepared for the project which includes mitigation measures which
will reduce all impacts to below a level of significance.
5.Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, and exhibits associated with these
applications and herein incorporated by reference. This Staff Report contains maps and
Conditions of Approval which support the Staff recommendation.
Attachments:
1 . PC Resolution No. 96- - Blue Page 8
2. PC Resolution No. 96- - Blue Page 13
Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 18
3.Initial Study - Illue Page 39
4.Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 55
5.Findings for Public Necessity or Convenience - Blue Page 62
6.Exhibits - Blue Page 65
A.Zoning Map
S.Site Plan
C.Village Center Overlay
D. Alcohol Vicinity Map
R:kSTAFFFP'Rl57PASO.PC2 11/14/96 c* 7
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 95-
R:@STAFFWMI57PA96.PC2 11/14198 cdr 8
AT'RAC NO. I
RESOLUTION NO. 96-
A RESOLUTTON OF TIHE CITY COUNCIIL OF TEE CITY
OF CULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICAITON
NO. PA96-0157, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 102,000 SQUARE FOOT
CO CL4,L SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE
NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
AND MARGARrrA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORIS
PARCEL NO. 950-020-037
, Jim Cosmw of Pacific Development Group filed Planning Application No.
PA96-0157 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use
and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
, Planning ApplicatLon No. PA96-0157 was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA96-0157
on November 18, 1996 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons deserving to be heard, the Commission considered all facts
relating to Planning Application No. PA96-0157;
NOW, FORE, THE PLANNING CO SION OF THE CM OF
TEMEECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FindinLys- That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings:
A. Pursuant to Section 18.28, no Development Plan may be approved unless the
applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare
of the community, and further, that any Development Plan approved shall be subject to such
conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, @ and general welfare of the community.
B. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA96-0157
makes the following findings, to wit:
R:kSTAFFFfMlS7PA96.PC2 11/14196 c* 9
The proposed use conforms to all General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of State law and City ordinances. The project is a permitted use within
the General Plan Land Use designation of Community Commercial. In addition, the project is
permitted with the approval of a Development Plan.
2. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the
size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and intensity of use due to the
fact that the proposed development complies with the standards contained within the previously
adopted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
3.The project is consistent with the General Plan due to the fact that the project
has been designedto be consistent with the Village Center Concept of the General Plan.
Development of thistype will meet and further the overall goals of the General Plan.
4.The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or welfare due'to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include measures which will
ensure that public health and welfare will be maintained.
5.The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harrnony in
scale, bulk, height,intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with
adjoining propertiesdue to the fact that the proposed development is compatible with current
surrounding development and future potential development.
6. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open
to, and useable by, vehicular traffic due to the fact that the interior circulation is suitable and
connects with Margarita Road and Highway 79 South.
7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built
or natural environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project due to the fact
that the Conditions of Approval provide necessary mitigations for the project.
8. The proposed use or action complies with all other requirements of state law
and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section
65360, Section 18.28 (Development Plan) of Ordinance No. 348, Ordinance 460, and Ordinance
No. 94-22 (Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance).
9. Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference.
C. As conditioned pursuant to Section 4, Planning Application No. PA96-0157, as
proposed, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
D. The Planning Commission in approving the @cation of the Negative Declaration
of environmental impact under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
specifically finds that the approval of this Development Plan will have a di munmis impact on fish
R:@TAFFWM157PASO.PC2 11/14/98 c& 1 0
and wikuife resources. The Planning Commission y finds that in considering the record
as a whole, the project involves no potential adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively,
on wildlife as the same is defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. This is based on
the fact that dus project will be located on a site that has been previously graded and no wildlife
exists on the site. The Planning Commission @er finds that Pacific Development Group is the
project proponent and the site is located at on the northeasterly comer of Highway 79 South and
Margarita Road, Temecula, California. The project includes the construction of a commercial
@ing center consisting of approximately 102,000 square feet of building area and that all of
the same are located in the County of Riverside. Furthermore, the Planning Commission finds
that an initial study has been prepared by the City Staff and considered by the Planning
Commission which has been the basis to evaluate the potential for adverse impact on the
environment and forms the basis for the Planning Commission's determination, including the
information contained in the public hearing records, on which a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact was issued and this di minimis finding is made. In addition, the Planning
Commission finds UW there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have any
potential for an adverse effect on wddlffe resources, or the habitat on which the wildlife depends.
Finally, the Planning Commission finds that the City has, on the basis of substantial evidence,
rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in 14 California Code of Regulations
753.5(d).
Section 3. EnvironMentd Compliqncfl. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates
that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the Litigation measures described in the Conditions
of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
granted.
Section 4. Conditions- That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA96-0157, for the operation and construction of a commercial
shoppmg center located on the northeasterly comer of Highway 79 South and Margarita Road and
known as Assessor's Parcel No. 950-020-037, and subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a
part hereof.
R:\STAFFWMI57PAOS.PC2 11114/98 c&
Section S. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1996
Linda Fahey, Chairperson
I Y CERTEFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 18th day of
November, 1996 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: PLANNING CONMSSIONFM:
NOES: PLANNING CONMSSIONERS:
ABSENT:PLANNING CONMSSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:kSTAFF@157PAOO.PC2 11/1419acdr 12
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 96-
R:%STAFFWM157PASO.PC2 71/14/9ac& 1 3
ATTACHMENT No. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 96-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CO
SION OF
THE CITY OF TFMWULA APIPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA9&0158, TO SUBDWME A 10.99
ACRE PARCEL INTO 7 PARCELS LOCATED ON THE
NORTHEAST'ERLY CORNER OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
AND MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 950-020-037
, Jun COsmm Of Pacific Development Group ffled Planning Application No.
PA96-0158 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use
and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
%MEREAS, the Planning Application No. PA96-0158 was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA96-0158
on November 18, 1996, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
%MEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons deserving to be heard, the Commission considered all facts
relating to Planning Application No. PA96-0158;
NOW, F'ORE, TJRE PLANNING COMMLSSION OF THE CITY OF
TEM[ECULA DOES RESOLVE, DE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findingg- The Planning Commission in approving the proposed Parcel Map,
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
1. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
R:%STAFFFfMl57PA96.PC2 11/14/90 mk 1 4
Swdon 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1996.
Linda Fahey, Chairperson
I HEREBY CER'.['WY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 18th day of
November, 1996. by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: PLANNING CONMSSIONERS:
NOES: PLANNING COMNUSSIONERS:
ABSENT:PLANNING CONMSSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:ISTAFFMM157PA96.PC2 11114/96cdr 1 7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:@STAFF@l 57PA96.PC2 11/14196 wr 1 8
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA96-0157, Development Plan
Project Dascrip6m: The development of an approximately 1 1 acre commercial shopping
center consisting of 102,632 square feet of building area
Assessor's Parcel No.: 950-020-037
Approval Date: November 18, 1996
Expiration Date: November 18, 1998
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1The applicanttdeveloper shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars
($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination
required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations
Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has
not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the
project granted herein shall be voided by reason of failure of condition.
GeneralRequirements
2.The use hereby permitted by the approval of Planning Application No. PA96-0157 is for
the construction and operation of a commercial shopping center.
3.The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set
aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body
including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning Planning Application
No. PA96-0157 which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations
period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq.,
including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall
promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought
within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action.
Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall
not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City,
any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
4.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
R:\STAFFRPT\157PASe.PC2 11114196 edr 1 9
17.The applicant shall submit development plans for all future development with the
appropriate filing fee to the Planning Department for approval. Staff may
administratively approve all future development if the square footage of future projects
is within ten (10) percent of this approval, there are no material alterations to the
footprints on the site plan nor any alterations to the approved uses. Approvals for all
other proposals which are not within the ten percent margin, including alterations to
the building footprints on the site plan or alterations of the approved uses, at the
discretion of the Planning Director shall be approved by the Planning Commission.
18.All light shall be directed onto the site to insure that surrounding properties are not
impacted by light or glare created from this project.
19.A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever
occurs first.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
20.The applicant shall comply with City of Temecula Ordinance No. 96-16 by paying the
fee required by that ordinance which is based on the gross acreage of the parcels
proposed for development .
21.The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this
stage of the development.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
22.A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
Fees.
23.Three (3) copies of a Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plan shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee.
The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown.
Plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along streets and within the
parking areas.
24.The applicant shall make application for and pay the applicable fees for a consistency
check with the Department of Building and Safety Department.
25.The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this
stage of the development.
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
26.All roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view.
R:%STAFFWM157PASO.PC2 11/14/96 c& 21
27.All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a
condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free
of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in
good working order.
28.Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal,
displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than
70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space
at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space
finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space
finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place,
at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 1 7 inches by 22 inches,
clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
'Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped
persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed
vehicles may be reclaimed at or
by telephone
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least
3 square feet in size.
29.Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning to
guarantee the installation of plantings, walls, and fences in accordance with the
approved plan, and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed
with the Department of Planning.
30.The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this
stage of the development.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
31.Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building,
Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
32.Submit at time of plan review, complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with
Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution.
33.Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
34.All buildings and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations
lcalifomia Disabled Access Regulation3 effective April 1, 1994).
R:kSTAFF@157PA90.PC2 11/14/9e edr 22
35.Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting
and fire alarm systems.
36.Restroom fixtures, number and type, shall be in accordance with the provisions of the
1991 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
37.Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
38.Provide electrical plan including load calcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and
mechanical plan for plan review.
39. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. I lt is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site
plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage
courses, and their omission will subject the project to further review and may require revision.
General Requirements
40.A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all onsite flat work and improvements,
shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any
construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way.
41.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.
42.An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
43.All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated
for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site
and shall be submitted on standard 24' x 36' City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
44.A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all
necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and
private property.
45.The Developer 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.
R:@STAFF@157PA96.PC2 11114/96 cdr 23
46.As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
47.A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Soils or Civil Engineer and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall
address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
48.The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site
and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or
private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze
and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations
to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of
downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary
to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
49,Graded but undeveloped land shall be stabilized from erosion to the satisfaction of the
Director of Public Works.
50.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.
51.The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for
offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public
Works.
52.The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or
through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of
streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section Xi of Ordinance No. 460 will
apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited
for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
53.Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City
Standards subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. The following design
criteria shall be observed:
a.Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over
A.C. paving.
b.Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
C.Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as
otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works.
R:@STAFFFfMl57PA96.PC2 11JI4/Wc& 24
d.All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as
approved by the Department of Public Works.
e.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.
f.All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
Prior to @ance of a Building Permit
54.The underlying Tentative Parcel Map No. 28384 shall be recorded.
55.A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or
other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works.
56.Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 1 10' R/W) along property
frontage to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb, gutter,
sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not
limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot raised landscaped median.
57.Provide a lane drop transition per Caltrans standards at the northerly project boundary
on the east side of Margarita Road.
58.Provide a minimum 120 foot long 10 foot wide right turn lane to Dartolo Road/southerly
entrance into the shopping center.
59.Provide two 10 foot wide left turn lanes to access the eastbound lanes of Highway 79
South.
60.A Signing and Striping Plan for Margarita Road shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included on the
street improvement plans.
61.Design and install a fully actuated 8-phase traffic signal at the intersection of Margarita
Road and Dartolo Roadisoutheriy entrance into the shopping center in accordance with
City Standards which includes interconnecting with the traffic signal located at the
intersection of Margarita Road and Highway 79 South. The interconnect system shall
include a master controller and all traffic signal timing plans.
62.Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by RTA and
approved by the Department of Public Works.
63.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 Soils
Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
64.The Developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established
per gross acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact.
R:kSTAFFMM157PA96.PC2 11/14196 cdr 25
65.This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a 'Trip Reduction
Plan' in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
66.The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent
property.
67.The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the intent to develop.
Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
68.The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility
mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be
paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or
final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date
on which the Developer requests its building permit for the project or any phase thereof,
the Developer,ihall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of
which has been provided to the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this
Agreement, the Developer shall secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount
of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those
now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By
execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the
provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee
district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee
for this project; groyoded that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
69.Traffic signal and interconnect system shall be installed and operational to the
satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
70.As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
71.All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
72.All public and onsite improvements related to this project shall be constructed and
completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the
Department of Public Works.
Ft:@STAFFRP'nl57PA90.PC2 11114/96 o* 26
73.The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken
shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public
Works.
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Community Services has reviewed the applications for Paloma Del Sol Commercial Center and
provides the following conditions of approval:
General Reau*rements:
74.All perimeter slope and landscape areas within the commercial development shall
be maintained by the property owner.
75.A Class 11 Bike Lane shall be identified on the street improvement plans for
Margarita Road and completed in conjunction with the street improvements.
76.Landscaping shall be installed within the existing and proposed raised median on
Margarita Road in accordance with TCSD standards.
77.Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians on Margarita Road
shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance
Superintendent. Construction of the median landscaping shall be monitored in
accordance with the TCSD inspection process.
Prior to Recordation of the Final @-
78.Construction plans for the landscaping within the median on Margarita Road shall
be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services.
79.The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement with the TCSD to
install the landscaping within the median on Margarita Road.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits:
80.The applicant or his assignee shall file an application and pay the appropriate
fees for the dedication of arterial and local street lights into the TCSD
maintenance program.
OTHERAGENCIES
81.Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal
dated July 24, 1996 a copy of which is attached.
82.Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of
Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated November
13, 1996, a copy of which is attached.
R:kSTAFFMMI57PA96.PC2 11114/98 cdr 27
83.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho
California Water District transmittal dated July 24, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
84.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittal dated July 29, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
85.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the
Department of Transportation transmittal dated July 30, 1996, a copy of which
is attached.
86.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Temecula
Police Department transmittal dated November 6, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
R:kSTAFFRMI57PA".PC2 11114/96 o& 28
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONIMENTAL HEALTH
DATE:July 24. 1996
TO:CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT.
-7 ATTN: Craig Ruiz
FROM:OR.EGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
RE:PLOT PLAN NO. PA96-0157
1.Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Revised Plot Plan No. PA96-0157
for this pr 'ect and cannot make any recommendations until a sanitation letter is filed.
Oi
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SAN 53 LETTER ARE AS FOLLOWS:
a)Should the pr 'ect be served sanitary sewer services, this Department would need
Oi
only:
+ A "will-serve" letter from the agencv/agencies serving potable water and
sanitary sewers.
+ One copy of the Plot Plan Map.
GD:dr
(909)'-?7-@-8980
By
mecula
0 Business Park Drive a Tem@ia, CA 92590 - Nbiting Address: P. 0 Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033
694-6444 o Fax f9O9) 694-; 999
November 13,1996
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CRAIG RUIZ
RE: PA96-0157
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced project, the Fire Department
recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City of
Temecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards:
1.The fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction
of all commercial building using the procedures established in Ordinance 546. A fire flow
of 2500 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
17.A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6 " x4 " x2 -2 1 / I "), will be located
no less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building as measured
along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any
adjacent hydrant(s) in the system.
3.Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water plans to the Fire Department for
review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, containing a Fire Department
approval signature block, and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and
minimum fire flow. Once the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals
shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature.
4.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 the
job site.
5.Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay $.25 per square foot as
mitigation for fire protection impacts.
o,, @e@ ci@ P.,p,,
6.Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be responsible to
submit a plan check fee of $582.00 to the City of Temecula.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY.
7.Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve and fire
department connection shall be located to the front of the building, within 50 feet of a
hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement that the building
will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building
plans.
8.Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
9.Knox Key lock boxes shall be installed on all buildings/suites. If building/suite requires
Hazardous Material Reporting (Material Safety Data Sheets) the Knox HAZ MAT Data
and key storage cabinets shall be installed. If building/suites are protected by a fire or
burglar alarm system, the boxes will require "Tamper" monitoring. Plans shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
10.Install a hood duct fire extinguishing system. Contact a certified fire protection company
for proper placement. Plans must be approved by the Fire Department prior to
installation.
11.All exit doors shall be openable without the use of key or special knowledge or effort.
12.Install panic hardware and exit signs as per chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code.
Low level exit signs shall also be provided, where exit signs are required by section
3314(a).
13.Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2AlOBC. Contact a certified
extinguisher company for proper placement.
14.Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location
of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with
fire hydrant.
15.Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire
Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and or signs.
16.Street address shall be posted, in a visible location, minimum 12 inches in height, on the
street si 'de of the building with a contrasting background.
17. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to provide or show there exists conditions set
forth by the Fire Department.
18.Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and
Safety Office.
19. Please contact the Fire Department for a final inspection prior to occupancy.
All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department
Planning and engineering section (909)694-6439.
Brian Hampton
Fire Safety Specialist
Thursday Juty 25, 1 6@8.38am rom 17146c '51 -- Pge 2
an BY: @au -24-ID6 ; 21:30 RANCtiO R- 9096946477;# 2/ 2
July 24, 1996
Mr. C@g Ruiz, Assistant Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43174 Bu@s Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590-3606
SU T: Water Availability
Parcel Map 28384, APN 950-020-037
r@ba F. ]Co Planning Application Nos- PA96-0157 and PA96-0158
I- @me Dear Mr. Ruiz:
@r" AL W@
Please be advised that the abuve-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho CaUfomia Water District (RCWD). Water wvice and
sewer @ice is available upon completion of :rmancial arrangements between
RCWD and the property owner.
If fire protection is required, customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and
requirements. On-site and off-site improvements may be required for water
K@c@ service. The owner should contact RCWD for the determination of these
46 U@@requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the p
1,Ladh AL irt tv-
owner signing an Agency
Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD-
C- C:@
If you have any questions, pl=e contact an Engineering Services Representative
at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
wp96@:ntct)35/MI21@
cc:LaLtrie Williains, En-ineering Services Supervisor
U-.k. C.W$J*@ W@ FM@t
Eastern I"unicipal'% aterdistrict
John B. Brudin B",4 -fD@
@n V A&WCK Pr=dcnc
Ldfdi Coumti R. Hag. Vacc P@mt
SheirLD D. S@
David 1. S
Direaer of@ Afam.po@ Weter Clayton A. R=ofd. Jr.
Damci of Sme@ @fomw
Chesocr C- CUbcrt
Mary C. W'hice
Joseph 1. Kucbicr. Cl'A
July 18, 1996
Todd M. Skoro
Castillo Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 21087
Phoenix, AZ 85036-lu87
SUBJECT: Lucky/Sav-On Plan-o-f-Service
Dear Mr. Skoro:
We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which
describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below:
GENE@
Our understanding is the proposed subject project is to develop a
65,479 sq. ft. Lucky retail grocery store and a 16,853 sq. ft. Sav-
On Drug store. The provided Feasibility Site Plan shows three
other smaller buildings are also proposed. The subject project is
located on the northeast corner of Margarita Road and State Highway
79 (south) in the City of Temecula.
The subject project is only within the District's sewer service
az,ea. A matter of importance which =-,=t be understco--4 4--- the
available service capabilities of the Districtos systems are
constantly changing due to the continuous development within the
District and the improvement of District facilities. Hence, the
service for the subject project will be dependent upon the
available capacity of the District's systems at the time service
agreements are made with the District.
DomE=ic WATE.R.
The subject project is outside of EMWD's water service area. Any
potable water service must be arranged with the Rancho California
Water District.
.Mail to: Post Office Box 8300 San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 Tclcphone (909) 925-7676 Fax (909) 929-0257
Main Officc: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenuc, San Jacinto Customer Service / Engincering Anncx. 440 E. Oakl2nd Avenue, Hemet. CA
Operations &' Mainren2ncc Ccnter: 2270 Trumble R02d. Perris, CA 92571 Telephone (909) 923-3777 Fax (909) 928-6177
EasternN[unicipal'% aterdistrict
@emi Afwwfff
John B. Bnbdin @n V. A&WCK Prm@c
L'T.1 C..i R. H&LL Vtce P@ent
VW ShcorLu D. Sicms
Dand 1.
Dim"r o@ Afam Walff @Vion A. R=ord. Jr.
Dumcr of Southem @lfamm
Chcsttr C- Gjbctt Maq C. Wlutc
)oscph 1. @cr, CI'A
July 18, 1.996
Todd M. Skoro
Castillo Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 21087
Phoenix, AZ 85036-lu87
SUBJECT: Lucky/Sav-On P.Ian-o-f-Service
Dear Mr. Skoro:
We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which
describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below:
GRW-PAT,
our understanding is the proposed subject project is to develop a
65,479 sq. ft. Lucky retail grocery store and a 16,853 sq. ft. Sav-
On Drug store.The provided Feasibility Site Plan shows three
other smaller buildings are also proposed. The subject project is
located on the northeast corner of Margarita Road and State Highway
79 (south) in the City of Temecula.
The subject project is only within the District's sewer service
area. A matter of importance which =---=t be -lrderstco,-' 4--- the
available service capabilities of the District's systems are
constantly changing due to the continuous development within the
District and the improvement of District facilities. Hence, the
service for the subject project will be dependent upon the
available capacity of the District's systems at the time service
agreements are made with the District.
DomEsTTc WATER
The subject project is outside of EMWD's water service area. Any
potable water service must be arranged with the Rancho California
Water District.
I.lail Eo: Post Office Box 8300
San Jacinto. California 92581-8300 Telephone (909) 925-7676 Fax (909) 929-0257
Main Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenuc, San Jacinto CuscomL-r Scrvice / Enginecring Anncx: 440 E. Oakland Avenuc, Hernet. CA
Operzitions & Mainccn2ncc Ccncer: 2270 Truznbic Road. Perris, CA 92571 Tclcphonc (909) 928-3777 Fax (909) 928-6177
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On POS
July 18, 1996
Page 2
SANITARY SEWER
The subject project is tributary to the District's Temecula Valley
Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The subject project is fronted
by 15-inch VCP sewers in Margarita Road and Highway 79.
The Developer has the option of having the District or himself own
and maintain the on-site sewer facilities. -District owned on-site
facilities will require plan check, easements, construction per
District guidelines, and all laterals from the on-site main to each
unit must still be owned and maintained by the Developer.
Developer owned on-site facilities will require a lateral from the
existing 15-inch sewer to a clean-out at the street right-of-way
line. The lateral must be added to the original drawings for the
15-inch main. All on-site sewer beyond the street right-of-way
would be owned and maintained by the Developer and not subject to
EMWD construction requirements (City requirements would still
apply).
REcLArmED WATER
The subject project is outside of EMWD's water service area. Any
reclaimed water service must be arranged with the Rancho California
Water District. The subject project is fronted by existing EMWD 12
and 20-inch tertiary effluent mains in Highway 79 (SD-12082).
In your April 9, 1996 letter, you sought the answers to several
questions regarding EMWD's system, requirements and procedures. The
answers to those questions are listed below. The numerical
sequence for the answers follows the sequence in your letter.
Questions & Answers:
1.a. 15-inch VCP gravity sanitary sewers exist in both
Margarita Road (SD-10330) and Highway 79 (SD-11026). These
sewers are available for service to the Lucky/Sav-On
development.
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On POS
July 18, 1996
Page 3
b.Both sewer mains are 15-inch diameter.
C.Both sewer mains are vitrified clay pipe (Vcp).
d.The connection of the sewers the project are determined by
theDeveloper. The connections can be located anywhere along
thepiue as determined by the Develoner.
e.Connections can be made directly to the VCP main. The
attached Standard Drawing (SA-44) details the construction
requirements for such a connection.
f. The minimum lateral size is 4-inch. The minimum main line
size is 8-inch.
2.Ductile iron, PVC and VCP laterals and mains are acceptable.
a. Above-ground installations are not permitted for gravity
sewer laterals or mains.
3.Sewer mains are available. Septic systems are not needed.
4.a-e. See the attached 'Project Plan submittal Guidelines &
General Information' pamphlet for an explanation of the fees
and deposits required for service.
5.The requirements for grease traps, sand traps and sampling
boxes will be determined during the Waste Discharge Approval
process by the Source Control Department. Questions regarding
specific requirements can be directed to Gary Ethridge at
(909) 925-7676, extension 6241. The attached Standard
Drawings (SB-70, 75 and 156) detail the construction of grease
traps, sand traps and sampling boxes utilized an EMWD sewers.
6.The applicable standard drawings are attached. Also attached
is the 'EMWD Guidelines for Sewer System Plans'. For a full
set of Standard Drawings and guidelines, contact Carol Willey
at (909) 925-7676, extension 4861.
7. a. New accounts- Judy conacher (909) 766-1810, ext. 4409.
b.Sales Engineer- None.
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On Pos
July 18, 1996
Page 4
C.Government Facility- EMWD Oakland Annex (909) 766-1810.
8.Person supplying the above information:
Mike Gow, Civil Engineer, Customer Service Department.
Mailing Aldress: POB 8300
San Jacinto, CA 92581-8300
Site Address: 440 East Oakland Avenue
Hemet, CA 92543
Telep#one No. (909) 766-1810, ext. 4468
Facsimile No. (909) 658-1803
ADDITIONAL INFORMATIOM
Additions or improvements to off-site facilities are not required
to adequately serve the subject project. This letter serves as the
plan-of-service for the subject project. To proceed with
development of the project, please follow the procedures outlined
in the attached 'Project Plan Submittal Guidelines & General
Inf ormation' pamphlet.
If you have any questions regarding the above matter, please call
me at (909) 766-1810.
Sincerely,
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Mike Gow, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Customer Service Department
MAG/mag
V4()k[,i RI 11 \ Wf'k 14EW El II T. II\,;(IW\ I,,,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Go@ernor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STRICT 8, P,O. BOX 231
'4 BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402
.,)D (9091 383-5959
July 30, 1996
08-Riv-79-17.3
Mr. Craig Ruiz
Project Planner
Temecula Planning Department
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mr. Ruiz:
Planning Application No. PA96-0157 Development Plan
Planning Application No. PA96-0158 Tentative Parcel Map
We have reviewed the above-referenced documents and request
consideration of the following comments:
0It has been mutually discussed that the ultimate plan
for State Route 79 (SR 79) in the project area is a
six-lane, iimited-access facility within a 134' right
of way over a new alignment. The City of Temecula
should develop policies and procedures to preserve the
needed right of way, and maintain and improve the
current facility.
0A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
State of California, Department of TransDortation
(Cai--rans), and the City of Temecula was finalized
on November 13, 1995. This MOU serves as a
guideline for new development and upgrade or
realignment of SR-79. The following excerpts are
from this MOU:
1.Route 79 is planned for up to three lanes in each
direction for through traffic and up to two lanes
in each direction for local circulation.
Realignment may be necessary upon future
development along Route 79.
Mr. Craig Rui-"
July 30, 1996
Page 2
2.The City shall hereafter protect the right of way
for said realignment by limiting development
approvals for South Route 79 as follows:
a.Intersections will be spaced at 1/4 mile
increments and limited access driveways at
1/8 mile spacing from Interstate 15 (I-15) to
Anza Road.
0This project will require an Encroachment Permit if
there is any work, including work pertaining to:
access, grading, and drainage,, within the State highway
right of way; the Department of Transportation would be
a responsible agency and may require certain measures
be provided as a condition of permit issuance.
0The developer must obtain an Encroachment Permit from
the District 8 Permits Office prior to beginning work.
Their address and phone number are listed below:
Encroachment Permits
California Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 231
San Bernardino, CA 92402
(909) 383-4536
If you have any questions, please contact Cecil A.
Karstensen at (909) 383-5922 or FAX (909) 383-7934.
Very truly yours,
@wwa@4t v.
ROBERT G. HARVEY, Chief
Office of Riverside County
Transportation Planning and
Public Transportation
06 '96 03: @ SW @IFF STATION P.2
City of Temecula
Temecula Police Department
November 6, 1996
'Planning Application No. PA96-0293
Development of a 19,729 square foot Commercial RatoU Canter
After reviewing the above proposed plan, the following recommendations are
submitted In behalf of the Temecula Police Department:
Exterior Walls:. (if ony/none should on site plan)
All portions of the perimeter wall, which are of solid block or stucco finish,
should have it graffiti coated covering applied to it an to prevent vandalism
(graffiti). Any openings or areas where there Is no fence or wails end where
pedestrian foot traffic is prohibited *hall have thorned/ security type shrubbery to
encourage persons to use established points of ingre"/ogress.
Lighting:
All exterior loading doors should have LPS wall-pack lighting covering
loading doors.
Parking lot pole light w/concrets bass, should have a minimum lft. candle
@ parking areas.
If you have any questions or concerns. please call me at the Temecula Police
Station.
Ofc. Lynn Fanone Sr.
Temecula Police Department
307155-A Auld Road
Temecula. CA S2589
(909) 896-3000
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA96-0158, Tentative ParceJ Map No. 28384
Project Description: The subdivision of approximately 10.99 acres into 7 parcels
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
1The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and to all the,'requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions
listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act
and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
2.The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set
aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body
including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning Planning Application
No. PA96-0158 which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations
period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 el =.,
including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall
promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought
within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action.
Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall
not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City,
any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
3.A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever
occurs first.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
4.A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Director.
5.The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this
stage of the development.
R:kSTAFF@157PA9a.PC2 11/14/90 o& 29
The applicant shall comply with City of Temecula Ordinance No. 96-16 by paying the
fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the parcels
proposed for development).
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
6.The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director:
A.A copy of the Final Map
B.A copy of the Rough Grading Plans
C.A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes:
(1)This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations,
,Ordinance No. 655.
(2)This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone.
(3)This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone.
D.A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
(1)CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The
CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open
space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all
buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways.
(2)No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a
corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has
been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or
jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common
areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power
to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority
to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features
of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's
which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or
dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of
maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit
enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of
Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such
sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for
public purposes.
(3)Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to
such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common
R:kSTAFFFFTN157PA98.PC2 11114196cdr 30
areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting
membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
7.A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
f ees.
8. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director:
A.Construction landscape 121ans consistent with the City standards and the
approved Conceptual Landscape Plans including automatic irrigation for all
landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from
the view of the public from streets and adjacent property.
B.Precise grading plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including
all structural setback measurements.
9.The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures
identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the
development.
Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
10.All the Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors
of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety.
11.The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures
identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the
development.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this
project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost
to any Government Agency.
General Requirements
12.It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and
their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
13.A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the
Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the
City-maintained road right-of-way.
14.An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
R:ISTAFFRMI57PAOIS.PC2 11/14196 edr 31
15.An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
16.All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated
for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site
and shall be submitted on standard 24' x 36' City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall
complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted:
1 7.As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
City of Temecula Fire Bureau
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
Riverside County Health Department
Cable TV Franchise
Caltrans
Community Services District
General Telephone
Southern California Edison Company
Southern California Gas Company
18.The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Department of Public Works:
a.Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 1 10' RIW) al ' ong property
frontage to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb,
gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities
(including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot raised landscaped
median.
b.Provide a lane drop transition per Caltrans standards at the northerly project
boundary on Margarita Road.
C.Provide a minimum 120 foot long 10 foot wide right turn lane to the southerly
entrance into the shopping center.
d. Provide two 10 foot wide left turn lanes onto eastbound Highway 79 South.
R:\STAFF@157PAgO.PC2 111141"cdr 32
e.A Signing and Striping Plan for Margarita Road shall be designed by a registered
Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Margarita
Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
f.Design and install a fully actuated 8-phase traffic signal at the intersection of
Margarita Road and Dartolo Road/southerly entrance into the shopping center in
accordance with City Standards which includes interconnecting with the traffic
signal located at the intersection of Margarita Road and Highway 79 South. The
interconnect system shall include a master controller, traffic signal timing plans
and all necessary equipment as required by the Department of Public Works.
19.Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the
design of the street improvement plans:
a.Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00%
minimum over A.C. paving.
b.Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A.
C.Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461.
d.Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos.
400 and 401.
e.Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the
project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining
properties.
f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
9.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.
h.All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301.
i.All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV
shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where
adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities
shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider.
20.A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or
other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works.
21.Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Margarita Road on the Parcel Map with
the exception of three openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map.
R:kSTAFFRP'nl67PAgO.PC2 11/14/H c& 33
22.Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Highway 79 South on the Parcel Map
with the exception of the opening as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map.
23.Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian
facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County
Standard No. 805.
24.All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the
public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or
abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved
by the Department of Public Works.
25.Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section.
Prior to City Council approval of the parcel map, the Developer shall make an application
for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency.
26.Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
27.An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the
parcel map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the
map.
28.The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
29.The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as
established, per gross acre, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the
Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may
enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of
issuance of a building permit.
30.The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop.
Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
31.Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by RTA and
approved by the Department of Public Works.
32.This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a 'Trip Reduction
Plan' in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
33.Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through private property.
34.Easements, when required for reciprocal access roadway, roadway slopes, landscape
easements, drainage facilities, utilities, and/or other required easements., shall be shown
on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of
dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by
the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-
of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A
R:kSTAFFRP'nl57PAOB.PC2 11114196 c& 34
note shall be added to the final map stating 'drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions. '
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
35.As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
36.A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City
of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
37.A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to
the Department of ' Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall
address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections.
38.A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify
storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream
of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private,
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an
adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public
or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy
of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the
storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis
for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
39.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.
40.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.
41.The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work
performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as
directed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to @ance of Building Permits
42.Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded.
R:@STAFFRPT\157PA96.PC2 11/14/96 cdr 35
43.A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for
location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
44.The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility
mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be
paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or
final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date
on which the Developer requests its building permit for the project or any phase thereof,
the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of
which has been provided to the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this
Agreement, the Developer shall secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount
of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those
now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By
execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the
provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee
district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee
for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
45.Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, the traffic signal and interconnect system
shall be installed and operational to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
46.As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
47.All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
48.All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
49.The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due
to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced
to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Community Services has reviewed the applications for Paloma Del Sol Commercial Center and
provides the following conditions of approval:
R:\STAFF@157PASO.PC2 11/14/90 a* 36
General Requirements
50.All perimeter slope and landscape areas within the commercial development shall
be maintained by the property owner.
51.A Class 11 Bike Lane shall be identified on the street improvement plans for
Margarita Road and completed in conjunction with the street improvements.
52.Landscaping shall be installed within the existing and proposed raised median on
Margarita Road in accordance with TCSD standards.
53.Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians on Margarita Road
shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance
Superintendent. Construction of the median landscaping shall be monitored in
accordance with the TCSD inspection process.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
54.Construction plans for the landscaping within the median on Margarita Road shall
be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services.
55.The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement with the TCSD to
install the landscaping within the median on Margarita Road.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
56.The applicant or his assignee shall file an application and pay the appropriate
fees for the dedication of arterial and local street lights into the TCSO
maintenance program.
OTHERAGENCIES
57.Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal
dated November 5, 1996 a copy of which is attached.
58.Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of
Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated November
12, 1996, a copy of which is attached.
59.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho
California Water District transmittal dated July 24, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
60.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittal dated July 29, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
R:kSTAFFFeT\157PA96.PC2 11/14/90cdr 37
61.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the
Department of Transportation transmittal dated July 30, 1996, a copy of which
is attached.
62.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District transmittal dated
September 19, 1996, a copy of which is attached.
63.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Temecula
Police Department transmittal dated November 6, 1996, a copy of which is
attached.
R:kSTAFFFe'r\157PA96.PC2 11/14/96cdr 38
DAVID P. ZAPPE 1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
General Manager-Chief Engineer 909/275-1200
"9ngg-9965 FAX
7829,1
RIVERSIDE COLJNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590 Bv
Attention: c- P"q 16 U PM - 2,'?39'
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Ea C/ 4 -IO/
The District does not noffnWIV recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities.
The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other ftW
hazard reports for such cases. District commentsjrecommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of
specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and
drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District
Area Or@-.inage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any wa
constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project With respect to flood hazard, public heaitg
and safety or any other such issue:
This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional
interest proposed.
This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District vall accept ownership of such facili@s on
written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and
inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be
required.
This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be
considered ional in nature and/or a logical extension of thiiadodted
Master Drai an The District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on wn request
ilb s I'
of the City. Fie a ust t>e constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspec n will be
required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required.
This project is located within the limits of the Districts Area
Drain@gii Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid to the Flood ontmi
Districf or City prior to final approval of the project, or in the case of a parcel map or subdivision prior to
recordation of the final map. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of recordation, or if
deferred, at the time of issuance of the actual permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project may reqq)ire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water
Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be gO,/en unt;it the C;",,
has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.
If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should
require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA
requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior
to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy.
If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the applicant to
obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Departme6t of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating
the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Cd-rtification may be
required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
@KM Senior Civil Engineer
c: Date: - /9.- 9@
County of Ri'vers'l'de
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE:July 24, 1996
TO:CITY OF TEMECULA PLANMNG DEPT.
ATTN:Craig Ruiz
FROM:(IREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
RE:PLOT PLAN NO. PA96-0157
1.Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Revised Plot Plan No. PA96-0157
for this pr 'ect and cannot make anv recommendations unt'i a san'tat'on letter 's filed.
Oi 1 1
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SAN 53 LETTER ARE AS FOLLOWS:
a) Should'the project be served sanitarv sewer services, this Department would need
onlv:
+ A "will-serve" letter from the agency/agencies serving potable water and
sanitarv sewers.
One copy of the Plot Plan Map.
GD:dr
(909)'-'7-@-8980
6y
cit mecula
43200 8 sinez Park C)rrve a Temecula, CA 92590 a Wiling Addrez: P. 0 Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033
1909) 694-6444 a Fax f9O9) 694-1999
November 13,1996
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CRAIG RUIZ
RE: PA96-0157
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced project, the Fire Department
recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City of
Temecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards:
1.The fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction
of all commercial building using the procedures established in Ordinance 546. A fire flow
of 2500 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
2A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"x4"x2-2 1/1 "), will be located
no less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building as measured
along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any
adjacent hydrant(s) in the system.
3.Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water plans to the Fire Department for
review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, containing a Fire Department
approval signature block, and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and
minimum fire flow. Once the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals
shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature.
4.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 the
job site.
5.Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay $.25 per square foot as
mitigation for fire protection impacts.
6.Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be responsible to
submit a plan check fee of $582.00 to the City of Temecula.
THE FOLLOWING CONDMONS MUST BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY.
7.Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve and fire
department connection shall be located to the front of the building, within 50 feet of a
hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement that the building
will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building
plans.
8.Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
9.Knox Key lock boxes shall be installed on all buildings/suites. If building/suite requires
Hazardous Material Reporting (Material Safety Data Sheets) the Knox HAZ @T Data
and key storage cabinets shall be installed. If building/suites are protected by a fire or
burglar alarm system, the boxes will require "Tamper" monitoring. Plans shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
10.Install a hood duct fire extinguishing system. Contact a certified fire protection company
for proper placement. Plans must be approved by the Fire Department prior to
installation.
11.All exit doors shall be openable without the use of key or special knowledge or effort.
11.Install panic hardware and exit signs as per chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code.
Low level exit signs shall also be provided, where exit signs are required by section
3314(a).
13.Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2AIOBC. Contact a certified
extinguisher company for proper placement.
14.Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location
of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with
fire hydrant.
15.Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire
Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and or signs.
16.Street address shall be posted, in a visible location, minimum 12 inches in height, on the
street side of the building with a contrasting background.
17. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to provide or show there exists conditions set
forth by the Fire Department.
18.Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and
Safety Office.
19. Please contact the Fire Department for a final inspection prior to occupancy.
AU questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department
Planning and engineering section (909)694-6439.
- @L- @
Brian Hampton
Fire Safety Specialist
SEN - wage e I
-96 ; 21:30 RANCHO 9096346477;# 2/ 2
July 24, 1996
Mr- Craig Ruiz, Assistant Planner
City Of Temecula
Planiling DepartTnent
43174 ]3u@s Park Drive
Temecula, CA 925@3606
Mi@ IL AE.M.U_
@. V,-
M,@a. H.SU@T: Water Availlbu4
C-bA P.@cel Map 28384, APN 95"20-037
D..g x
J.ffi." I-D@ Mr. RLjiz:
r-r"Pleasc be advised that the- above-rcferenced property is located
boundaries of Rancho California Water ]Di@ict (RCyrD).
Water service and
@'wer W"ice- is available upon completion of financial arrangements between
1-1.@ x- FRCVVD an-d the property owner.
If fire Protection is required, customer wW @ to contact RCWD for @ and
requirements. On-site and off-site improvements may be required for water
service- The owner should contact RCVRD for the determination of these
requirements.
P@ 9L T.~&,
T,Lnd^ hL r-q-Water availability would be con6ngent upon the property owner signing an Agency
Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
C- i C:@
@ & xi - W..
C-.iIf you have any questions, pl=e contact an Engineering Servi@ Repr=ntative
at this office.
Sincerely,
.RANC140 CALIFORMA WATER DISTRICT
12
Steve Brannon, P.E.
De,velopment Engineering &tanager
PI.-tnning APP]ication Nos. PA96-0157 and PA96-0158
wilftiri the
cc: Lattric Williaiiis, En-inecring Services Supervisor
Eastern Mu n ic i pal 1% aterdistrict
Genewl M@@
John B. Brudin Boad fD,@
Lqai Cowri A4.uion V. AsWc-y. Ptm@,
R.HaU. V'-Cc Pm,den,
@winc Uw ShcrTig @cr D. Sians
David 1. S@n
Dimeror 4,f @ Afet7vtoitta. Wtff Clayton A. Rceord. it.
Dumer of @.t@ @--
Chager C- GJbcrt 1-17
C Whitc
Joseph J. Kucbicr. CPA
July 18, 1996
Todd M. Skoro
Castillo Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 21087
Phoenix, AZ 85036-lUS7
SUBJECT: Lucky/Sav-On Plan-Of-Sex-vice
Dear Mr. Skoro:
We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which
describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below:
GEHE@.
Our understanding is the proposed subject project is to develop a
65,479 sq. ft. Lucky retail grocery store and a 16,853 sq. ft. Sav-
On Drug store. The provided Feasibility Site Plan shows three
other smaller buildings are also proposed. The subject project is
located on the northeast corner of Margarita Road and State Highway
79 (south) in the City of Temecula.
The subject project is only within the District's sewer service
area. A matter of importance wLl,.i-ch m--,=t 'D- -,r.,derstood @ - the
available service capabilities of the District's systems are
constantly changing due to the continuous development within the
District and the improvement of District facilities. Hence, the
service for the subject project will be dependent upon the
available capacity of the District's systems at the time service
agreements are made with the District.
C W
The subject project is outside of EMWD's water service area. Any
potable water service must be arranged with the Rancho California
Water District.
:zil co: Post Officc Box 8300 . San Jacinto. Califomi2 92581-8300 7clcphone (909) 925-7676 Fax (909) 929-0257
-i@n Office: 1045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto Customer Scrvice / Enginecting Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue. Hcmer. CA
pcr3tions &: Niaincenance Ccnrcr: -'270 Trumbic Road. I)crris, CA 92571 . Telephone (909) 928-3777 . F= (909) 923-6177
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On POS
July 18, 1996
Page 2
SANITARY SEWER
The subject Project is tributary to the District's Temecula Valley
Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The subject project is fronted
by 15-inch VCP sewers in Margarita Road and Highway 79.
The Developer has the option of having the District or himself own
and maintain the on-site sewer facilities. District owned on-site
facilities will require plan check, easements, construction per
District guidelines, and all laterals from the on-site main to each
unit must still be owned and maintained by the Developer.
Developer owned on-site facilities will require a lateral from the
existing 15-inch sewer to a clean-out at the street right-of-way
line. The lateral must be added to the original drawings for the
15-inch main. All on-site sewer beyond the street right-of-way
would be owned and maintained by the Developer and not subject to
EMWD construction requirements (City requirements would still
apply)-
'W
The subject project is outside of EMWD's water service area. Any
reclaimed water service must be arranged with the Rancho California
Water District. The subject project is fronted by existing EMWD 12
and 20-inch tertiary effluent mains in Highway 79 (SD-12082).
In your April 9, 1996 letter, you sought the answers to several
questions regarding EMWD's system, requirements and procedures. The
answers to those questions are listed below. The numerical
sequence for the answers follows the sequence in your letter.
Questions & Answers:
1.a. 15-inch VCP gravity sanitary sewers exist in both
Margarita Road (SD-10330) and Highway 79 (SD-11026). These
sewers are available for service to the Lucky/Sav-on
development.
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On POS
July 18, 1996
Page 3
b.Both sewer mains are 15-inch diameter.
C.Both sewer mains are vitrified clay pipe (Vcp)
d.The connection of the sewers the project are determined by
theDeveloper. The connections can be located anywhere along
thepiue as determined by the Develoner.
e.Connections can be made directly to the VCP main. The
attached Standard Drawing (SA-44) details the construction
requirements for such a connection.
f. The minimum lateral size is 4-inch. The minimum main line
size is 8-inch.
2.Ductile iron, PVC and VCP laterals and mains are acceptable.
a. Above-ground installations are not permitted for gravity
sewer laterals or mains.
Sewer mains are available. Septic systems are not needed.
4.a-e. See the attached 'Project Plan Submittal Guidelines &
General Information' pamphlet for an explanation of the fees
and deposits required for service.
5.The requirements for grease traps, sand traps and sampling
boxes will be determined during the Waste Discharge Approval
process by the Source Control Department. Questions regarding
specific requirements can be directed to Gary Ethridge at
(909) 925-7676, extension 6241. The attached Standard
Drawings (SB-70, 75 and 156) detail the construction of grease
traps, sand traps and sampling boxes utilized on EMWD sewers.
6. The applicable standard drawings are attached. Also attached
is the "EMWD Guidelines for Sewer System Plans'. For a full
set of Standard Drawings and guidelines, contact Carol Willev
at (909) 925-7676, extension 4861.
7. a. New accounts- Judy Conacher (909) 766-1810, ext. 4409.
b.Sales Engineer- None.
Todd M. Skoro
Lucky/Sav-On Pos
July 18, 1996
Page 4
C.Government Facility- EMWD Oakland Annex (909) 766-1810.
8.Person Supplying the above information:
Mike Gow, Civil Engineer, Customer Service Department.
Mailing Aldress: POB 8300
San Jacinto, CA 9258l-s3oo
Site Address: 440 East Oakland Avenue
Hemet, CA 92543
Telephone No. (909) 766-1810, ext. 4468
Facsimile No. (909) 658-1803
ApnTTToNAT, Tmrog 4ArTog
Additions or improvements to off-site facilities are not required
to adequately serve the subject project. This letter serves as the
plan-of-service for the subject project. To proceed with
development of the project, please follow the procedures outlined
in the attached 'Project Plan Submittal Guidelines & General
Inf ormation' pamphlet.
If you have any questions regarding the above matter, please call
me at (909) 766-1810.
Sincerely,
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER D.TSTR.ICT
Mike Gow, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Customer Service Department
MAG/mag
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-8USINE55, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, P@o. BOX 231
SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92,102
TDD (9091 383.5959
PETE WIL50t,4, Go@,-rnor
July 30, 1996
08-Riv-79-17.3
Mr. Craig Ruiz
Project Planner
Temecula Planning Department
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
IDear Mr. Ruiz:
Planning Application No. PA96-0157 Development Plan
Planning Application No. PA96-0158 Tentative Parcel Map
We have reviewed the above-referenced documents and request
consideration of the following comments:
7
0Lt has been mutually discussed that the ultimate plan
for State Route 79 (SR 79) in the project area is a
six-lane, iimited-access facility within a 134' right
of way over a new alignment. The City of Temecula
should develop policies and procedures to preserve the
needed right of way, and maintain and improve the
current facility.
0A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
State of California, Department of Trans-oortation
(1--altrans), and the City of Temecula was finalized
on November 13, 1995. This MOU serves as a
guideline for new development and upgrade or
realignment of SR-79. The following excerots are
from this MOU:
Route 79 is planned IL 4or up to three lanes in each
direction for through traffic and up to two lanes
in each direction for local circulation.
Realignment may be necessary upon future
-development along Route 79.
Mr. Craig Ruiz
July 30, 1996
Page 2
2.The City shall hereafter protect the right of way
for said realignment by limiting development
approvals for South Route 79 as follows:
a.Intersections will be spaced at 1/4 mile
increments and limited access driveways at
1/8 mile spacing from Interstate 15 (I-15) to
A.nza Road.
0This project will require an Encroachment Permit if
there is any work, including work pertaining to:
access, grading, and drainage, within the State highway
right ' of way; the Department of Transportation would be
a responsible agency and may require certain measures
be provided as a condition of permit issuance.
0The developer must obtain an Encroachment Permit from
the District 8 Permits Office prior to beginning work.
Their address and phone number are listed below:
Encroachment Permits
California Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 231
San Bernardino, CA 92402
(90 9) 3 8 3- 4 53 6
If you have any questions, please contact Cecil A.
Harstensen at (909) 383-5922 or FAX (909) 383-7934.
Very truly yours,
@@A@4t V.
ROBERT G. HARVEY, Chief
office of Riverside County
Transportation Planning and
Public Transportation
NW 06 '% 03: @M SW @IFF STATRON
P. 2
City of Temecula
Temecula Police Department
November 8, 1996
'Planning Application No. PA96-0293
Development of a 19,729 squarip foot Commercial Retail Canter
After reviewing the above proposed plan, the following recommendations are
submitted In behalf of the Temecula Police Department:
Exterior Walls:, (If any/none should on site plan)
All portions of the perimeter wall, which 8fG Of solid block or stucco finish,
should have a graffiti coaled covering applied to It an to prevent vandalism
(graffiti). Any openings or areas where there is no fence or walls and where
pedestrian foot traffic is prohibited shall have thorned/ security type shrubbery to
encourage persons to use established points of ingress/egress.
Lighting:
All exterior loading doors should have LPS wall-pack lighting covering
loading doors.
Parking lot pole light w/concrate bass, should have a minimum ltt. candle
parking areas.
If you have any qU83tions or concerns. please call me at the Temecula Police
Station.
Ofc. Lynn Fanano Sr.
Temecula Police Department
30755-A Auld Road
Temecula, CA 92589
(909) 696-3000
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
INITIAL STUDY
R:ISTAFFFPT\157PAOO.PC2 11/14/96 cdr 39
1 Project Title:
2.Lead Agency Name and Address:
3.Contact Person and Phone Number:
4.Project Location:
5.Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
6.General Plan Designation:
7.Zoning:
8. Description of Project:
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
10.Other public agencies whose approval
is required:
R:%STAFF@157PAOG.PC2 11/14196 cdr 40
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
Planning Application No. PA96-0157
(Development Plan) & Planning Application
No. PA96-0158 (Tentative Parcel Map)
City of Temecula Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Craig Ruiz, Assistant Planner, 909-694-6400
Northeast corner of State Highway 79
South and Margarita Road
Jim Costanzo, Pacific Development Group
One Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Community Commercial
Specific Plan
The project consists of the development of
an approximately 12 acre commercial
shopping center and associated parcel
map. The project will consist of 102,000
square feet of leasable area.
The project is located within an
undeveloped section of the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan. Land to the north, south
and east is currently vacant. Land to the
west is low-density residential and
commercial.
Riverside County Fire Department,
Riverside County Health Department,
Temecula Police Department, Eastern
Municipal Water District, Rancho California
Water District, Southern California Gas
Company, Southern California Edison
Company, General Telephone Company,
and Riverside Transit Agency.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Land Use and Planning I Hazards
Population and Housing Noise
X I Geologic Problems Public Services
[X I Water I Utilities and Service Systems
I I Air Quality I Aesthetics
I XI Transportation/Circulation IX I Cultural Resources
I I Biological Resources I I Recreation
I I Energy and Mineral Resources I I Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Ifind that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and
ùNEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
XI 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 the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A
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 significant effect(s) 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.
Fi:\STAFFFP'nl57PA96.PC2 11114/96 c& 41
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
aConflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s) Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) f I pq
b.Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? I pq
C. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinitv?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) I f Xi
d.Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source 1, Figure 54, Page 5-17) I pq
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
community (including low-income or minority community)?
f I I I I I pq
2.POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a.Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projects? ( ) I I I I pq [ I
b.Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) I I I I Ex I [ I
C. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ f I r I [Xi
3.GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Page 7-6) 1 ( I IX I I I
b. Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-7) t I [ I IX I I I
C.Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-7) f I [XI [ I f I
d. Selche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? I I I I I I pq
e. Landslides or mudflows? ( ) I I f I I I pq
f Erosion, changes 'in topography or unstable soil conditions
form excavation, grading or fill? ( ) I I [ I Ix I I I
9- Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-7) [ I [ I I I [XI
h.Expansive soils? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-7) 11 r I I I pq
i.Unique geologic or physical feawres? ( ) I I I I I I
R:\STAFFFFMI57PA90.PCZ 11/14196c& 42
4.WATER. Would the proposal result in:
&Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and mount of surface runoff? ( ) I I m [ I I I
b.Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ( ) I I c )q I I I I
C. Discharge into surface waten or other alteration of surface
water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)? ( ) I I f xi [ I [ I
d.Changes 'm the amount of surface water in any water
@? ( ) I I I I [
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? ( ) I I I I [ I pq
f Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aqwfff by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) I I I I [ I pq
9. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? I I [ I [XI
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) I I [ I pq
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? I I
5.AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality vio@on? I I I I pq
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? I I [ I pq
C. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
I any change in climate? ( ) [ I [ I I I pq
d. Create ob*donable odors? f I I I I I [XI
6.TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ I pq I I I I
b.Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)? I I I I [XI
C. Inadequate emergency access or access to ncarbv uses? I I I I [XI
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? f I I I [ I [
R:kSTAFfff'T\157PAOe.PC2 11114/96c& 43
e. Hazardq or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [X
f Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? I [XI
9. Rail, waterbome or air @ic impacts? f I I pq
7.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? ( ) I I I I f I m
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? I f I pq
C. @ly designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) I [ I xi
d. Wedan@ habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? I f I ( m
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? I
8.ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? I I pq
b.Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner? ( ) I I I I
C. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State? ( ) I I I I I
9.HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a.A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or @ation)? ( ) t I I I I I [XI
b.Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) I I [ I I I [XI
C. The creation of any health hazard or potential health
ba7ard? ( ) I I I I I I pq
d.Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health
hazards? ( ) I I I I I I pq
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or U=? ( ) I I I I I I pq
R:XSTAFFFPrl57PAOO.PC2 11/14/9a cdr
10.NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. kaease in existing noise levels? I [XI I I
b. Exposureofpec)plctoseverenoiselevels? t I fx I [ I
ii.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:
a. Fire protection? I Ix I [ I
b. Pobce protection? I IX I [ I
C. Schools? ( ) I [XI [ I
d. Maintenanceofpubhcfacilities,'tncludingroads? I I Ix I I I
C. Other governmental services? I I I [XI
12.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? ( ) [ I I [xi
b. Communicauons systems? I I pq
C. Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( ) I I pq
d. Sewerorseptictanks? ( ) t I [XI
C. Stormwatcrdrainage? ( ) I I I I I I pq
f Sohdwastedispo@? ( ) I I I I Ix I I
9-Local or regional water supplies?
13.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? [XI
C. Create light or glare? pq f 1
14.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Dis@ paleontological resources? ( ) I I I)q
R:XSTAFFFF'r\157PA96.PC2 11/14/90 c& 45
b. Disturb archaeological resources? I I Ix I I t I
C. Affect historical resources? ( ) I I I I I pq
d.Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e.Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area? ( ) I I I I f I pq
is. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a.Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities? ( ) I I I I I pq
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? I I pq
16.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a.Does @c project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sus@g levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal commumty, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory? I I pq
b.Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-@ environmental goals? I pq
C. Does the project have 'unpacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connecuon with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other cur-rent
projects, and the effects of probable funre projects). I pq
d.Does the project have environmental effects which Van
cause substantial adverse effects on hwnan beings, either
directly or indirectly? pq
17.EARLIER ANALYSES.
Environmental Impact Report No. 235, Adopted bv the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on
September 6, 1988 for Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol.
SOURCES
I .City of Temecula General Plan.
2.City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
3.South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA @ Quality Handbook.
R:@STAFF@l 57PAOS.PC2 11/14196 C& 46
Pi= UM Use Designation of BP
Designations were analyzed m the
DISCUSSION OF THE ENVMONMENTAL IWAC17S
I-and ljse and Planning
I.b.The project wiU not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with Action over the projecl The project is consistent with the City's General
Park). @cts from all General Plan Land Use
=enW @ct Report for (E]IR) the General Plan.
Agencies with jurisdiction within dw City commented on the scope of the analysis contained
in the EIR and how the @ uses would m3pact thetr particular agency. Nfltiption measures
approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction
over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the project and it is
anticipated that they will make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates to
their specific environmental plans or polices. The site has been previously graded and
services within proxunity of the projecl There will be limited, if any environmental effects
on environmentni plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project.
No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
I.e. The , ' will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including low-income or minority community). The project is a commercial development
located within an approved Specific Plan. The Specific Plan was adopted with this land use
at the proposed location. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
Polptdation and Hatt-;Onir
2.a.The project will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections.
The project is a commercial center which is consistent with the City's General Plan Land
Use Designation of Commumty Commercial. Further, the project is consistent with the land
use designation provided in the Specific Plan for this project. Since the project is consistent
with the City's General Plan and Specific Plan, and does not exceed the floor area ratio for
Commercial Centers, it is not be a significant contributor to population growth which will
cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. No significant effects
are anticipated as a result of this project.
project will not induce substantial growth m the area either directly or indirectly. The
project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Community
Commercial. The project will cause people to relocale to or withm TemecWa; however, due
to location of the project within a planned community, it will not induce substantial growth
in the area. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.c. The project will not displace housing, especially affordable housing. Ile project site is
vacant; therefore no housing will be displaced. No significant effects are anticipated as a
result of this project.
Geologic Problem.,,
3.b,c The project will have a less than significant impact on people involving seismic ground
; however, there may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground Mure
and liquefaction. Mx project is located in Southern California, an area which is seismically
active. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction
which is co with Uniform Building Code ds. Further, preliminary soil reports
were reviewed as part of the previous EIR for tile site and recommendations contained in
R:kSTAFFRPT\157PAGO.PC2 11/14/96 c* 47
this report will be used to determine appropriate conditions of approval. The soils reports
will also conmm reconunendations for the compacaon of the sod winch will serve to nutigate
any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground dmLing, seismic ground fidure,
liquefaction, nce and expansive sods. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d.The project will not expose people to a seiche, or volcanic hazard. The project is
not located in an area where any of these hazards could occur. No significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
3.e.The project will not eVm people to L"&Iides or mudflows. The Final Environmental
Impact for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any imown Lw&lides or
mudslides located on the site or proxiinaie to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
3.f.The project will have a less than significant impact from erosion, changes in topography,
grading or fill. The site has been previously graded and the project does not propose
significant grading beyond that which has already occurred. Increased wind and water
erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur during the construction phase of the project
and the project may result in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Erosion control
techniques will be included as a condition of approval for the project. In the long-run,
hardscape and L=&caping will serve as permanent erosion control for the project. Since
the amount of grading will be the minimum ne for the realization of the project,
modification to topography and ground @ce relief features will not be considered
significant. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be
nutigated through the use of @caping and proper compaction of the soils. After
mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.i. The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic
features or physical features exist on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
4.a.The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and
amount of surface runoff, however, these changes are considered less dun significant.
Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and @ce runoff will
@, potential wapacts shall be rmapted through site design. Drainage conveyances will
be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff which is created. After
mitigation are performed, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
4.b. The project will have a less than significant to people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding because the project site will be elevated outside of the 100 year floodway
as a result of grading performed prior to project approval. However; the project is located
within a dam inundation area as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final
Enviromnenmi Impact Report. Impacts can be niitipted by utilizing existing emergency
response systems and by g that @ systems continue to maintain adequate service
provision as the City develops. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
R:\STAFFFP'nl 57PA98.PC2 11/14/90 cdr 48
4.c.project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into @ce waters and
alteration of @ce water quality. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the
developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge F-lim*t=tion System (NPDES) permit from the State Water R ces Control
Board. No grading @ be pemumd until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential
impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of @ project.
4.d,e.@ project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface
water in any waterbody or impact currents, or to the course or direction of water
movements. Additional @oe rtmoff will occur because previously permeable ground will
be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and
driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the additional amount of drainage will
not considered significant No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.f-h.The project will have a less dm significant change in the quantity and quality of ground
waters ' -eiiher direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability.
Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters; however, due to
the minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significant. Further, construction
on the site will not be at depdis stdficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.i. The project will not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater water
otherwise available for public water supplies. According to information contained in the
Final Enviromenmi Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan, 'Rancho
Water Dimct uidicates that they can accommodate additional water demands."
Water @ce mmrrdy exists in the immediate proximity to the project. Water service Will
need to be provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD). This is typically
provided upon completion of financial arrangements between RCVM and the property
owner. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Air C=Iily
5.a. Tbe pro@ will not violate any air quality S=&rd or contribute to an existing or projected
air quality violation. The project (approximately 105,000 square feet commercial/retail
center) is below the threshold for potentially significant air quality impact established by
South Coast Air Quality Managemem District (Page 6-1 1, Table 6-2 of the South Coast Air
Quality Management CEQA Air Quality Handbook). No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
S.b. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
5.c. The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in
climate. The limited scale of the project precludes it from creating any significant impacts
on the environment in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
R:\STAFF@157PAG6.PC2 11/14/98cdr 49
S.d. project will not create objectional odors during the construction phase of the project.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of @ project.
Tr2n=rtation/C*rc!ulation
6.a.A cumulative traffic study was prepared for the project by Robert Bein, William Frost
tes. The Level of Service (LOS) at aff-ected intersections wiU be LOS uD" or better
during peak @s for the entire study area. Based upon the analysis contained in the
cumulative study, the project is consistent with the Goals of the City's General Plan
Circulation Element. @ applicant wifl be required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and
public facility fees as conditions of approval for the project. After mitigation measures are
performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.@ pro)= will not result m @ds to safety from design features. The project is designed
tD want City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6. c.Ile project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The
project- is a commercial use in an area with existing and planned similar uses. The project
is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.d.The project will have sufficient parldng capacity on-site. The project exceeds the City's
. . um parldng requirement. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
6.e.The project wifl not result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or
barriers to bicyclists have not been included as part of the project. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.f.The project will not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation. The project was transmitted to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and
their response is: The proposed project does not impact RTA facilities or services." No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.g.The project will not result in impacts to rail, waterbome or air traffic since none exists
currently in the immediate proxinuty of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
BiolookalRf!snurcp,-,
7.a.The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, including, but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project
site has been previously @. Currently, dxre are no native species of plants, no unique,
rare, dmtened or endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the
site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife species exist at this location. 'Me
project wifl not reduce the number of species, provide a barrier to the migration of animals
or deteriorate e@ habitat Ile project site is located winn the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat
Habitat Fee Area. Habitat Conservation fees wiff be required to mitigate the effect of
tive impacts to the species. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of tws
project.
R:@STAFFFtP'nl57PA90.PC2 11/14196 o* 50
7.b.The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. @y designated
species are protected in the Old Town Teme@ Specific Plan; however, they are not
protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since
there are no locally designated species on site, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
7.c.The project wifl not result in an impact to @y designated natural communities.
Reference response 7.b. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.d.The project will not result in an impact to we@ habitat. There is no wedand habitat on-
site or within proximity to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
7.e.The project will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The
project site does not serve as part of a migration corridor. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Energy and Mineral Re.@urceq
The project wifl not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The
project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy
conservation during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is
@ to be consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
8.b. The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable
resources in a wasteful and inefficient mqnner. While there will be an increase in the rate
of use of any na@ resource and in the depletion of nom-enewable resource(s) (construction
materials, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent depletion of
@ non-renewable na=A resources. Due tD the scale of the proposed development, these
impacts are not seen as significant.
8.c. IU project wiff not restdt in Ix loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located at this
project site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a restdt of this project.
Hn7-ard-q
9.a. The project will not result in a risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances
in the event of an accident or upset conditions since none are proposed in the request. The
same is aw for the use, storage, rt or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials.
Large quantities of these @ of substances will not be associated with this use. The
Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the project and the applicant must
receive their clearance prior to any plan check submitw. This applies to storage and use
of b-g-rdous materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.b. Mz pro@ wiU not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation
plan. IU subjw site is not located in an area which could impact an emergency response
plan. The project will @ access from a maintained street and will therefore not impede
any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFF@157PAaB.PC2 11/14/90 c& 5 1
9.c.The project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard.
@ project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan
check stage. No pernuts will be @ unless the pro)ect ts found to be consistent with these
applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d.Mv project will not expose people to e@ sources of potential health hazards. No health
@ds are known to be within proximity of the project. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
9.e.The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable b@,
grass, or trees. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
IO.a.will result in a less than sigwficant increase to existing noise levels. The site
is currently vacant and development of the @ logically will result in increases to noise
levels @ co on @ as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run.
No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in either the short or
long-term.
IO.b.The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the development/construction
phase (short run). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of
100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause hearing damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore
will not be considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
I I.a,b.The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered fire or police protection. The project will incrementally increase the need for fire
and police pro@on; however, it will contribute its fair share to the maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
ll.c.The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered school facffides. Mw project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate
within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
I I.d.The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities,
including roads. Funding for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax wtuch
is distributed to the City of Temecula from the State of Califoniia. Impacts to current and
future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be
incremental, however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is
sufficient to cover any of the proposed expenses.
I I.e.The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRM157PA96.PC2 11114/98cdr 52
Utilatie,.q and Service Sy=m.-q
12.a.@ project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to power or natural gas. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.b.The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to communication systems (reference response No. 12.a.). No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12. c.Mx project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.d.The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to sanitary sewer @ms or septic W". While the project will have an incremental impact
upon systems, the Fuxd Enwommentg @ct Report (FEIR) for the City's General
Plan states: 'both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water
as is required in their services areas (p. 39). ' The FEIR further states: 'implementation
of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40).'
Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project. There are no septic =b on site or proximate to the
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.e.The proposal will result in a less than sigmificant need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to storm water drainage. The project will need to provide some
additional o@te drainage systems. The drainage system will be required as a condition of
approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. No si@cant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.'Me proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid
waste @ms. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development
can be mitigated through participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling Programs
which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
12.g. @ project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water supplies. Reference response 12.d. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in
a area where there is a scenic vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic
highways. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.b. The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. 'Me building designs are
consistent with the design guidelines contained within the Specific Plan. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:kSTAFFWMI57PAOS.PC2 11/14/9e c& 53
13.c. project will have a po y significant impact from light and @. ne project will
produce and result in light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new tight
sources. All light and glare has the Potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory.
The project will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance
Regulating Ught Pollution). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Cultural R@ur@s
14.a-c.The is located within an area known to contain archaeological resources. The project will
be required to have an archaeologist on site during grading to insure that all resources are
protected. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.c.The will not have an impact historical resources. The site has been disturbed from prior
grading activity and any impacts to these resources would have been mitigated during the
grading process. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d.project will not have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values. Reference response 14.a,c. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
14.e.The project will not restrict e@ religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area.
No religious or sacred uses exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
15.a,b.The project will have a less than significant impact or increase in demand for neighborhood
or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project wiU not cause significant
munbers of people to relocate within or to the City of TemecWa. However, it will result in
an incremental impact or in an increase in demnnd for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing
recreational resources or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
R:\STAFFWM157PA98.PC2 11/14190 cdr 54
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:ISTAFFW'nl57PAOS.PC2 11/14190odr 55
litigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA96-0190
(Development Plan, Fast Track -Zevo Golf)
Geologic Problems
General Impact: Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Mitigation Measure: Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
Specific Process: A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall
be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works and Building and Safety
Department.
General Impact: Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Mitigation Measure: Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with
the Uniform Building Code.
Specific Process: Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety
Department for approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building and Safety Department.
General Impact: Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill.
Mitigation Measures: Planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457.
Specific Processes: Submit erosion control plans for approval by the
Department of Public Works.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
Ft:kSTAFFNM157PAOa.PC2 11/14/M cdr 56
General Impact: Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill.
Mitigation Measures: Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with
the Development Code.
Specific Processes: Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to
the Planning Department for approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department.
General Impact: Exposure of people or property to seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, landslides or mudflows,
expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Mitigation Measure: Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
Specific Process: A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall
be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building
permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works and Building & Safety
Department.
General Impact: Exposure of people or property to seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, landslides or mudflows,
expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Mitigation Measure: Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with
the Uniform Building Code.
Specific Process: Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety
Department for approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Department
Ft:%STAFFRMI57PAOS.PC2 11/14/98c& 57
Water
General Impact: The project will result in changes to absorption rates,
drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface
runoff.
Mitigation Measure: Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will
not negatively impact adjacent properties, including
drainage conveyances, have been incorporated into site
design and will be included on the grading plans.
Specific Process: Submit grading and drainage plan to the Department of
Public Works for approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
General Impact: Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity).
Mitigation Measure: An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance
with City requirements and a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared in
accordance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
Specific Process: The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) for
their review and approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for
SWPPP).
R:kSTAFFRP'nl 57PA90.PC2 11/14/96 c& 58
Transoortfimon/Circulation
General Impact: Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of Public Facility Fee for road improvements
and traffic impacts.
Specific Process: Post bond @ $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed
$10,000.00 and execute agreement for payment of
Public Facility Fee.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
General Impact: Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of Traffic Signal Mitigation Fee.
Specific Process: Pay pro-rata share for traffic impacts (to be determined
by the Director of Public Works.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
General Impact: Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site.
Mitigation Measure: Provide on-site parking spaces to accommodate the
use.
Specific Process: Install on-site parking spaces.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works, Planning Department and
Building & Safety Department.
R:@STAFFRM167PAOB.PC2 11/14/96 c& 59
Boologecal Resources
General Impact: Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals and birds).
Mitigation Measure: Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo
Rat.
Specific Process: Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens
Kangaroo Rat habitat.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works and Planning Department
Public Servozm
General Impact: A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered
governmental services regarding fire protection. The
project will incrementally increase the need for fire
protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to
the maintenance of service provision.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of Fire Mitigation Fees.
Specific Process: Pay current mitigation fees with the Riverside County
Fire Department.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Department
General Impact: A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered
schools. No significant impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of School Fees.
Specific Process: Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley
Unified School District.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley
Unified School District.
R;@STAFFF"157PA90.PC2 11114190odr 60
General Impact: A substantial effect upon and a need for maintenance
of public facilities, including roads.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of Public Facility Fee for road improvements,
traffic impacts, and public facilities.
Specific Process: Post bond @ $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed
$10,000.00, and execute agreement for payment of
Public Facility Fee.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
AESTHETICS
General Impact: The creation of new light sources will result in
increased light and glare that could affect the Palomar
Observatory.
Mitigation Measure: Use lighting techniques that are consistent with
Ordinance No. 655.
Specific Process: Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety
Department for approval.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Department.
R:kSTAFFFe'r\157PA9@.PC2 11/14/96o* 61
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
FINDINGS OF PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE
R:@STAFFRM157PA96.PC2 11114/9a cdr 62
FINDINGS OF PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE
The Planning Commission has developed criteria to either justify or not justify making a
finding of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to State Law. These criteria and
Staff's preliminary responses are found below.
Criteria to Justify Making a Finding of Public Convenience or Neceasity
Q:Does the proposed establishment have any unique features which are not found in
other similar uses in the community (i.e. types of games, types of food, other
special services)?
A: No.
0:Does the proposed establishment cater to an under-served population (i.e. patrons
of a different socioeconomic class)?
A: No.
Q:Does the proposed establishment provide entertainment that would fill a niche in the
community (i.e. a comedy club, jazz club, etc.)
A: No.
Q:Would the proposed mode of operation of the proposed establishment (i.e. sales in
conjunction with gasoline sales, tours, etc.) be unique or differ from that of other
establishments in the area?
A: No.
Q:Are there any geographical boundaries (i.e. rivers, hillsides) or traffic barriers (i.e.
freeways, major roads, major intersections) separating the proposed establishment
from other establishments?
A:Yes. Highway 79 South provides a traffic barrier to the south. The license would
be a convenience to residents to the south and west who would not be required to
enter or cross the Highway.
Q:Is the proposed establishment located in an area where there is a significant influx
of population during certain seasonal periods?
A: No.
Criteria to Not Justify Making a Fi@a of Puhl6r Conven'enre-or Necessity
G:Is there a proliferation of licensed establishments within a quarter mile of the
proposed establishment?
A:No. Currently there is one (1) licensed establishment within a quarter mile of the
proposed establishment. However, the Commission has previously made findings of
public necessity for two other businesses located within this center, Albertson's and
Chevron. Neither of these businesses have yet to be constructed.
Q:Are there any sensitive uses (i.e., schools, parks, hospitals, churches) in close
proximity (600 feet) to the proposed establishment?
A: No.
R:kSTAFFRP'nl57PA96.PC2 11/14190 cdr 63
Q:Would the proposed establishment interfere with these sensitive uses?
A: No.
Q:Would the proposed establishment interfere with the quiet enjoyment of their
property by the residents of the area?
A:No. There is a residential development adjacent to the shopping center. However,
this development is a gated community and it is not anticipated that the residents
would be impacted by this use.
Will the proposed establishment add to law enforcement problems in the area?
A:No. Staff contacted the Temecula Police Department regarding the proposed liquor
license. Based upon our conversation with the Police Department, the proposed
establishment will not add to law enforcement problems in the area.
Number of similar uses within the @
There are two (2) existing drug stores within the City that also offer alcohol sales (Sav On
and Long's Drug Store) one proposed drug store (Payless). There are existing Supermarkets
that also offer alcohol sales (Food-4-Less, Stater Brothers, Vons, Albertsons, Lucky) and one
proposed supermakert (Albertsons)
Number of other licensed astabl*shments within 1 mile and 3 moles
There is one (1) licensed establishments within one (1) mile of the subject establishment.
This licensed establishments is a gas station with beer and wine sales. There are 21
licensed establishments within a three (3) mile radius of the subject establishment which
include restaurants, nightclubs, bars, mini-marts and grocery stores.
R:kSTAFF@157PAOO.PC2 11114/96c& 64
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFFRP'r\157PAGB-PC2 11/14/9@c& 65
CITY OF TEMECULA
SITF-
NO. - PA96-0157 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), PA96-0158 (MAP 28384)
'EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 18,1996
ZONING MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
L 1,4
L.M
LtA Lt.4
L
LM
LM
'-VL
p
LM
Cs
LM
Os
VL
LM
LM
RH
CASE NO. - PA96-0157 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), PA96-0158 (MAP 28384)
EXHIBIT - B
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 18,1996
Os
LM
SITE PLAN
CITY OF TEMECULA
Village Ceniem
qu (Boundaries am Conceptual)
NO. PA96-0157 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), PA96-0158 (MAP 28384)
IT - C VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY
ALANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 18,1996
CITY OF TEMECULA
SA64S
CASE NO. PA96-0157 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), PA96-0158 (MAP 28384)
D ALCOHOL VICINITY MAP
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 18,1996
CITY OF TEMECULA
I r
F sr OOE24.
PAD 61479 v
c
LODO
7W- SF
NE
Fr
w-
9TATE @Y It
CASE NO.PA96- 157 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), PA96-0158 (MAP 28384)
.XHIBIT - E SITE PLAN
,ILANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 18,1996
R:\STAFFRPT\157PA96.PC2 11113/9@cdr
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 96-
R:\STAFFRPT\157PA96.APL 12/19/96 cdr 4
RESOLUTION NO. 96-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMLECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA96-0157, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 102,632 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE
NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
AND MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 950-020-037
AS, Jim Cos@ of Pacific Development Group filed Planning Application No.
PA96-0157 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use
and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
AS, Planning Application No. PA96-0157 was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
AS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA96-0157
on November 18, 1996 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons deserving to be heard, the Commission considered all facts
relating to Planning Application No. PA96-0157 and approved said application;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission decision to approve the project was appealed;
AS, the City Council consiered the appeal of Planning Application No. PA96-
0157 on January 28, 1997 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons deserving to be heard, the Council considered all facts relating
to Planning Application No. PA96-0157 and approved said application;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CM OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findings, That the City Council on hereby makes the following findings:
R:NSTAFFRff\157PA96.APL 12/19/96 cdr 5
A. Pursuant to Section 18.28, no Development Plan may be approved unless the
applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare
of the community, and further, that any Development Plan approved shall be subject to such
conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the community.
B. The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA96-0157 makes the
following findings, to wit:
1. The proposed use conforms to all General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of State law and City ordinances. The project is a permitted use within
the General Plan Land Use designation of Community Commercial. In addition, the project is
permitted with the approval of a Development Plan.
2. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the
size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and intensity of use due to the
fact that the proposed development complies with the standards contained within the previously
adopted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
3. The project is consistent with the General Plan due to the fact that the
project has been designed to be consistent with the Village Center Concept of the General Plan.
Development of this type will meet and further the overall goals of the General Plan.
4. 'fhe project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or welfare due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include measures which will
ensure that public health and welfare will be maintained.
5.The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in
scale, bulk, height,intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with
adjoining propertiesdue to the fact that the proposed development is compatible with current
surrounding development and future potential development.
6. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open
to, and useable by, vehicular traffic due to the fact that the interior circulation is suitable and
connects with Margarita Road and Highway 79 South.
7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built
or natural environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project due to the fact
that the Conditions of Approval provide necessary mitigations for the project.
8. The proposed use or action complies with all other requirements of state law
and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section
65360, Section 18.28 (Development Plan) of Ordinance No. 348, Ordinance 460, and Ordinance
No. 94-22 (Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance).
R:\STAFF@\157PA96.APL 12/19/96 cdr 6
9. Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference.
C. As conditioned pursuant to Section 4, Planning Application No. PA96-0157, as
proposed, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
D. The City Council in approving the certification of the Negative Declaration of
environmental impact under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
specifically finds that the approval of this Development Plan will have a di minimis impact on fish
and wildlife resources. The Planning Commission specifically finds that in considering the record
as a whole, the project involves no potential adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively,
on wildlife as the same is defmed in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. This is based on
the fact that this project will be located on a site that has been previously graded and no wildlife
exists on the site. The Planning Commission further finds that Pacific Development Group is the
project proponent and the site is located at on the northeasterly comer of Highway 79 South and
Margarita Road, Temecula, California. The project includes the construction of a commercial
shopping center consisting of approximately 102,000 square feet of building area and that all of
the same are located in the County of Riverside. Furthermore, the Planning Commission finds
that an initial study has been prepared by the City Staff and considered by the Planning
Commission which has been the basis to evaluate the potential for adverse impact on the
environment and forms the basis for the Planning Commission's determination, including the
information contained in the public hearing records, on which a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact was issued and this di minimis finding is made. In addition, the Planning
Commission finds that there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have any
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources, or the habitat on which the wildlife depends.
Finally, the Planning Commission finds that the City has, on the basis of substantial evidence,
rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in 14 California Code of Regulations
753.5(d).
Section 3. Environmental ComWiance, An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates
that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions
of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
granted.
Section 4. Conditions, That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning
Application No. PA96-0157, for the operation and construction of a commercial shopping center
located on the northeasterly comer of Highway 79 South and Margarita Road and known as
Assessor's Parcel No. 950-020-037, and subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a
part hereof.
R:\STAFFRn\157PA96.APL 12/19/96 cdr 7
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1997
Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I BY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 28th day of January, 1997 by
the following vote of the Council:
AYES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk
R:\STAFFRn\157PA96.APL 12/19/96 cdr 8
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 16, 1996
R:\STAFFM\157PA96.APL 12119/96 edr 9
MIWTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 16, 1996
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order on Monday, September 16,
1996, 6:06 P.M., at the Rancho California Water District Board Room, 42135 Winchester Road, Temecula,
California. Co-Chairman Slaven presiding.
PRESENT:MHler, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
ABSENT: Fahey
Also present were Planning Manager Debbie Ubnoske, Assistant City Attorney Rubin D. Weiner, Senior Planner
Dave Hogan, Associate Planner Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner Craig Ruiz, Associate Engineer John
Pourkazerni, Associate Engineer @ Cooley, Assistant Engineer Annie Bostre-Le, and Minute Clerk Pat
Kelley.
PITRTIC C-OMNIFNTI@;
Co-Chairman Slaven called for public comments on non-agenda items at 6: 10 P.M. There were no requests to
speak.
C 0 M I 0 N B I J',g I W-SI;
1.Api2roval of ALenda
It was moved by Commissioner Webster and seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak to approve the agenda.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: I COMMISSIONERS: Fahey
2. A1212roval of July 15- 1996 Minutes
It was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Webster to approve the minutes
of July 15, 1996, with the following amendments:
Page 1, 7th Paragraph - The motion carried as follows: Ayes: add Slaven
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb
PLANNTNG COMMISSION SFffFMRER 16,1996
Page 4, 5th paragraph - ...Commission felt it was something that would w enhance sales to minors...
Page 4, 6th paragraph - Commissioner Miller inquired about...
Page 6, 5th paragraph - Commissioner Miller expressed concerns...
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: I COMMISSIONERS: Fahey
Approval of AuL-ust 19. 1996 Minutu
It was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Webster to approve the minutes
of August 19, 1996, with the following amendment.
Page 5, 9th paragraph - ... 15 gallon sycamore trees and 24 " box...
Page 6, 6th paragraph add The Commi estinl,, that the parking ratio be met if the prq.iect is
downsized-
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: t COMMISSIONERS: Fahey
3.Director's HearinL, @d=
No update was submitted.
Chairman Fahey was present at 6:13 P.M.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb2
PLANNINC, CO@SSIM SEPTEMBF@R 16,1996
4.PlanninL- Application No. PA96-0130 (Development Agreement) Van Daelc DevelQpment Co=ration
Associate Planner Matthew Fagan presented the Staff report recommending approval to reduce the
Development Agreement fees from $5,334.00 to $3,590.00 per unit for Planning Areas No. 8, 9 and 12
(Final Tract Maps 22761 and 2'1&762), within Specific Plan No. 180.
Commissioner Slaven stated this request is consistent with past practices and asked if this agreement
would have a new expiration date or continue the existing expiration date. Mr. Fagan answered a new
expiration date is in effect.
Commissioner Soltysiak questioned if Riverside County would receive any of the monies under the new
agreement. Mr. Fagan responded upon adoption of this agreement, the County would not receive monies
for Planning Areas 8, 9 and 12. Undeveloped areas remain in the Rancho I-Eghlands Specific Plan subject
to the existing development agreement.
Commissioner Miller inquired if it was necessary to make a finding that if the fee was not decreased,
there was a likelihood the project would not be developed. Mr. Fagan replied it was not necessary to
make that finding.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:18 P.M.
Bryce Kittle, 2900 Adams, Riverside, representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer any
questions. There were none.
Chairman Fahey closed the Public Comment Section at 6:20 P.M.
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Webster to adopt the Negative
Declaration for Planning Application No. PA96-0130 and Resolution No. 96-NEXT recommending
approval of Planning Application No. PA96-0130 to the City Council, based upon the amended Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, and to
close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS None
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 kib3
PLANNIN(I COMMIg',RION SEpTF@M-nFg 16,1996
5.PA96-0090 (Develapment Plan) Construction of Industrial BuildinE's, Rich Byer
Senior Planner Dave Hogan presented the Staff report recommending approval for construction of two
17,000 square foot. industrial buildings on two different parcels on the southside of Winchester Road,
west of Diaz Road.
Commissioner Webster stated Conditions of Approval should be amended stating the entire lot be graded,
landscaped, and parldng spaces completed in Phase 1.
Chairman Fahey asked if applicant has indicated a time frame between the construction of the two
buildings. Mr. Hogan replied no as construction was market-driven. Chairman Fahey remarked there
would be a large visible blank wall until the second building was built.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked whether the docks are at grade or slope down. Mr. Hogan replied he
believes the docks slope down with the building's floors at grade and it was felt the docks were well
screened from the street.
Commissioner Slaven expressed concern regarding adequate space for trucks to enter the loading dock
area without hitting the trash enclosures. Mr. Hogan replied the plans are somewhat misleading as there
is sufficient space for trucks to pass the trash area and the trucks will exit onto Winchester Road.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:30 P.M.
Steve Smith, 6867 Nancy Ridge Road, San Diego, representing Rich Byer, applicant, stated the wall will
be finished in an attractive manner and the unbuilt area will be hydroseeded.
Chairman Fahey asked if the applicant was willing to have those items added as Conditions and Mr. Smith
answered yes.
Commissioner Webster asked Mr. Smith to expand on the wall treatment. Mr. Smith replied it will be
painted and details continued from the front of the building.
Commissioner Webster questioned if the hydroseeding, landscaping around the perimeter, and paving are
being done in Phase 1. Mr. Smith answered they were. Curbs not descriptive for the second budding
will not be done in Phase 1.
Commissioner Miller asked if everything shown in green on the Landscaping Plan is to be completed in
Phase 1. Mr. Smith replied all of the perimeter landscaping will be completed in Phase 1, but not the
landscaping adjacent to the second building. Bottle trees are planned for the back of the building and
drake elms, flowering plums and/or crepe myrtles planned for the parking area.
R:\PLANCOMM\MI14UTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 kib4
PLANNTNC, COMMIS',910N SFPTF-MBF@R 16. 1996
Chairman Fahey closed Public Comments at 6:35 P.M.
Chairman Fahey stated Conditions should include additional landscaping for vacant lot, and the front
color treatment continued on the wall.
Commissioner Webster stated the elevations show scoring lines and paint on the wall which is
appropriate. He also said it is not practical to plant additional trees since the perimeter trees will be an
adequate screen in the interim phase. He added, some of the trees shown on the landscape plans are not
appropriate for this area and recommended the City Landscape Architect take a close look at the tree
palate. Tree size shown is 15 gallon and somewhere between 40 to 50% should be 24" box trees.
Mr. Hogan clarified the Commissioners were looldng at a conceptual landscaping plan and the final
construction landscape plan would be submitted later to the City Landscape Architect. Mr. Hogan asked
if the request for 24" box trees was because the Commission was looking for immediate screening on the
site. Commissioner Webster replied that was correct.
Chairman Fahey said the @ landscape plan should have approximately 40% of the trees designated 24'
box instead of 15 gallon and the vacant lot should be hydroseeded.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if there are current mix requirements for landscape plans. Mr. Hogan
replied that the ordinance minimum requirement is 15-gallon trees and 5-gallon shrubs.
Commissioner Miller stated he did not see the need for 24" box trees and prefers to see a couple of
specimen trees in the front and the major portion of screening trees left at 15 gallon size because they are
generally a better tree.
Commissioner Webster reiterated 24" box trees are definitely needed on the side of the lot facing the wall
to provide adequate screening for a blank wall. He also said although the City Design Guidelines are not
in effect, they do call for a mix of 36"-box, 24"-box and 15-gallon trees. Mr. Hogan clarified it is his
understanding the larger trees would be adjacent to the street and at the northwest comer.
Chaimian Fahey stated the proposed guidelines have a mix of 20%-36" box, 30%-24" box and 50%-15
gallon trees which is what is being suggested.
Commissioner Miller asked about the traffic count for this street. Mr. Hogan replied there is not a lot
of traffic at this time, but development plans for this area are being submitted.
R:\PLANCOM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC @,/30/96 kib 5
PLANNING CO@SSION SEPTENMF-R 16,1996
Commissioner Slaven asked if the blank wall will be seen from Diaz Road and what the time frame was
for constructing the second building. Mr. Hogan replied the wall could not be seen from Diaz Road; only
from Winchester Road when going towards Diaz Road. W. Smith said constructioiri was dependent upon
the market, but hopefully within a year or two.
Commissioner Soltysiak recommended hydroseeding the vacant lot and leave it to staff to make certain
temporary screening of the blank wall and the dock area is provided and work out the ratio details with
the applicant.
Commissioner Webster disagreed that requesting a certain percentage is getting too specific or is
redesigning the landscaping plan, but rather is providing a minimum requirement.
Chairman Fahey clarified Commissioner Webster was asking the permanent landscaping have larger trees.
Commissioner Webster replied that was his intent.
Chairman Fahey closed the public hearing at 6:55 P.M.
It was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Slaven to adopt the Negative
Declaration for Planning Application No. PA96-0090; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for
Planning Application No. PA96-0090; and to adopt Resolution No. 967-approving PA96@O based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval as amended and to close the public hearing.
Chairman Fahey clarified the amendments to be:
0Temporary hydroseeding of vacant lot;
0All perimeter landscape to be in place with Phase 1;
0All paving to be completed in Phase 1;
0 Wall to be painted and treated with same design as front of building.
Mr. Hogan stated the following changes in the Conditions of Approval:
0Condition 5, extra treatment given to the wall;
0Condition 7 to be reworded "in the front component of the lot, additional trees, 24"- and 36"-box,
will be provided. "
0Condition 17 addition "With the issuance of the permit of the first building, all the perimeter
landscaping will be in and any undeveloped areas will be hydroseeded.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 kib 6
PLANNING CONMSSIM SEPIIFNTBER 16, 1996
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS None
6.Planning A1212lication No. PA96-0170 (Development Plan - @a Auto
Associate Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report recommending approval for design,
construction and operation of a 12,500 square foot Napa Auto Parks Facility at the intersection of
Jefferson and Sanborn Avenues.
Chairman Fahey opening the public hearing at 7:02 P.M.
Russell Rumansoff, 27349 Jefferson, Temecula, representing Alan Orr, the applicant, stated 1. The
storefront is clear anodized aluminum with solar glazed glass, orange-yellow stripe, and blue. 2. Sides
will be sandblasted to bring out the grey-blue tone. 3. Signage is limited to the south and east-facing
comers with the logo sign facing north. 4. He requested a correction to Condition 4c, 'bicycle rack win
be a Standard 2 as opposed to a Class 1 locker'. He stated the applicant does not have a problem with
302 street outlets. Surrounding businesses were notified of the proposal and supporting letters were
received. 5. This building has been approved by the North Jefferson Business Park Architectural Review
Committee.
Chairman Fahey asked Mr. Rumansoff if the applicant agreed with the change in Condition 8 with
Ordinance 663 no longer applicable and the Temecula Code on habitat conservation applying. Mr.
Rumansoff replied the applicant agreed.
Commissioner Slaven inquired if the plastic tubing was 2' wide and Mr. Rumansoff replied it was, but
because it curves back, it will appear thinner.
Commissioner Slaven asked about the business hours. Mr. Rumansoff answered 8 A.M. to 6 P.M.
Commissioner Slaven asked about the makeup of the North Jefferson Business Park Architectural Review
Committee. Mr. Rumansoff replied
there were two people on the committee, the owner of the property and himself The owner has 51 % of
the vote and while she has the authority to change the CC&RS, there has not been a change since they
were recorded.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb7
PLANNING COMM',RION SEPTFMLRER 16.1996
Chairman Fahey clirified the Commission must base its decision based on City guidelines, not CC&RS.
Commissioner Soltysiak noted that the Bank of Commerce letter references a dark blue strip with gold
pipeline, but the submitted plans show a blue storefront with an illuminated tube as the gold accent band.
Mr. Rumansoff replied the submitted plans were correct.
Chairman Fahey closed Public Comments at 7: 10 P.M.
Commissioner Slaven stated the dark blue color and the 2' illuminated tube are not appropriate and not
compatible with other area businesses. A dark blue strip with a gold stripe would not be as loud and
would be more appropriate. She cannot support the project as submitted.
Commissioner Soltysiak stated the front of the building looks more like a billboard, not compatible with
surrounding building colors and he would support the project if the color scheme can be reworked.
Commissioner Miller stated he has no problem with the project as designed.
Mr. Rumansoff stated the gold band could be eliminated from going around the entire building and the
front would be blue above the gold band and the bottom sandblasted with a compatible tone.
Chairman Fahey asked if the owner was willing to eliminate the illuminating light band. Mr. Rumonsoff
stated the stripe must be illuminated as it is a Napa requirement and the store will be opened til 9 P.M.
at times.
Commissioner Webster stated he thought it was a fair proposal.
Chairman Fahey said she could support the project without the lighted band.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if the blue band was 9 feet wide and Mr. Rumansoff stated that was
correct. Based on dimensions shown on the elevations, the band may be I 1 feet.
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Miller to continue the item to the
September 30, 1996, meeting to allow time for Staff and the applicant to resolve the concerns raised
tonight as this is a vital business to Temecula.
Commissioner Webster remarked the only legitimate concern is the light on the building and would rather
the Commission resolve the matter at this time causing no delay.
R:\PLANCOMM\MIUUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 kib 8
PLANNINCR CO SION SF-PrlFMRER 16.1996
Commissioner Slaven stated she does not agree this project should not be continued just because it is a
fast track project. She stated the applicant and the architect understand the Commission's concerns that
I I'x6O' of blue is too much.
Commissioner Soltysiak stated he was comfortable with continuing the matter and getting the color
scheme more in line with Bank of Commerce's letter of approval.
Chairman Fahey stated the public hearing remains open.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak
NOES: I COMMISSIONERS: Webster
ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Chairman Fahey called for a recess at 7:35 P.M.
Chairman Fahey called the meeting back to order at 7:45 P.M.
7.PlanninLy A1212lication PA96-0176 (Develol2ment Plan - The Allen Group
Associate Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report recommending approval for the design,
construction and operation of a 77,582 square foot corporate office and distribution facility for FFF
Enterprises on the northeast corner of Ynez Road and County Center Drive.
Commissioner Miller inquired about the required landscaping percentage. Mr. Fagan responded 20%
is the minimum landscaping requirement and this project has planned 22% of the site to be landscaped
which does not include the hydroseeded area. The landscaping percentage is determined by the project's
acreage, not building size.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
Steve Stock, 4365 Executive Drive, San Diego, representing the applicant, The Allen Group, said he was
available for questions.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if they had a tenant for this project. Mr. Stock replied, FFF Enterprises,
a medical product distribution company, has leased the property.
R:\PIANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 9
PLANNFNG COMMISSION SEPTF-NMER 16,12%
Chairman Fahey closed the Public Comment Section at 7:58 P.M.
Commissioner Webster observed this is a light industrial site and the landscape plan shows 24" box and
15 gallon trees.
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Miller to adopt the Negative
Declaration for Planning Application No. PA96-0176; to adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for
Planning Application PA96-0176; and to adopt Resolution No. 96-Next recommending approval of PA96-
0176 as amended and based upon the amended Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and to close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
8.Planning Application PA96-0206 (Minor ChanLe to Tentative Parcel Map
24085), City Associates I
Associate Planner Matthew Fagan presented the Staff report recommending a modification to Condition
of Approval No. 29 of PA96-0140 (Tentative Parcel Map 24085) pertaining to restricted access on Diaz
Road. After a review of the Development Plan submitted by Zevo Golf, staff deter-mined that the
condition can be modified for the following reasons:
1.The project can be found consistent with Ordinance No. 460 which allows flexibility for
intersection spacing due to the use of the word = be limited.
A similar condition exists to the south of this project.
3. The PA96-0190 access design to and from Diaz Road is superior for truck traffic.
He also stated environmental review was handled under the previous map. This is not a change that
requires additional environmental review.
Commissioner Webster asked if the access modification was for this parcel's Phase I only or also for the
parcels to the north. Mr. Fagan answered access to Diaz Road is limited to Phase I only.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 10
PLANNTNG COMNHIRSION SF.PREMBF.R 16
Commissioner Soltysiak inquired if a minimum dimension is applied to the separation. Engineer @
Cooley stated street design criteria mentions a minimum dimension of 660 feet spacing between
intersections and there is about 800 feet between Remington Road and Avenida de Ventas.
Chairman Fahey opened public hearing at 8:07 P.M.
Max Harrison, 41975 Winchester Road, Temecula, representing the applicant, Zevo Golf, stated he was
available to answer any questions. There were no questions.
Chairman Fahey closed Public Comments at 8:09 P.M.
Assistant City Attorney Rubin Weiner stated the Resolution needed the following amendments in Section
2, Finding No. 1, end of first line. Insertion to read: ",with conditions as modified in Section 3 below,."
The last sentence to read "The Findings made for Planning Application PA96-0140 are hereby
readopted." Add a new Section 3 executing the Com@ssion's intent to read "'ne Planning Commission
hereby approves Planning Application PA96-0206 to revise Condition of Approval 29 of Planning
Application PA96-0140 allowing access to and from Parcel I of Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085 onto
Diaz Road." Renumber Section 3 to 4 and 4 to 5.
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Miller to find the proposed
modification is consistent with the impacts included in the previously adopted Negative Declaration for
Planning Application PA96-0140 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085); and to adopt Resolution No. 96-
approving PA96-0206 as amended based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report,
and to close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 1 1
PLANNING CONMSSION SF-PrF-MRF.R 16,1996
9.PA96-0190 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 7EVO COT,F)
Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report recommending approval for design,
construction and operation of a 235,249 square foot office/manufacture building and a test golf driving
range at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas (Zevo Drive). Mr. Fagan stated staff discussed concerns
about golf balls being hit over the fence onto Avenida de Ventas (Zevo Drive). The applicant plans a 6-
foot fence around the perimeter, but more for security reasons than restricting golf balls as the driving
range will only be used by testing machines and PGA golfers.
Commissioner Miller questioned the meaning of "comer cut off area" in Condition 47j. Engineer
Cooley stated a diagonal cut off provides a clear space easement for the site obstructions and oncoming
traffic; intent is to limit landscaping to low lying shrubbery. He said planting a specimen tree would not
impact the line of sight as long as 3 1/2 feet is maintained.
Chairman Fahey opened the Public Hearing at 8:20 P.M.
Scott Staley, 157 Linda Vista Drive, San Marcos, representing Zevo Golf, the applicant, stated
equipment is assembled at this location, not manufactured, and he was available to answer any questions.
Commissioner Slaven asked if all 500+ parking spaces were planned to be used. Mr. Staley replied the
parking number was dictated by the City requirements and employees planned would not exceed 400
working varying shifts.
Commissioner Webster asked about the fencing. Mr. Staley stated the testing range was more
representative of a fairway. The fence would be a 6' chain link with barbed wire on top which is why
both sides of the fence are being landscaped.
Chairman Fahey closed public comments at 8:25 P.M.
Commissioner Webster discussed concerns about keeping balls within the driving range so they do not
become a public safety issue. He recommended the City have some recourse for remedial action if there
is a problem in the future. Mr. Fagan said he believes the applicant will monitor themselves, but perhaps
an annual review would also be in order.
Chairman Fahey asked if straying balls can be listed as a potential public safety item and have a
mitigation plan requiring annual monitoring of any problems. Mr. Fagan replied that should be
possible.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if the oleander trees are meant to screen the fence and barbed wire.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 1 2
PLANNING COMTvrtSSION SEPTEMBER 16,1996
Commissioner Webster replied landscaping is outside the fence and there is a fair amount of oleanders
and other trees to adequately screen the fence.
Chairman Fahey reiterated that barbed wire does not meet City guidelines.
Commissioner Webster asked if the applicant would go with a higher fence without barbed wire. Mr.
Staley answered security is a problem, but a 6' or 8' fence does not really keep people out.
Commissioner Slaven stated an 8-foot chain @ fence, even with landscaping, is not going to do a better
job. She said other applicants have agreed to a 6' fence with no barbed wire and that was be sufficient.
It was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Slaven to adopt the Negative
Declaration for Planning Application No. PA96-0190; to adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program as
amended for Planning Application PA96-0190; and to adopt Resolution No. 96- recommending
approval of PA96-0190 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject
to the attached Conditions of Approval as modified and to close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES:0 COMMISSIONF-RS: None
ABSTAIN:0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Chairman Fahey recessed the meeting at 8:33 P.M.
Chairman Fahey called the meeting back to order at 8:40 P.M.
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Webster to continue Item II.
Review of City-Wide Design Guidelines, to the September 30, 1996 meeting.
Mr. Ruiz asked the Commission to submit any questions/concems to the Planning Department as soon
as possible and a sheet with questions and answers will be prepared and given to each Commissioner
before the September 30, 1996 meeting.
R:\PLANCCMM\MIt4UTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 kib 13
PLANNINR-, COMNHRSION SEPTIFM-RER 16. 1996
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
10.Workshop - Planning Application No. PA96-0157 (Lucky Shopl2inL' Center
Assistant Planner Craig Ruiz stated the project is in the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and is located at
Margarita Road and Hwy 79. The staff and applicant have met several times regarding the design of the
project. Staff's primary concern is the site design may not be consistent with Village Center Guidelines
contained in the General Plan. At this time, the Village Center designation does not apply to this
property. However, an application has been submitted for an amendment to the Paloma Del Sol Specific
Plan and Staff will recommend the Development Agreement be amended to apply the Village Center
designation to this property. He said the applicant requested a workshop with the Commission to receive
infon-nal input and direction regarding the site, landscape and elevation plans prior to proceeding further
with the project.
David Powell, I Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, representing the applicant, Pacific Development
Group, said they were here tonight requesting Commission input to determine if they are heading in the
right direction or wasting their time. This property is 12 acres, currently in escrow, and there are firm
deals with Lucky and Sav-0n. Elevations have not evolved too much from the original plan, and are
responsive to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan regarding ingress/egress. Perimeters are a little bit
different for this size parcel than for the 25-acre parcel across the street. Pedestrian w@ays from
parldng lots, perimeter streets and eventual adjacent properties allow people to gather in areas in front
of the multi-shop area (selling food, coffee, ice cream, etc). Sidewalks outside the canopy area will be
lined with seating areas and planters with built-in benches. Due to the required parking spaces, there is
not much room left to create gathering spots in other areas.
Chairman Fahey asked if the proposed design guidelines for a Village Center were reviewed by the
applicant. Mr. Powell responded they were.
Commissioner Webster asked for clarification of the areas of contention between the applicant and staff.
Mr. Ruiz's summarized Staff's concerns: 1) There is a High Density Residential parcel located adjacent
to this property with Lucky's truck-loading docks facing that property; 2) There is a possibility of the site
ending up as strip commercial; 3) there is the possibility of too much commercial in area; and 3) on-site
circulation problems may exist.
R:\PI,ANCOM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 14
PLANNING COMM]ISSION SF@PTIF-MBF@R 16,1996
Chairman Fahey stated having loading docks facing a High Density Residential area does not meet the
Village Center concept which is to encourage pedestrian traffic and non-auto uses.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if this eight acre parcel was driving the Village Center concept. Mr. Ruiz
answered the proposed site plan is oriented to 79S and a Village Center should be oriented more toward
the residential sections. He also said traffic should be funneled thru the interior as opposed to the
exterior.
Commissioner Soltysiak remarked that this site appears to be on the fringe and the Village Center concept
works better if located within the hub of a Specific Plan area. Mr. Ruiz replied that design guidelines
in Specific Plans talk about neighborhood commercial centers and design guidelines talk of similar things
such as village centers.
Commissioner Slaven stated that the other comers in this particular location are also part of the Village
Center concept. She felt this commercial comer is being piece mealed out and does not satisfy the
concept of Village Center. She noted the same standard of development should be required as was
expected for the center across the street.
Chairman Fahey stated the massive parking areas and building orientations do not follow General Plan
guidelines to meet Village concept.
Jim Costanzo, of Pacific Development Group, stated this project may not fit on this particular property
in this particular city. In dealing with City parking space requirements, size constraints, and tenant
requirements, this is the best building orientation. He said they don't own the adjoining property, but
street at the easterly boundary which will attach to Campanula and provide vehicular and pedestrian access
is envisioned.
Chairman Fahey asked how many parldng spaces are shown in excess of the ordinance requirement. Mr.
Costanzo replied about 100 over City requirement, but they are required by American Stores and Sav-on
for their customers' convenience. He said amendments to change zoning of surrounding parcels are in
the offering and pedestrian access will be provided to the surrounding properties as they develop.
Barry Nelson, land consultant, stated Parcel 38 was changed from Commercial to High Density
Residential after Lucky submitted their plan which makes it incumbent on the designer of the High
Density parcel to work with Lucky's loading docks. He added this commercial center is part of an overall
comprehensive plan that is half-built, the Specific Plan itself is pedestrian oriented and has green belts
throughout the area.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 1 5
PLANNINC, COMMTSSION SE ER 16. 1926
Commissioner Miller asked if the park being mentioned is where the fenced ballfields are located. Mr.
Nelson replied he was @g about the baflftelds and they propose that area be opened to provide access
when the high density residential parcel is developed.
Comniissioner Webster stated the applicant might come up with a preliminary site plan for the adjacent
properties, which the applicant would not be held to, but when would demonstrate how this particular site
relates to adjacent properties and the overall Specific Plan in regard to vehicular and pedestrian access.
Commissioner Soltysiak remarked the problem of applying the Village concept to this particular property
is inappropriate. The property is located on major roadways with high traffic counts, yet is trying to
promote pedestrian access from residential areas.
Mr. Ruiz said the development agreement states the developer will be held to the standards of 348 and
not to any future regulations unless both parties agree. There is a new development code which allows
for 150 less parldng spaces, but the vendors are not interested. Village Center concept is two tiered: 1)
getting to the site; and 2) what they do once they are there. The second part is what needs to be worked
on for this project. Once people are there, how do they get from one pad to the congregational areas.
The City does not want to preclude people in cars, but would prefer they drive in from the interior rather
than from Hwy 79 or Margarita Road.
Chairman Fahey remarked adjustments can be made to the plan to work toward meeting the Village
concept. She suggested grouping some of the buildings together to establish public congregation area
rather than parking spaces around each separate building. She feels there is some flexibility due to the
extra parldng spaces that would meet our concept as well as other requirements. She also suggested
changing orientation of Lucky to be located closer to Hwy 79 and to turn it around so the parking lot is
closer to the highway.
Commissioner Slaven stated the City's interested in satisfying 'people concerns". She agreed with
Commissioner Webster about having a bigger picture to understand how this could work.
Commissioner Miller stated the Village Center concept is trying to make people do things they do not do
because this is a car-oriented society. He said it seems possible to move retail buildings to allow foot
@c between stores and Lucky, and perhaps create a paseo with gazeboes at each end between Sav-On
and Lucky.
Mr. Powell stated they would try to address the issues raised tonight but reiterated they do not own Parcel
2 so it is impossible for them to design it. The best they can do is show vehicular access and enhance
pedestrian access to neighboring properties.
R:\PIANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 16
PLANNINC, COMMSSION SEPTIRMBER 16.1996
Mr. Ruiz mentioned there was a school in the Specific Plan at Meadows and Hwy 79S and a conceptual
landscape plan giving a general idea of building locations, landscaping, and other items of that nature was
done. The Commission has the option to ask for a conceptual landscaping plan as part of the Specific
Plan amendment.
Commissioner Soltysiak stated he saw two components: 1) pedestrian or alternative access; 2)
congregation on the site. The amended Specific Plan needs to show how the alternate access would be
provided and how to enhance the congregational areas.
PLANNING MANAGFR'S REPORT
Planning Manager Debbie Ubnoske stated she had nothing to report.
PLANNTNC, CO@SSION DISCIISSION
There was no further discussion.
It was moved by Chairman Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 P.M.
The motion was unanimously carried.
The next meeting will be held September 30, 1996, at 6:00 P.M. at the Rancho California Water District Board
Room, 42135 Winchester Road, Temecula, California.
v
a Fahey, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\091696.PC 9/30/96 klb 17
ITEI\4 14
APPRO
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF Fl@A
CITY MANAGER J_@,
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM:Gary Thornhill, Community Development Director,
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment) and Planning
Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan - Paloma del Sol)
Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
1 .Make a determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental
Impact Report was previously certified.
2.Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-
0107, CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
ON PLANNING AREA 2 FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, PLANNING AREA 29A
FROM LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OPEN
SPACE/RECREATION, AND PORTIONS OF PLANNING AREA 1
FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL AND MODIFYING FIGURE 2-4 (VILLAGE CENTER
OVERLAY) OF THE GENERAL PLAN, DELETING THE AREA
CORRESPONDING TO PLANNING AREA 2 FROM THE VILLAGE
CENTER OVERLAY AND ADDING AREAS CORRESPONDING TO
PLANNING AREAS 6 AND 37 TO THE VILLAGE CENTER
OVERLAY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR
79 SOUTH, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA
ROAD AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD
R:\STAFFRff\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1
3.Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-
0106 (ZONING AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219)
AMENDING PLANNING AREAS 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36
AND 37 OF PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AND SPECIFIC
PLAN ORDINANCE AND ADDING PLANNING AREA 38 TO THE
PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN
ORDINANCE, ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF
SR79 SOUTH, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA
ROAD AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 950-020-001 THROUGH
950-020-004, 950-020-009 THROUGH 950-020-025, 950-020-
027, 950-020-029, 955-030-002 THROUGH 955-030-004 AND
955-030-006 THROUGH 955-030-011
BACKGROUND
This item was continued off-calendar by the City Council at their December 10. 1996 meeting.
At that meeting, several homeowners in the vicinity of the project raised concerns regarding
the increase in the high density land use designation and the decrease in the amount of
commercial land use designation at the southwest corner of the project and traffic proposed
in Amendment No. 5 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The Council directed Staff to meet
with the homeowners and address their concerns regarding the project. Staff was also directed
to re-notice the project when it was to appear before the Council again.
Staff met with the homeowners on January 8, 1997 to discuss their concerns. At that
meeting, the homeowners expressed to Staff that they would prefer Planning Area 1 remain
the same as approved in Amendment No. 4 of the Specific Plan (Neighborhood/Community
Commercial). They also expressed a concern with current and proposed traffic in the area.
Staff informed them that commercial land use generates a higher number of trips than
residential land use.
The applicant has now proposed to revise Amendment No. 5 in the following manner: Planning
Area No. 1 (Neighborhood/Community Commercial) is proposed to be 32.3 acres. The
designation for Planning Area No. 38 has been changed to Medium-High from Very High and
the proposed density is 6 dwelling units per acre. No zero lot line product will be permitted in
this Planning Area. Planning Area No. 39 no longer exists, as it is now part of Planning Area
No. 1. An exhibit has been added to the Specific Plan which depicts the overall design for
Planning area 1.
Staff discussed these changes with the adjacent homeowners and has notified them of the time
and date of the re-scheduled City Council meeting. In addition, Staff has re-noticed the project
for the Council meeting.
R:\STAFFM\106PA96.CC2 1/16/97 mf 2
The information below is a recapitulation of all changes proposed by the applicant for Planning
Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment) and Planning Application No. PA96-
0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan):
Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment)
The proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Plan include the following:
1 .Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area No. 2 of the
Specific Plan from (H) High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre) to (LM)
Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre).
2.Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area 29A of the
Specific Plan from (LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre)
to (OS) Open Space/Recreation.
3.Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Areas 38 of the
Specific Plan from (CC) Community Commercial to (LM) Low-Medium Density Residential
(3-6 dwelling units per acre).
Chanaes to Fiaure 2-4 (Villacie Center Overlayl
The proposal is to amend Figure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay) of the General Plan to delete the
area corresponding to Planning Area 2 of the Specific Plan and add the areas corresponding to
Planning Area 6 and Planning Area 37 of the Specific Plan. Planning Area 2 is proposed to be
change from Very High Density Residential to Medium High Density Residential. The Village
Center is more appropriate with higher density development.
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan)
Specific Plan Chanaes
The project is an amendment to existing Planning Areas 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36 and 37
of Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance, adding Planning Area 38 to the
Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance. The changes have been reflected in the documents
transmitted to the City Council in the form of redlined items for additions to the Plan and
strikeout items for deletions.
A summary of changes to the Specific Plan text are listed below:
1 .Overall project acreage will remain the same. Overall dwelling units will decrease from
5,604 units to 5,328 units.
2.Roadway Cross Section (Figure 5A - Highway 79) has been modified to reflect the
approved Assessment District No. 1 59 street improvement plans.
3.Roadway Cross Section (Figure 5B) has been modified to reflect General Plan roadway
sections (includes raised, landscaped medians).
R:\STAFFRPT\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 3
4.Planning Areas 1, 6, 36, 37 and 38 contain language in their Planning Standards
pertaining to the Village Center. Figures 1 5A and 1 5F include references to Design
Guidelines for the Village Center.
5.Planning Areas 2, 9, 14, 27, 28 and 29A and 29B contain language which reflects their
respective change in density allowed or change in use within these areas. A pedestrian
linkage has been added between Planning Areas 27 and 28.
6.Highway 79 Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) has been decreased from fifty (50) feet
to thirty-eight (38) feet. This is to be consistent with the approved Assessment District
No. 1 59 street improvement plans.
7.Village Center Design Guidelines have been added.
Asummary of changes to the Specific Plan Ordinance are listed below:
1 .Deletion and addition of Planning Areas to the appropriate Ordinance Section based
upon the changes in density to the Planning Area (i.e., deletion of Planning Area 2 from
Very High Density Residential and addition of it to Medium High Density Residential,
etc.)
2.Deletion and addition of uses for Planning Areas 1, 27 and 36 which will foster a Village
Center.
Villaae Center Overlay
The City's General Plan has been adopted since the last amendment to the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan (Amendment No. 4). Figure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay) in the General Plan
includes conceptual locations for Village Centers within the City of Temecula. One such
Village Center is identified at the southwest corner of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Staff
supplied Village Center criteria from the General Plan, Development Code and Draft Design
Guidelines) to the applicant at the Development Review Committee meeting. The Specific Plan
has been amended to include a Village Center on Planning Areas 1, 6, 36, 37 and 38.
Language has been included to the Specific Plan Planning Standards (for each Planning Area),
Design Guidelines and the Specific Plan Ordinance to foster the design and development of the
Village Center Concept. The Specific Plan addresses mixture of uses, pedestrian oriented
design, building scale and design intensification, parking design, signage and transit provisions.
These are the areas identified in the Community Design Element of the General Plan, the Village
Center Performance Standards contained in the Development Code and the draft Village Center
Design Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
R:\STAFFRPT\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 4
Attachments:
1 . City Council Ordinance No. 97- - Page 6
2. City Council Ordinance No. 97- - Page 10
a.Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Page 15
3.Planning Commission Staff Report: November 18, 1996 - Page 18
4.Planning Commission Minutes: November 18, 1996 - Page 19
5.Exhibits - Page 20
6.Specific Plan Text (included under separate cover) - Page 21
7. Specific Plan Ordinance (Included under separate cover) - Page 22
R:\STAFFRn\106PA96.CC2 1/16/97 mf 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
R:%STAFFRff%106PA96.CC2 1115/97 mf 6
ATTACHMENT NO. I
ORDINANCE NO. 97-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMIECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA96-0107, CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND
USE DESIGNATION ON PLANNING AREA 2 FROM VERY
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW-MEDWM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, PLANNING AREA 29A FROM
LOW-MEDIEUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OPEN
SPACE/RECREATION, AND PORTIONS OF PLANNING
AREA 1 FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO
MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND
MODIFYING FIGURE 2-4 (VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY)
OF THE GENERAL PLAN, DELETING THE AREA
CORRESPONDING TO PLANNING AREA 2 ]FROM THE
VH,LAGE CENTER OVERLAY AND ADDING AREAS
CORRESPONDING TO PLANNING AREAS 6 AND 37 TO
THE VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR 79 SOUTH, EAST
OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND
WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings, The City Council in approving Planning Application No. PA96-
0107 (General Plan Amendment), makes the following findings, to wit:
1. Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment), as
proposed, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project consists
of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area No. 2 of the
Specific Plan from (H) High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre) to (LM) Low-
Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre), Planning Area 29A of the Specific Plan
from (LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) to (OS) Open
Space/Recreation, Planning Area 38 of the Specific Plan from (CC) Community Commercial to
(LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and Figure 2-4 (Village
Center Overlay) of the General Plan to delete the area corresponding to Planning Area 2 of the
Specific Plan and add the areas corresponding to Planning Area 6 and Planning Area 37 of the
Specific Plan. Ultimate development of the site will be consistent with the previously approved
Specific Plan and adjacent land uses.
R:\STAFFRPT\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 7
3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property,
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the
fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219.
4. The changes proposed in the approved Specific Plan are minor and do not
increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development
as analyzed in the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report or Environmental Impact
Report 235 prepared for the Paloma del Sol Project. The mitigation measures prepared for this
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
Section 2. Environmental Coml2liance, The City of Temecula General plan EIR was
certified on November 9, 1993. Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific
Plan No. 219 and was certified by the County Board of Supervisors. It has been eight (8) years
since the environmental analysis was performed for this project. In addition, an Addendum to that
EIR was prepared in 1992 for Amendment No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Based upon
this infon-nation, it is Staff s opinion that due to the scope (a decrease in the overall density of the
project) of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment, there will be no effect
on the previous analysis. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the
project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the
project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to
circumstance under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in
the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and
complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred; therefore, no further
environmental analysis is required. The City Council hereby determines that the project is
consistent with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified.
Section 3. Conditions, That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning
Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment) on property generally located north of
SR 79 South, east of Margarita Road, south of Pauba Road and west of Butterfield Stage Road.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance,
and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 8
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 96- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of January, 1997, 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 28th day of January, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS
June S. Greek, City Clerk
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
R:\STAFFRPT\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 0
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 97-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA96-0106 (ZONING AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN
NO. 219) AMENDING PLANNING AREAS 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27,
28, 29, 36 AND 37 OF PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
AND SPECIFIC PLAN ORDINANCE AND ADDING
PLANNING AREA 38 TO THE PALOMA DEL SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN ORDINANCE, ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF SR79
SOUTH, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, SOUTH OF PAUBA
ROAD AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 950-020-001
THROUGH 950-020-004, 950-020-009 THROUGH 950-020-025,
950-020-027, 950-020-029, 955-030-002 THROUGH 955-030-004
AND 955-030-006 THROUGH 955-030-011
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings, The City Council in approving Planning Application No. PA96-
0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219), makes the following findings, to wit:
1 . Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan
No. 219), as proposed, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan
No. 219) is consistent with the City's General Plan, due to the fact that the subject request is in
substantial conformance with the proposed General Plan Land Use Plan amendment and the
Village Center Overlay amendment.
3. Specific Plan No. 219 for development of Paloma del Sol was incorporated
into Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and
KRDC, Inc. and Mesa Homes ("Development Agreement"), the predecessor-in-interest to
Newland Associates, Applicant for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 5. The Development
Agreement was approved by the City Council of the City of Temecula and recorded on February
18, 1993 ("Effective Date") in the Official Records of the Riverside County Recorder.
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 1
The applicant and the City have agreed to include certain standards in the
Specific Plan Amendment No. 5 pe@ng to the Village Center Design Guidelines and roadway
cross-sections which are now requirements of the City's current General Plan but were not
included as part of the General Plan in effect when the Development Agreement was recorded.
These agreed upon standards are:
A. The Applicant has added Design Guidelines in Section IV of Specific
Plan 219 entitled 'D. Village Center Design Guidelines".
B. The Applicant has amended the 'Artetial Highway' and 'Major
Road'cross-sections on Figures 5A and 5B of Specific Plan 219 to conform to the City's General
Plan 'Arterial Highway' and 'Major Road' cross-sections. The City further finds that the
applicant's acceptance of the City's General Plan "Arterial Highway" and "Major Highway" cross-
sections is based on certain understandings and arrangements reached with the City whereby any
costs of implementation will be reimbursed to the Applicant.
C.The Applicant has amended the 'Highway 79' cross-section on
Figure 5B of Specific Plan219 to increase paved area and to reduce the parkway area in
accordance with current Stateof California criteria.
4.The City Council finds and determines that the changes to the existing
development approvalsfor Paloma del Sol proposed in Specific Plan 219, Amendment No. 5, are
deemed to be "minor"as defined in Section 14.3 of the Development Agreement and do not
require an amendment to the Development Agreement. The City finds and determines that by
accepting the City's new General Plan standards of development as set forth in this Section, the
Applicant has not waived any of its vested development rights under the Development Agreement.
5. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project consists
of the modification to an existing Specific Plan, with an overall reduction in density. Ultimate
development of the site will be consistent and compatible with the existing land use in the area.
6. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property,
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the
fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219.
7. The changes proposed in the approved Specific Plan are minor and do not
increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development
as analyzed in Environmental Impact Report 235. The mitigation measures prepared for this
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
Section 2. Environmental Comi2liance, The City of Temecula General plan EIR was
certified on November 9, 1993. Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific
Plan No. 219 and was certified by the County Board of Supervisors. It has been eight (8) years
since the environmental analysis was performed for this project. In addition, an Addendum to that
EIR was prepared in 1992 for Amendment No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Based upon
R:\STAFFRP'r\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 2
this information, it is Staff's opinion that due to the scope (a decrease in the overall density of the
project) of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment, there will be no effect
on the previous analysis. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the
project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the
project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to
circumstance under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in
the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and
complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred; therefore, no further
environmental analysis is required. The City Council hereby determines that the project is
consistent with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified.
Section 3. Conditions, That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning
Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219) on property generally
located north of SR79 South, east of Meadows Parkway (north) and Margarita Road (south), south
of Pauba Road and west of Butterfield Stage Road and known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 950-
020-001 through 950-020-004, 950-020-009 through 950-020-025, 950-020-027, 950-020-029,
955-030-002 through 955-030-004 and 955-030-006 through 955-030-01 1, subject to Exhibit A,
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Wi@ 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance,
and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
R:\STAFFRff\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 3
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1997.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 96- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of January, 1997, 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 28th day of January, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS
June S. Greek, City Clerk
R:\STAFF@106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 4
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 5
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219)
Project Description: Amend Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment to
existing Planning Areas 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36 and 37 of Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance, adding Planning Area 38 to the Specific Plan
and Specific Plan Ordinance
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
1 .The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set
aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body
including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning
Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219) which action
is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources
Code, Division 1 3, Chapter 4 (Section 21 000 =., including but not by the way of
limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall promptly notify the
developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this time period.
City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City fail to
either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not, thereafter be
responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
2.The applicant shall comply with all underlying conditions of approval for Specific Plan
No. 21 9, and its amendments, unless superseded by these conditions of approval.
3.The amendment to the Specific Plan text shall conform with Attachment No. 6 (Specific
Plan Text)
4.The amendment to the Specific Plan Ordinance shall conform with Attachment No. 7
(Specific Plan Ordinance).
R:\STAFF@%106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 16
Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of The Ordinance Approving the Amendment
5. The applicant shall submit the Amended Specific Plan text to the Planning Department.
Prior to the Certificate of Occupancy for any Building in Planning Area 1
6.The Minor Community Entry Statement identified on Figure 1 5A of the Specific Plan
shall be installed.
OTHER AGENCIES
7.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal
Water District transmittal dated July 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached.
8.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California
Water District transmittal dated June 26, 1996, a copy of which is attached.
9.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the California
Department of Transportation's transmittal dated June 1 7, 1 996, a copy of which is
attached.
10.The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated November 4, 1996,
a copy of which is attached.
R:\STAFFRn\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 7
Eastern municipa v, acerdistrict
Gmewl Manager Boani ofdirecrom
John B. Brudin M2zion V AsWcy, P,,midcnc
Legal Countel Richud R. HaU, Vice PtcsidcnE
Redwine and Sherrill Rodger D. Siems
Da,id J. Slawson
Dimcror oftbe MetmpoLitan Water C12yton A. Record. Jr.
D,srncr of Southen Califomw SCart4fy
Chester C. Gilbert Mary C. White
Tremumr
Joseph J. Kucbicr, CPA
July 12, 1996
..........
Matthew Fagan
Planning Department
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:PA96-0106/0107 (Meadows s.p. NO. 219, Paloma Del Sol)
Agency Case Txansmittal
Dear Mr. Fagan:
We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your off ice which
describe the subject project. The subject project is located north
of Highway 79, west of Butterfield Stage Road, south of Pauba Road
and east of Margarita Road in the City of Temecula.
The subject project has already been submitted by the developer to
the District for review. In fact, construction has already begun
on some of the sewer facilities within the Paloma Del Sol
development. According to the provided Summary of Changes Table,
the total number of dwelling units decreases from 5604 to 5584. In
addition, the same table indicates the total commercial area
decreases from 31.5 acres to 12.5 acres. Due to the stage of sewer
facility construction and the expected relatively minor changes in
sewer flows',, the proposed land use changes do not warrant
subsequent changes in the planned sewer facility sizes. Hence, our
current plan for serving the subject project will remain unchanged.
Upon receiving notice of the proposed changes being approved, we
will update our databases to include the revised land use figures.
Maii to: Post Office Box 8300
&fain Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto Customer Service / Enginecring Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue, Hcmet, CA
Operations & Maintenancc Center: 2270 Trumble Road, Perris, CA 92571 Telephonc (909) 928-3777 1 Fax (909) 928-6177
San Jacinto, California 92581-8300
Telephanc (909) 925-7676 Fax (909) 929-0257
Mr. Matthew Fagan
PA 96-0106/0107
July 12, 1996
Page 2
Thank you for soliciting our concerns and if you have any questions
regarding the above matter, please call me at (909) 766-1810.
Sincerely,
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Mike Gow, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Customer Service Department
MAG/mag
J:\WORDPROC\WP\NEW-BUSI.ll\GOW\tepaOlO6.796
JVi#4 2 8 1996
Ran* June 26, 1996 )Lrs'd.-@........
Watr Mr. Matthew Fagan
Associate Planner
f Direct... City of Temecula
Lisa D. He@.n Post Office Box 9033
P,@"d".t Temecula, CA 92589-903-')
@Nti@hael R..McMillan
P,@,@d@nt SUBJECT: Water Availability
Ralph H. Daily Palorna De] Sol Specific Plan
Csaba F. Ko Planning Application No. PA96-0106
D.. g R.Iberg
,Ieffrev L. Nli.kier Dear Mr. Fagan:
George Al. Wood.
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
,John F. Henniga@boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service,
therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements
Phillip L- F.@be@between RCWD and the property owner.
Di,@... of Fi..@,@
E. P. "Bob" Le-onsThe Developer will be required to construct all on-site and off-site water
i @.facilities required by RCWD to service the individual developments. The
Kenneth C. Deal,Developer(s) should contact RD@ for fees and requirements.
P@@ R. LouckWater availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Linda .1. F@@gos.Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
C. Nlichael CowettIf you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Best, Best & KriegerRepresentative.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
J,
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
wp96/SB:L W: ni.00 7/FO I 2/FEF
cc: Laurie Williams, Enginecrin_@ Services Manager
ti;@ncho C.lif,)mii, Water District
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPOR. -jN AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, P.0, BOX 231
SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92AO2
TDD (909) 383-5959
PETE WILSON, Go@ernor
July 17, 1996
08-Riv-79-17.3
Mr. Matthew Fagan
Associate Planner
Temecula Planning Department
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mr. Fagan:
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 and
Planning Application No. PA96-0107
We have reviewed the above-referenced documents and request
consideration of the following comment:
It has been mutually discussed that the ultimate plan
for State Route 79 (SR 79) in the project area is a six
(6) lane, limited-access facility within a 1341 right
of way over a new alignment. The City of Temecula
should develop policies and procedures to preserve the
needed right of way, and maintain and improve the
current facility.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
State of California, Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) and the city of Temecula was finalized on
November 13, 1995. This MOU serves as a guideline
for new development and upgrade or realignment of
SR-79. The following excerpts are from this MOU:
1.Route 79 is planned for up to three lanes in each
direction for through traffic and up to two lanes
in each direction for local circulation.
Realignment may be necessary upon future
development along Route 79.
Mr. Matthew Fagan
July 17, 1996
Page 2
2.The City shall hereafter protect the right-of-way
for said realignment by limiting development
approvals for South Route 79 as follows:
a.Intersections will be spaced at 1/4 mile
increments and limited access driveways at
1/8 mile spacing from Interstate 15 (I-15) to
Anza Road.
Concerning drainage, care should be taken when
developing this project to preserve and perpetuate the
existing drainage pattern of the state highway.
Particular consideration must be given to cumulative
increased storm runoff to insure that a highway
drainage problem is not created.
This project will require an encroachment permit if
there is any work, including work pertaining to:
access, grading, and drainage, within the State highway
right of way; the Department of Transportation would be
a responsible agency and may require certain measures
be provided as a condition of permit issuance.
The developer must obtain an encroachment permit from
the District 8 Permits Office prior to beginning work.
Their address and phone number are listed below:
Encroachment Permits
California Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 231
San Bernardino, CA 92402
(909) 383-4536
If you have any questions, please contact Cecil Karstensen
at (909) 383-S922 or FAX (909) 383-7934.
Sincerely,
ROBERT G. HARVEY, Chief
Office of Riverside County
Transportation Planning and
Public Transportation
IMonday Mov@r 4, 1"6 4:29prn -- Page
NOV-04-96 MON 05:25 PH ENN
ilENTAL HEALTH FAX NO. P.01
County of Riverside
DEPAR OF ENVI[RONMEENTAL HEALTH
DATE:November 4,1996
TO:C@ OF TEMFCULA
ATTN:Matthew Fag@ As@iate P@er
FROM:@lohti C. Silva, P.E., Sr. PubJjc Health Engineer
RE: Paloma Del Sol-Final Conditions
This memo is to respond to the proponents leftet of Septernber 30, 1996 regarding the use of racked
water ffimughout the project. This topic was brought to the attention of your propoiarnt iia our July 16,
1996 memo. (copy attached) In your proponents @nse to our memo, it I the projcrt could
therefore utilize 343,000 gallons per day of reclaimed watew for @gation...... once EMNM implements
its Rancho Noia-Domcstic Water Distribution Sy@.
'Me point that needs to be @ to the proponent is @ "it should be a to
reclaimed water @ughoia tire project, as no@ SpecificaJly, 343,000 gallons per day divided by
350 gallons per household per day eq@ to tile eqifivadent of the water savings of 980 dwelling units
or homes- This fresh - @ng water could then be repurified at the cnt plant and re@ within
the project area. Tbus, the d to @rt water intdthe project area would be e@ted.
Please cWl me at (909) 275-8980 if you have any questions.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT: NOVEMBER 18, 1996
R:\STAFTRn\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 1 8
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1996
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan - Paloma del Sol)
Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment)
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184)
Planning Application No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186)
Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
1.Make a determination of Consistency with a project for
which an Environmental Impact Report was previously
certified;
2.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan
Amendment) based upon the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report;
3.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning
Amendment, Specific Plan) based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval;
4.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- approving Planning
Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 24184) based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval; and
5.ADOPT Resolution No. 96- - approving PA96-0114
(Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186) based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
R:\STA 106PA96.PCI 11/14/96 1
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Cal-Paloma del Sol, LLC c/o Newland Associates, Inc.
REPRESENTATIVES:Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan
Amendment): T&B Planning Consultants, Inc.
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment,
Specific Plan): T&B Planning Consultants, Inc.
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 24184): Keith International, Inc.
Planning Application No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 24186): Keith International, Inc.
PROPOSAL: Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment,
Specific Plan): Amendment to existing Planning Areas 1, 2, 6,
9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36 and 37 of Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
and Specific Plan Ordinance, adding Planning Areas 38 & 39 to
the Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance
Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan
Amendment): Amendment to the City of Temecula General
Plan Land Use Plan and Village Center Overlay Plan to
correspond to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 24184): Decrease the total number of lots from
21 0 to 1 5 6 and increase the size of residential lots from 5,000
square feet to 7,200 square feet
Planning Application No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 24186): Decrease the total number of lots from
461 to 424 and increase the size of residential lots from 4,000
square feet to 6,000 square feet
LOCATION: Generally located to the east of Meadows Parkway (north) and
Margarita Road (south), south of Pauba Road, north of SR79
South, and west of Butterfield Stage Road
EXISTING ZONING: SP (Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol)
SURROUNDING ZONING: North: SP (Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village)
South:SP (Specific Plan No. 227 - Vail Ranch)
East: Low Medium and Medium Density Residential
West:Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del
Sol), Very Low Density Residential, Professional
Office and Highway Tourist Commercial
R:\STA 106PA%.PCI 11/14/96 M 2
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING
LAND USES: North: Single-family residences
South:Vacant
East: Single-family residences and vacant
West: Single-family residences; Arco AM/PM
PROJECT STATISTICS
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zon*ng Amendment, Specofic Plan No. 21M
Summary of Changes from Amendment No. 4 and Amendment No. 5
OLD NUMBER OF
OLD PLANNING DWELLING
OLD LAND USE/NEW AREA/NEW OLD ACREAGE/NEW UNITS/NEW
LAND USE PLANNING AREA ACREAGE NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS
Commercial/ 1/1 31.5/21.3 ----
Commercial
Very High Res./ 2/2 20.0/20.0 320/116
Medium High Res.
Medium High 9/9 44.0/44.0 198/135
Res./Medium Res.
Medium High 14/14 49.0/49.0 269/230
Res./Medium Res.
Medium Res./Medium 28/28 30.0/26.0 135/117
Res.
Medium 28/29A ---- /4.0 ----
Res./Recreation
Area(Park)
Elementary 29/298 10.0/10.0 ----
School/Elementary
School
Commercial/Very 1/38 ---- /8.0 ---- /128
High Res.
ommercial/Very 1/39 ---- /11.0 ---- /176
High Res.
As a result of Amendment No. 5 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, revisions to existing,
approved tentative tract maps will be required. Planning Application No. PA96-0108
(Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184) and Planning Application No. PA96-0114
(Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186) are discussed below.
R:\STA 106PA%.PCI 11/14/% M 3
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 241841
Number of Residential Lots: 136
Number of Open Space Lots: 20
Total Number of Lots: 156
Lot size: 7,200 square feet
Overall Acreage: 52.3 acres
Planning Applocateon No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186)
Number of Residential Lots: 410
Number of Open Space Lots: 14
Total Number of Lots: 424
Lot size: 6,000 square feet
Overall Acreage: 114.1 acres
BACKGROUND
Planning Applications No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan), PA96-0107 (General
Plan Amendment), PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184) and PA96-
0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186) were submitted to the Planning
Department on June 6, 1996. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on
July 11, 1996. All applications were deemed complete on November 4, 1996.
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan) is the fifth amendment
to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Changes to the Planning Areas for Amendment No. 5 are
listed above under Project Statistics. Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan
Amendment) is required because changes to the Specific Plan will necessitate concurrent
changes to the Land Use Plan and Village Center Overlay exhibit within the City's General Plan.
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184) is a
request to decrease the overall number of proposed lots from 21 0 to 1 56. Planning Application
No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186) is a request to decrease the
overall number of proposed lots from 461 to 426.
ANALYSIS
Plannmng Applecatoon No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan)
Sgec*f*c Plan Changes
The project is an amendment to existing Planning Areas 1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 27, 28, 29, 36 and 37
of Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance, adding Planning Areas 38 & 39 to
the Specific Plan and Specific Plan Ordinance. The changes have been reflected in the
documents transmitted to the Planning Commission in the form of redlined items for additions
to the Plan and strikeout items for deletions.
R:@ST 106PA96.PCI 11/14/% k%
4
A summary of changes to the Specific Plan text are listed below:
1Overall project acreage will remain the same. Overall dwelling units will decrease from
5,604 units to 5,584 units.
2.Roadway Cross Section (Figure 5A - Highway 79) has been modified to reflect the
approved Assessment District No. 159 street improvement plans.
3.Roadway Cross Section (Figure 5B) has been modified to reflect General Plan roadway
sections (includes raised, landscaped medians).
4.Planning Areas 1, 6, 36, 37, 38 and 39 contain language in their Planning Standards
pertaining to the Village Center. Figures 15A and 15F include references to Design
Guidelines for the Village Center.
5.Planning Areas 2, 9, 14, 27, 28 and 29A and 29B contain language which reflects their
respective change in density allowed or change in use within these areas. A pedestrian
linkage has been added between Planning Areas 27 and 28.
6.Highway 79 Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) has been decreased from fifty (50) feet
to thirty-eight (38) feet. This is to be consistent with the approved Assessment District
No. 159 street improvement plans. Figure 25 has been modified to reflect the proposed
changes.
7.Village Center Design Guidelines have been added. The following Figures have been
added pertaining to the Village Center:
a.Figure 50A (Village Center Pedestrian Linkages and Gathering Places);
b.Figure 50B (Typical Pedestrian Linage Between Pedestrian and Park Use);
C.Figure 50C (Typical Pedestrian Connection Between Residential and Commercial
Uses); and
d. Figure 50D (Sample Signage).
Asummary of changes to the Specific Plan Ordinance are listed below:
1 .Deletion and addition of Planning Areas to the appropriate Ordinance Section based
upon the changes in density to the Planning Area (i.e., deletion of Planning Area 2 from
Very High Density Residential and addition of it to Medium High Density Residential,
etc.)
2.Deletion and addition of uses for Planning Areas 1, 27 and 36 which will foster a Village
Center.
Villaae Center Overlay
The City's General Plan has been adopted since the last amendment to the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan (Amendment No. 4). Figure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay) in the General Plan
includes conceptual locations for Village Centers within the City of Temecula. One such
Village Center is identified at the southwest corner of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Staff
supplied Village Center criteria from the General Plan, Development Code and Draft Design
Guidelines) to the applicant at the Development Review Committee meeting. The Specific Plan
has been amended to include a Village Center on Planning Areas 1, 6, 36, 37, 38 and 39.
Language has been included to the Specific Plan Planning Standards (for each Planning Area),
Design Guidelines and the Specific Plan Ordinance to foster the design and development of the
Village Center Concept. The Specific Plan addresses mixture of uses, pedestrian oriented
design, building scale and design intensification, parking design, signage and transit provisions.
These are the areas identified in the Community Design Element of the General Plan, the Village
R:NSTAFFRYnlO6PA96.]PCI 11114/96 kib 5
Center Performance Standards contained in the Development Code and the draft Village Center
Design Guidelines.
Planning Apl2locataon No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment)
The proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Plan include the following:
1Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area No. 2 of the
Specific Plan from (H) High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre) to (LM)
Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre).
2.Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area 29A of the
Specific Plan from (LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre)
to (OS) Open Space/Recreation.
3.Amend the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Areas 38 and 39 of
the Specific Plan from (CC) Community Commercial to (H) High Density Residential (1 3-
20 dwelling units per acre).
Changes to F*aure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay)
The proposal is to amend Figure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay) of the General Plan to delete the
area corresponding to Planning Area 2 of the Specific Plan and add the areas corresponding to
Planning Area 6 and Planning Area 37 of the Specific Plan. Planning Area 2 is proposed to be
change from Very High Density Residential to Medium High Density Residential. The Village
Center is more appropriate with higher density development.
Plannina Apgll*catoon No. PA96-0108 frevesed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184)
The proposed changes to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184 include the following:
1 . Decrease the number of residential lots from 198 to 136.
2.Increase the number of open space lots from 12 to 20.
3.Decrease the total number of lots from 210 to 156.
4.Increase the size of lots in phases 1 through Final from 5,000 to 7,200 square feet
(minimum lot size shall remain at 5,000 square feet).
5.Revised street cross sections to incorporate landscape median islands per the City's
General Plan.
Planning Aliplecat*on No. PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186)
The proposed changes to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186 include the following:
1 . Decrease the number of residential lots from 445 to 410.
2.No change in the number of open space lots (1 4 lots).
3.Decrease the total number of lots from 462 to 424.
4.Increase the size of lots in Phase 1 from 4,000 to 6,000 square feet (minimum lot size
shall remain at 4,000 square feet).
5.Revised street cross sections to incorporate landscape median islands per the City's
General Plan.
R:\STA 106PA%.PCI 11/141% kk 6
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Current zoning on the site is Specific Plan. No change to the zoning is requested for this
project. Several amendments are proposed to the General Plan Land Use Plan. These have
been discussed above.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City of Temecula General Plan EIR was certified on November 9, 1993. Environmental
Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the County
Board of Supervisors. It has been eight (8) years since the environmental analysis was
performed for this project. In addition, an Addendum to that EIR was prepared in 1992 for
Amendment No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Based upon this information, it is Staff's
opinion that due to the scope (a decrease in the overall density of the project) of the proposed
General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment, there will be no effect on the previous
analysis. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no
subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one
or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which
will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstance
under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; or,
new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete
becomes available. None of these situations have occurred; therefore, no further environmental
analysis is required. Staff is recommending the Commission make a determination of
consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project consists of a General Plan Amendment, a Specific Plan Amendment and two (2)
revised vesting tentative tract maps. The General Plan Amendment is required to be processed
concurrent with the Specific Plan Amendment due to proposed changes to land use
designations within the Specific Plan. Overall units within the Specific Plan will decrease by
20 units (from 5,604 units to 5,584 units). A Village Center has been created at the southwest
corner of the Specific Plan. Staff feels the applicant has done a good job incorporating
language and Design Guidelines into the Specific Plan which will facilitate develoment of the
Village Center. Both revised vesting tentative maps are proposal to increase minimum lot sizes.
Based upon previous environmental review for the project, a because the project is a proposal
reduce overall project density, Staff is not requiring any additional documentation for the
project.
FINDINGS
Plannina A12plicatoon No. PA96-0106 (Zon*na Amendment, Specific
1 .Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219), as
proposed, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2.Planning Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan No. 219) is
consistent with the City's General Plan, due to the fact that the subject request is in
substantial conformance with the proposed General Plan Land Use Plan amendment and
the Village Center Overlay amendment.
R:\STA,FFRPTNI06PA96.PCI 11/14/96 lilb 7
3.Specific Plan No. 219 for development of Paloma del Sol was incorporated into
Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement between the City of Temecula
and KRDC, Inc. And Meas Homes ('Development Agreement'), the predecessor-in-
interest to Newland Associates, Applicant for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No.
5. The Development Agreement was approved by the City Council of the City of
Temecula and recorded on February 18, 1993 ('Effective Date') in the Official Records
of the Riverside County Recorder.
The applicant and the City have agreed to include certain standards in the Specific Plan
Amendment No. 5 pertaining to the Village Center Design Guidelines and roadway cross-
sections which are now requirements of the City's current General Plan but were not
included as part of the General Plan in effect when the Development Agreement was
recorded. These agreed upon standards are:
A.The Applicant has added Design Guidelines in Section IV of Specific Plan 219
entitled 'D. Village Center Design Guidelines'.
B.The Applicant has amended the 'Arterial Highway' and 'Major Road' cross-
sections on Figures 5A and 5B of Specific Plan 219 to conform to the City's
General Plan 'Arterial Highway' and 'Major Road' cross-sections. The City
further finds that the applicant's acceptance of the City's General Plan "Arterial
Highway' and 'Major Highway' cross-sections is based on certain understandings
and arrangements reached with the City whereby any costs of implementation
will be reimbursed to the Applicant.
C.The Applicant has amended the 'Highway 79" cross-section on Figure 5B of
Specific Plan 219 to increase paved area and to reduce the parkway area in
accordance with current State of California criteria.
4.The City Council finds and determines that the changes to the existing development
approvals for Paloma del Sol proposed in Specific Plan 219, Amendment No. 5, are
deemed to be 'minor' as defined in Section 14.3 of the Development Agreement and do
not require an amendment to the Development Agreement. The City finds and
determines that by accepting the City's new General Plan standards of development, the
Applicant has not waived any of its vested development rights under the Development
Agreement.
5.The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project consists of the
modification to an existing Specific Plan, with an overall reduction in density. Ultimate
development of the site will be consistent and compatible with the existing land use in
the area.
6.The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does
not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact
that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No.
219.
R:\STA 106PA96.PCI 11/14/96 ki 8
7.The changes proposed in the approved Specific Plan are minor and do not increase the
impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as
analyzed in Environmental Impact Report 235. The mitigation measures prepared for
this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
Planning Apol9catoon No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment)
1 .Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment), as proposed, is
compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2.The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project consists of
amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan corresponding to Planning Area No. 2
of the Specific Plan from (H) High Density Residential (1 3-20 dwelling units per acre) to
(LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre), Planning Area 29A
of the Specific Plan from (LM) Low-Medium Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per
acre) to (OS) Open Space/Recreation, Planning Areas 38 and 39 of the Specific Plan
from (CC) Community Commercial to (H) High Density Residential (1 3-20 dwelling units
per acre) and Figure 2-4 (Village Center Overlay) of the General Plan to delete the area
corresponding to Planning Area 2 of the Specific Plan and add the areas corresponding
to Planning Area 6 and Planning Area 37 of the Specific Plan. Ultimate development of
the site will be consistent with the previously approved Specific Plan and adjacent land
uses.
3.The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does
not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact
that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No.
219.
4.The changes proposed in the approved Specific Plan are minor and do not increase the
impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as
analyzed in the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report or Environmental
Impact Report 235 prepared for the Paloma del Sol Project. The mitigation measures
prepared for this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
Planning Application No. PA96-0108 (Revosed-Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184)
1The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is consistent
with the City's General Plan and is physically suitable for the type and density of
development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Low-Medium
Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre), with a target density of 4.5 dwelling units per
acre). The project proposes one hundred thirty-six (136) residential parcels on 52.3
acres for a density of 3.1 units per acre. This is consistent with the General Plan Land
Use designation for the site.
2.The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance
with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping
Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval
have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development will occur
to City Standards.
R:\STAFFRYnlO6PA96.PCI 11/14/96 kib 9
3.The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. The project will take access from DePortola Road,
Meadow Parkway and Leena Way and will not obstruct any easements.
4.Planning Application No. PA96-0108 as proposed, conforms to the logical development
of its proposed site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
Planning Agir)location No. PA96-0114 (Revqsed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186)
1 .The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is consistent
with the City's General Plan and is physically suitable for the type and density of
development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Low-Medium
Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre), with a target density of 4.5 dwelling units per
acre). The project proposes four hundred ten (410) residential parcels on 141.1 acres
for a density of 2.9 units per acre. This is consistent with the General Plan Land Use
designation for the site.
2.The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance
with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping
Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval
have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development will occur
to City Standards.
3.The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. The project will take access from Meadows Parkway
and Leena Way, and will not obstruct any easements.
4.Planning Application No. PA96-0114 as proposed, conforms to the logical development
of its proposed site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
R:@S'rA 106PA%.PM 111141% M 10
Attachments:
1PC Resolution (Planning Application No. PA96-0106 - Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan
No. 219) - Blue Page 12
a.Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 17
2.PC Resolution (Planning Application No. PA96-0107 - General Plan Amendment) - Blue
Page 20
3.PC Resolution (Planning Application No. PA96-0108 - Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 24184) - Blue Page 24
a.Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 28
4.PC Resolution (Planning Application No. PA96-0114 - Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 24186) - Blue Page 34
a.Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 38
5.Initial Study - Blue Page 44
6.Exhibits - Blue Page 53
A.Vicinity Map: Planning Application No. PA96-0106
B.Vicinity Map: Planning Application No. PA96-0108
C.Vicinity Map: Planning Application No. PA96-0114
D.Paloma del Sol Land Use Map (Amendment No. 4)
E.Paloma del Sol Land Use Map (Amendment No. 5)
F.General Plan Land Use Plan Amendment
G.General Plan Land Use Plan Amendment
H.Village Center Overlay Amendment
1. Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24184
J.Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186
7.Specific Plan Text - Blue Page 54
8. Specific Plan Ordinance - Blue Page 55
R:kSTAFFRYnlO6PA96.PCl 11114/96 kib 1 1
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: NOVEMBER 18, 1996
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1115/97 mf 1 9
PLANNING COMMlrRRION
NOVFMBER i8, i996
Bernard Haverly, 1701 S. Vineyard, Suite G, Ontario, architect for the project, stated the date palms are
intended to be 25 to 30 feet high.
Commissioner Webster asked why 5-gaUon shrubs are being used and if vines are planned for the six foot
retaining wall on the northwest comer. Mr. Haverly replied the shrubs were for variation and texture as
the landscaping theme is desert and no vines are planned.
Paul Benevides, 30525 Greenbrook Place, Canyon Lake, owner of Specialty Metals, stated he presently
employs 15 people, but plans to expand within the next five (5) years. His company distributes metals -
copper, brass, nickel and silver -- sells to manufacturers, and also does light assembly. They are locating
in Temecula to enhance their ability to serve the San Diego market.
Bill Dendy, 41975 Winchester Road, Temecula, stated he strongly encourages this type of industry in
Temecula.
Chairman Fahey closed the Public Comment section at 7:12 P.M.
Commissioner Webster suggested eliminating the five (5)-gaHon willow trees, keeping the mix of 15-
gallon and 24" box trees even, and adding vines to cover northwest comer retaining wall.
It was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Slaven to adopt the Negative
Declaration for Planning Application No. PA96-0266; to adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for
Planning Application No. PA96-0266; and to adopt Resolution No. 96-Next recommending approval of
Planning Application PA96-0266 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, modify the landscape plan with a mixture of 15-gaUon
and 24-inch box willow trees, and to close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS None
Chairman Fahey called a recess at 7:15 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 7:25 P.M.
6. Planning Apl2lication No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, S=ific Plan - Palor, lanning
A12plication PA96-0107 (General Plan Amendment); PI ne A1212lication No. PA96-0108 (Revised
ntative Tract M= No- 24184); and Planning Application No. 96-0114 (Revi@ Vesting
ract Map Nc
Associate Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report.
Commissioner Webster asked why a determination of consistency is recommended rather than an
addendum to the EIR as CEQA guidelines do not mention determination of consistency. Mr. Fagan
replied staff determined that due to the decrease in the overall density of the project, no effect on the
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\111896.PC 12/23/96 klb6
PLANNINC, COMMT',R',gM NOVF@MRFR 18, 1"6
previous environmental analysis would occur; therefore an Addendum is not required. City Attorney
Weiner stated an addendum usually addresses new impacts and with no change, it is not necessary to
prepare additional environment documents. CEQA states when an addendum is or is not required and
this project does not qualify as a change for which an addendum is required. Mr. Weiner suggested the
last sentence of Section 3 be modified to read 'The Commission hereby determines that the = ' ject is
consistent with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously cerfified." for each
resolution.
Commissioner Miller asked what changes are proposed for Planning Areas 29A and B, and if the school
district decides not to use 29B as a site and the developer uses it as residential, would an environmental
document be required. Mr. Fagan answered a four (4) acre park is being added in those areas and an
environment document would not be required if Planning Area 29B's usage is changed.
Chairman Fahey complimented staff on their tables and the presentation.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M.
Barry BumeR, 3242 y Street, Suite 100, Santa Ana, representing Newland Associates, stated the
applicant was reducing commercial by ten (10) acres, and adding four (4) acres of park in the north area.
The proposed park on the east side will be u@ as a private recreational facility. The applicant is in
concurrence with the Conditions of Approval and would like to add the following language to Finding
No. 4 of the Specific Plan Resolution. "...standards of development, as set forth in this section, the
Applicant has... "
Commissioner Miller asked about the existing park location and the existing plan for Planning Area 19.
W. Bumell answered the park is currently located in Planning Area 12 and there are no specific design
plans for 19, which is currently designated as a park or recreation area.
Commissioner Webster mentioned on page 3-150 of Specific Amendment No. 5 for Planning Area 36,
Figure 42 is mentioned in the first paragraph and Figure 23B, under Item C3 and he could not find them
in the document. Mr. Bumell stated they are existing figures and are not in this document.
Commissioner Soltysiak questioned the difference between primary and secondary connections as shown
in Figure 58, linkage and gathering places exhibit. Mr. BumeR stated in terms of design, the primary
areas will carry more traffic and are =Uwalkway connections in residential areas. In commercial areas,
they are sidewalks.
Chairman Fahey closed the public comment section at 8:15 P.M.
Commissioner Miller mentioned in the Uses Permitted Section, a golf course is referred to and asked if
one is planned in Paloma del Sol. Mr. Bumell answered the Specific Plan was written in Riverside
County originally and refeffed to Ordinance 348 and when rewritten, uses were not changed. No golf
course is planned.
R:\PLANCOW\MINUTES\1996\111896.PC 12/23/96 klb 7
PLANNING COMMIFSSION NOW@MBER 18, 1996
It was moved by Commissioner Slaven and seconded by Commissioner Webster to make a Determination
of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified; to
adopt Resolution No. 96-Next recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA96-0107 (General
Plan Amendment) as amended; to adopt Resolution No.96-Next recommending approval of Planning
Application No. PA96-0106 (Zoning Amendment, Specific Plan) as amended; to adopt Resolution No.
96-Next recommending approval of Planning Application PA96-0108 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 24184) as amended; and to adopt Resolution No.96-Next approving Planning Application No.
PA96-0114 (Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24186) as amended based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report subject to the attached Conditions of Approval as amended and to
close the public hearing.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak, Webster
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS None
7.Planning A=Iication No.PA96-0157 (DevelMment Plan) and PA96-0158 @ntative Parcel Map) Luc4
ShQpl2inL- Center
Assistant Planner, Craig Ruiz, presented staff report.
Commissioner Webster questioned if the two handicap parldng stars, located in the east side compact car
area, had sufficient length. Mr. Ruiz stated all handicap stalls must be in compliance with the handicap
standard and there is adequate length in that area.
Commissioner Miller questioned configuration of Parcel 4 and why it reaches to Margarita Road and if
the Commission is approving the monument signs shown on the Worldng Site Plan. Mr. Ruiz stated the
applicant will answer those questions.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 8:20 P.M.
David Powell, I Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, representing the applicant Pacific Development Group,
stated they were comfortable with staff's report and the Conditions of Approval. In response to
Commissioner NMer's question, he stated each parcel requires legal frontage on a public street and that
flag lot gives an interior building it's legal access to Margarita Road. On the issue of signs, there will
be one center identification sign on each street, one monument sign for the pad building fronting on Hwy
79; pad building westerly on Margarita Road shall have its own single tenant identification sign. There
will be a comer sign identifying the entire development.
Commissioner Webster suggested aligning the interior driveways so they are more in line with each other.
Mr. Powell replied both north/south directions could be stop signed with the east/west directions free
flow.
R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES\1996\111896.PC 12/23/96 klb8
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFF@%106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 20
CITY OF TEMECULA
'i 7F,
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0106
EXHIBIT A
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
C
o@, Pro
09,
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
30
32
33
29
26
2 0
18
23
22
2 1
16 '4: 24
21
17
1 4
13
ILI-
9
5
31
-Du
2
311@
CASE NO: N/A
EXHIBIT B SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP (AMENDMENT NO. 4)
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
32
33 @gi sc.,@
MEDIUM 10.0 AC. 't
37.0 AC.
issoli.
ia
MEIXUM NGH
32 AC, C.
14'SDDtJ-
21
MEDIUM NGH
36.8 AC
2D2
17
MEDIUM
3,D AC.
325 CXJ.
-k 8
MEDIUM
.-O AC
40D DkJ
ELEAL SCHOOL.
6
VERY "a
36.3 AC.
N8GHBOR SW CXJ.
36
NOGMORWW
COM ERCIAL
2.MS AC.
COMMUNITyw@IGHD RHI c
COMMEACIA
32.3
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0106
EXHIBIT C SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP (AMENDMENT NO. 5)
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
31
MEDIUM
67.0 AC.
214 DU. 298
ELE&L SCHOO
IO.GAC,
26
MEDIUM
30.0 AC.
RE 149 cxi.
23
MEDIUM IOGN
66.0 AC@
MEDIUM FIGH 363 DU.
64.0 AC.
362 DU.
24
GM
1 4
MEDIUM
49.0 AC. 1 3
30 DU. MEDIUM F#GH
32JD AC.
1 2 178 Ot)@
PARK/
MEDIUM
10
"JDAC MEDIUM
135 DU. 78JD AC.
351 DU.
MEDIUMtoGN
35,5 AC.
ISSDTJ.
3
MFL IUM FGH
48.0 AC 4jum
:2@ 255 DU,' LIED
MEDIUM GH 40.0 A C,
20.0 ACH IISDU.
116 DU.
CITY OF TEMECULA
LM
LM
LM
VL
LM
p LM
LM
LM
LM
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PLAN
LM
LM
VL
LM
ow
p
p LM
LM
Is LM
LM
LM
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0107
EXHIBIT D GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
LM
LA LM
LM
VL
0
cc
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PLAN
LM
LM
LM
LM
Ltv
VL
0
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0107
EXHIBIT E GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
ITE
loom!
EXISTING VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY
$&lots.
Feel&
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0107
EXHIBIT F VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY AMENDMENT
CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 28, 1997
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0106)
Included under separate cover
R:\STAFFRn\106PA96.CC2 1/15197 mf 21
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
SPECIFIC PLAN ORDINANCE
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0106)
Included under separate cover
R:\STAFF@\106PA96.CC2 1/15/97 mf 22
ITEI\4 15
APPROV
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICL--klt @U
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM:Gary Thornhilf, Community Development Director
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:General Plan Land Use Map Amendment No. 2 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 1
(PA96-0043)
Prepared by: David Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:It is recommended the City Council:
1 .Make a finding that the Proposed Amendments to the General
Plan are consistent with the impacts included in the previously
approved Final Environmental Impact Report of the City General
Plan for the City and its environs.
2.Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL
PLAN AND AMENDING SOME OF THE STATISTICAL TABLES IN
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
3.Make a finding that the Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Map
are consistent with the impacts included in the previously
approved Negative Declaration for the Development Code and
Zoning Map as well as the Final Environmental Impact Report of
the City General Plan for the City and its environs.
4.Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA
R:\GENPLAN\CLEANUP2.CC1 1121/97 dwh
BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted the City's first General Plan in November 1993. The first General Plan
Land Use Map Amendment and the City Zoning Map were approved in 1995. Since that time
a need to amend the General Plan and Zoning Map have been identified. These items were
presented to the Planning Commission on August 19, 1 996 and tentatively scheduled for the
City Council on September 24,1996. However, because of a legal challenge filed against the
City by the owner of the commercial property at the corner of Margarita and Pauba Roads the
proposed general plan amendment and zone change Number 2 has been separated from the
other properties in the original proposal and is not included in this item.
DISCUSSION
AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN
Since the adoption of the General Plan, a number of minor corrections have been identified to
the Land Use Element map. The Commission is also recommending that two of the tables in
the Land Use Element be changed to reflect a number of amendments to the Land Use Map.
The proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map are described in the following
table. The location maps for each of the proposed changes are included in Attachment No. 7.
G.P. LAND USE DESIGNATION
PROPERTY APN PLANNING
NUMBER OWNER'S NAME COMMISSION'S JUSTIFICATION
EXISTING RECOMMENDATION
1 911-150-039 Open Space/ Low-Medium Density The site was not
Jeffrey Compton Recreation Residential accepted as open space
by the Flood Control
District and is currently
privately owned. The
owner requested that the
property be designated
as Medium Density
Residential.
3 921-300-006 Medium Open Space/ This site is City owned.
City of Temecula Density Recreation A community park is
Residential being built on the site.
Propert@l
This property is located north of the channel for Santa Gertrudis Creek and west of North
General Kearney Road. It was originally shown as Open Space on an adjacent specific plan.
The site was needed by the Flood Control District for channel improvements and was sold to
Mr. Compton in 1994. In 1995, he learned that the property he had purchased was designated
as Open Space on the General Plan and approached staff about making a change.
R:\GENPLAN\CLFANUP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 2
In his August 6, 1996 letter, he is requesting that the property be changed from Open
Space/Recreation to Medium Density Residential. However, after a review of the surrounding
area, the Commission is recommending that the site be designated as Low-Medium Density
Residential to stay compatible with the surrounding area. A copy of Mr. Compton's letters are
included in Attachment No. 6.
Property 3
This parcel is currently owned by the City of Temecula. The Community Services District has
designed a community park for the site. This change is being requested to reflect the actual
future character of the property.
Land Use Table U12dates
There have been a number of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map since its adoption.
These have resulted in the need to update Tables 2-2 and 2-3 of the Land Use Element to
accurately represent citywide land use designations. The final numbers on these Tables will
be adjusted based upon the City Council's final action. Copies of the updated Tables, including
all of the previously discussed Land Use Map changes, are included in Attachment 7. To
eliminate the need to bring future changes to non-policy and non-directive summary tables in
the General Plan before the Commission and Council, the Planning Commission is
recommending that staff be allowed to update these tables automatically whenever Plan
amendments are approved by the City Council.
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING MAP
Since the adoption of the City Zoning Map, several mapping problems have been identified.
These corrections, in addition to the consistency rezoning that will be required for the
previously discussed General Plan Amendments are shown below.
ZONING MAP CATEGORY
ZONING MAP
AMENDMENT PLANNING
NUMBERS APN COMMISSION'S JUSTIFICATION
EXISTING RECOMMENDATION
1 911-150-039 Specific Plan Low-Medium Density GP Amendment 1.
Jeffrey ISP) Residential (LM) Needed to make site
Compton consistent with revised
General Plan Land use
designation.
3 921-300-006 Medium Public Parks and GP Amendment 3. The
City of Density Recreation (PR) site will be a City-owned
Temecula Residential park.
(M)
R:@GFM@\CL CC1 1121197 dwh
ZONING MAP CATEGORY
ZONING MAP
AMENDMENT PLANNING
NUMBERS APN COMMISSION'S JUSTIFICATION
EXISTING RECOMMENDATION
4 954-020-005 Specific Plan Public Institutional These parcels are not
Rancho (SP) (PI) located within the
California adjacent Specific Plans.
Water District They are currently used
and owned by Rancho
5 953-150-038 Specific Plan Public Institutional California Water District.
Rancho (SP) (PI)
California
Water District
6 Not Delete General Plan residential Eliminates possible
Applicable densities from the Legend of the confusion over the
City Zoning Map allowable land use
densities and
standards.
Zonina Map Amendments 1 through 3
The justifications for Zoning Map Amendments 1 and 3 are discussed under the General Plan
Amendment portion of this Staff Report as Properties 1 and 3. If the City Council decides to
not adopt all the Planning Commission's recommendation's, than some adjustments to the
previous table, to maintain consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Map, could be
needed.
Zoninci Mal2 Amendments 4 and 5
These parcels are currently zoned Specific Plan. However, the parcels are not actually regulated
by the adjacent Specific Plans. Both sites are currently owned and used by Rancho California
Water District. To provide appropriate land use regulation for each site, the Planning
Commission is recommending that these sites be zoned as Public Institutional.
Zonina Map Amendment 6
There has been a concern that showing the General Plan land use density ranges on the City
Zoning Map might cause some public confusion or misunderstanding. As a result, the
Commission is recommending that the density range numbers be removed from the map legend.
Removing the General Plan land use density ranges from the Zoning Map will not change the
uses, potential densities, or applicable development standards for any property within the City.
The locations of the sites affected by Zoning Map Amendments 1 through 3 are contained in
Attachment No. 5. Location maps for parcel-related Zoning Map Amendment Numbers 4 and
5 are included in Attachment No. 8.
R:\GENPLAN)CL CCI 1/21/97 dwh 4
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Environmental Study (IES) was prepared for this project. The IES evaluated the
potential impacts on the environment that might occur beyond those that were initially
identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and the Negative
Declaration for the Zoning Map. The Initial Environmental Study identified no additional
significant impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report
prepared for the General Plan that was certified by the City Council on November 9, 1993 and
in the Negative Declaration for the Zoning Map on December 19, 1995. All future development
projects will undergo an appropriate level of review when private and public development
proposals are considered by the City. A copy of the IES is included in Attachment No. 9.
FINDINGS
1 .The proposed amendments to the Land Use Map are consistent with the goals and
policies contained in the various elements of the General Plan.
2.The proposed amendments to the Zoning Map are consistent with the adopted City
General Plan as amended.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
1 . Resolution No. 97- Page 6
2. Ordinance No. 97- Page 14
3.Planning Commission Resolution PC96-23 - Page 18
4.Planning Commission Resolution PC96-24 - Page 19
5.General Plan Amendment Parcel Specific Land Use Request Maps - Page 20
6.Letter from Mr. Jeffrey Compton - Page 21
7.Revised Land Use Element Tables - Page 22
8.Zoning Map Amendment Parcel Specific Land Use Request Maps - Page 23
9. Initial Environmental Study - Page 24
R:\GENPLAN\CLEANUP2.CCI 1/22/97 dwh 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION 97 - _
R:\GENPLAN\CLEANUP2.CC1 1/21/97 dwh 6
Attachment No. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 97-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMEECULA AMEENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL
PLAN AND AMENDING SOME OF THE STATISTICAL TABLES IN
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
WTEREAS, Section 65300 of the Goverm-nent Code requires that cities adopt a comprehensive, long-
term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas which, in the
judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; and
@REAS, On November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the General
Plan.
@REAS, Sections 65350 of the Government Code permits a city to amend the general plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has identified a need to amend the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously amended the adopted General Plan; and
@REAS, the City Council desires to amend tables within the Land Use Element to reflect these
changes to the Land Use Map- and
WHEREAS, on August 19, 1996, the Planing Commission recommended that the Council approve
a number of Amendments to the General Plan; and
@REAS, the City Council has held a didy noticed public hearing on January 28, 1997 to consider
the proposed General Plan Amendment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Environmental Review. The City Council, based upon the information contained in the
Coal Environmental Study, finds that the impacts of the proposed amendments are accurately described and
discussed within the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the General Plan and that the FEIR
accurately reflects the impacts of the amended General Plan on City of Temecula and its surrounding areas.
Section 2. Amendment-, to the General Plan Land Use Map The City Council hereby amends the
General Plan Land Use Designations on the following parcels as specified below:
A.A]PN 911-150-039 from Open Space/Recreafion to Low-Mediwn Density Residential.
B. APN 921-300-006 from Medium Density Residential to Open Space/Recreation.
Section 3. Amendments to Tables. The City Council hereby approves the amendments to some of
the Tables in the land Use Element of the General Plan for the City of Temecula, as set forth on Exhibits "A"
and "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
R:\GEELAWCL CCI 1/21/97 dwh 7
Section 4. Future ChanLyes, The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development
Director to amend non-policy and non-directive summary tables in the General Plan whenever General Plan
Amendments are approved by the City Council.
Section 5. SeverabU4. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Resolution are
severable and if for any reason a court of competent Action shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section
of this Resolution to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this
Resolution.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this -th day of 1997.
Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTEFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 1997 by
the following vote of the Council:
AYES:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, Cit_v Clerk
R:\GENPLAMCLFAKUP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 8
EXMBIT A
LAND USE ELEMIENT TABLE 2-2
R:\GF-NPLAN\CL CCI 1/21/97 dwh 9
EXHIBIT A
Table 2-2
Temecula General Plan
Land Use Plan StatisticW Sumniary
CITY AREA SPHERE of INFLUENCE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AREA
Dwelling Square Feet Target
Units' (in thousands)' Target Dwelling Square Feet DUs/sq_fe Dwelling Square Feet Target
Land Use Designations Acreage Low High Low -High DUs/sq.ft Acreage Units' (in thousands)' Acreage Units' (in thousands)' DUS/,Sq.ft.2
RESIDENTiAL3.
Hillside (O-.1 DU/AC) 264 0 26 26 3,303 0 - 331 330 n/a - -
Very Low (.2 -,4 DU/AC) 3,367 673 1,346 1,010 2,279 456 - 912 683 3,552 711 -1,421 1,065
Low (.5 - 2 DU/AC) 245 123 482 319 1,306 653 - 2,612 1,697 159 80 - 318 - 208
Low Medium 5,325 15,975 31,950 23,963 4,075 12,225 - 18,338 685 2,055 - 4,110 - 3,082
(3 - 6 DU/AC) 24,450 I
Medium (7-12DU/AC) 612 4,284 7,344 5,814 490 4,837 - 4,655 479 3,353 - 5,748 - 4,551
8,292
High (13-20DU/AC) 380 4,940 7,600 6,270 1 2,483 - 3,151 14 1,482 - 2,280 - 1,881
31820
Subtotal 10,193 26,996 48,748 37,402 11,644 20,664 - 28,864 4,989 7,681 -13,877 10,787
40,217 1 1 1
NON-RESIDENTIAL":
Neighborhood Commercial 113 984 1,969 1,231 30 - 261 - 522 392 25 218 - 436 272
(.20 -.40 FAR)
Community Commercial 570 6,207 24,829 7,449 190 - 2,069 - 8,276 5,173 110 1,197 - 4,791 2,@
(.25 - 1.0 FAR)
Highway/Tourist Coml 313 3,409 13,634 4,090 117 - 1,274 - 5,096 3,185 a 87 - 348 218
(.25 - 1.0 FAR)
Service Commercial 378 4,116 24,@ 4,940 20 - 217 - 1,306 762 0 0 - 0 0
(.25 - 1.5 FAR)
Professional Office 487 6,364 21,214 10,607 21 - 274 - 915 457 19 248 - 827 579
(,30 - 1.0 FAR)
Business Park 13,133 -
(. 30 - 1.5 FAR) 1,258 1,644 82,198 21,919 1,005 - 65,6% 39,400 149 1,947 - 9,735 5,841
PubliG/Institutional 696 6,094 21,222 9,095 512 - 4,460 10,036 37 322 - 1,128 725
- . AR) 15,61 ;
Open Space/Recreation 2,377 NA NA NA 2,350 NA NA 560 NA NA
Subtotal 92 28,819 189,766 60,489 4,245 21,688 - 13,877 4,019 - 10,629
i@,, 1 97.392 17,265
I ir, -tits I @F -,, Rgq
R:\(3ENPLAMCL@UP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 10
IRange of dwelling units and square footage is the product of upper and lower threshold of density/intensity range multiplied by the numt>er of acres
2Target densityfintensity is the probable level of development as defined in Table 2-4 of the Land Use Element
Dwelling units rounded down to the whole number.
Non-residential uses, greater than .5 rounded up and.less than .5 rounded down to the nearest whole number.
R:\GFMLAN\Cl@RANUP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 1 1
EXHIBIT B
LAND USE ELEMIENT TABLE 2-3
R:\GEMPLAMCL CCI 1/21/97 dwh 12
EXHIBIT B
Table 2-3
Land Use Plan Population Estimate at Build-out
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Residential CITY AREA SPIEERE of MLUENCE AREA TOTAL
Land Use Tuget Dwetiin Dweft el g STUDY AREA
lin Population (Population)
@gnations Density Acreage I Unitsg I Populaflon Acreage I Units g I Population nits
Hillside 0.1 264 26 75 3,303 330 933 n/a -- - 1,008
Very Low 0.3 3,367 1,010 2,859 2,279 683 1,932 3,552 1,065 3,013 7,804
Low 1.3 245 319 901 1,306 1,697 4,802 159 208 589 6,292
Low Medium 4.5 5,325 23,963 67,814 4,075 18,338 51,897 685 3,082 8,722 128,433
IM.diu. 9 -5 121 5,8141 4901 4,6551 13,174 1 4791 4,551 12,879 42,507
.5
1 High 1 l@6 3801 6,2701 1911 3,1511 8,91711 1141 1,8811 5,323 1 31,9841
Tota4 10,1931 37,4021 105,84761 11,6441 28,8541 81,6575 1 4,9891 10,7971 30,5276 1 218,0271
GRAND TOTAL 224,43i
Notes:
1. F@ of 2.83 persons per household utiliwd. TtLis fa,@ is less than the persons per household by 1990 Census, us it assumes ii vwmcy rwe of 5 percent at build-out.
12.Target Density is the anticipated @ probable density of development for the designwion.
R:\G@LAN\CLEA CC1 1/21/97 dwh 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE 97- _
R:\(3EMPLAN\CL@UP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 14
Attachment No. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the Zoning Map to accurately reflect private
property and to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly noticed public hearing on August
19, 1996, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the City
Zoning Map; and
S, That this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State
law and local ordinances; and,
AS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library,
Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce;
and,
the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on January 28, 1997
to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, The City Council hereby finds that the
Negatlvc Declaration for the Development Code and Zoning Map accurately described and
discussed the environmental impacts of the amended Zoning Map on City of Temecula and its
surrounding areas
Section 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY ZONING MAP The City Council hereby
amends the Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as specified below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 911-150-039, change the Zoning Designation from
Specific Plan (SP) to Low-Medium Density Residential (LM).
R:\(3ENPLAN\CLEANLTP2.CC1 1/21/97 dwh 15
B. For the parcel identified as APN 921-300-006, change the Zoning Designation from
Medium Density Residential (M) to Public Parks and Recreation (PR).
C . For the parcel identified as APN 954-020-005, change the Zoning Designation
from Specific Plan (SP) to Public Institutional (PI).
D . For the parcel identified as APN 953-150-038, change the Zoning Designation
from Specific Plan (SP) to Public Institutional (PI).
E. Remove the General Plan Residential Density Ranges from the Legend of the
Zoning Map.
Section 3. SEVERABILITY, The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 4. NOUCE OF ADOPTION, The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE, This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty
(30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places.
R:\GENPI"CL@NUP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 16
Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of 1997.
Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I Y CERTIIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
) 1997 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
R:\GENPLAN\CLEANUP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 17
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-23
R:NGENPLAMCL@UP2.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 18
PC RESOLUTION NO. 96-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE I'LANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING TIIAT T14E CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A ITESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITI'OF TENIECULA AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF
THE GENERAL I"LAN AND ANIENDING SONIE OF THE STATISTICAL
TABLES IN THE LAND USE ELENIENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN"
WHEREAS, Section 65')OO ot'tlle C;ovei-iiiiieiit Code i-eqLlll-eS that cities adopt a comprehensive.
Ion(,-teriii general plan foi- the physical de\,elopjiieiit Of tile jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas
which, in the jltdgeiiient of the city, beii-st ielitionsliip to its planning. and
WHEREAS, On Noveiliber 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Tei-necula adopted
tile General Plan; -,nice
INIFIEREAS, Sections 65350 of'tlie Govei-iiiiiejit Code permits a city to allielid tile general
plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Cotiiicil has identified a need to aiiieiid the adopted General Plan;
and
WFIEREAS, the City Council likes previously amended the Land Use Plan included in the
adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, tile City (lesires to @iiiieii(I tables within the Land Use Eleiiieiit to reflect these
chances to the Land Use M@il); iii(I
WHEREAS, notice ot'ilic I)i-ol)osc(l Or(iiiiiiiice was posted at City Hall, County Library,
Raiiclio California Branch, the U.S. I-lo-st Ol'i-ice @iiici the TellIeCLIla Valley Cliaiilber of Coiiiinerce;
and,
WFIEREAS, a public lie@iriii-, Was COJI([LiCteci oii A@iitist 19, 1996, at which tliiie interested
zn
persons had an opportunity to testify eitlier'lil Support or opposition.
NOW, TliEREFOItE, THE I'LANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES I-IEI@EIIY IZECONINIEND THAT TFIE COUNCIL APIIIROVE A
RESOLUTION ENTITLEI) "A IZESOLU'FION OF'FIIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ANIENDING ]'HE LANI) USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND
ANIENDING SOME OF I'llEs,rA]'IS'I'ICAL TABLES IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF
THE GENERAL PLAN" THAT IS SUI@SI'ANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED TO
TfIlS RESOLUTION AS EXIIIBI'I'A.
X!@696kll,
PASSED, APIIIZOVED, AND ADOI"I-ED this 19tli day of August, 1996.
-T
Linda Fahey, Clialrilian
I HEREBY CEIZTIFY that the fore(yolii-, Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
C,
Coiiiiiiissioii of the City of Teiiiectila -,it a re-Lilar iiieetlil- thereof, held on the 19tli day of August,
1996 by the following vote of the Coiiiiiiissioii:
AYES: 5 PLANNING CONIMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slave, Soltysiak,
Webster
NOES: 0 PI-ANNIN(I CONINIISSIONERS: Noiie
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMNIISSIONERS: None
Debbie-Ubiioske, Secretary
912(,,96LI1,
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-24
R:\GEMPLAMCL@UP2.CCI 1121/97 dwh 19
I"C RESOLUTION NO. 96-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMNIENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED wAN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE ZONING NIAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA"
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any Such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted -eneral plan of the city; and
L-
WHEREAS, the Plaiiiiljic, Coiiiiiiissloii has held duty noticed public hearin-s on August
C,
19, 1996, and recoi-ni-neiided that the City Council approve the attached ai-nendi-nents to the City
Zonln,c,, Map; and
NNIHEREAS, That this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirei-nents of State
law and local ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library,
Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post OfFice and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce-,
and,
WHEREAS, a public liean'ii- was conducted on ALICIL]ST 19, 1996, at which tli-ne interested
L- LI
persons had an Opportunity to testify either in support or opposition.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE I'LANNING CONIMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES FIEREBY IZECON,INIEND THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN OIZDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING NIAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA"
SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM THAT IS ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS
EXHIBIT A.
PASSED, API"IZOVEI), AND AI)Oll"FED this ]9tli day of August, 1996.
Litida)Falley, Cliai:-rjiian
R:\S'I'A]:I:IZPT,043PA96,IZI--2 g@26/1)6kil,
m
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Comiiiission of the City of TeilieCLila at a reolitar iiieetliio thereof, held on the 19th day of August,
1996 by the following vote of the Coiiiiiiissioli:
AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Miller, Slave, Soltvsiak,
Webster
NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Noile
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONEIZS: Noiie
Debbie Obtioske, Secretary
R:'@STAI--FRP'nO431'A96.RE2 8/26@96 all,
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT LOCATION MAPS
R:\GENPLAN\CL@UP2.CCI 1/21@ dwh 20
CITY OF TEMECULA
p
p
m
m
LU LM
t-M
@LJ@j
01
z
N(
VL
CASE NO. - PA96-0043
PROPERTY -1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE - JANUARY 28,1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
LM VL
BP
M.
LM
H
cc
H
p
cc
H P.
CASE NO. - PA96-0043
PROPERTY - 3 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENT
ITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE - JANUARY 28, 1997
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
LETTER FROM MR. JEFFREY COMPTON
R:\G@L"CL@UP2.CC1 1/21197 dwh 21
JEFFREY COMPTON
Dave Hogan 8-6-96
Land Planner
City of Temecula RE: A.P.N. 911-150-039-9
Dear Mr. Hogan
First let me say, I really appreciate the city of Temecula taking the initiative
in making changes to the general plan that make sense for all concerned.
As you know, I have owned the property on North General Kerney for
years with the "open space" zoning. This of course left no room to develop
the property. The change to the general plan which will be proposed at the
August 19th meeting, will now allow the property to be utilized.
As I understand it, the zoning proposed at this meeting will be low to medium
density. This would allow for the construction of one single family residence.
I would like to suggest that a medium density zoning be approved. My
reason for this is, the lot is over 12,000 square feet. The normal lot for a
single family home 'in the area is 6,000 square feet. I'm suggesting that my
parcel is to large for one home but would be appropriate for a duplex or
two separate homes. Also, this lot is next to a flood control channel which
a home owner nu'ght not care for but a renter might accept. There is also a
street on the north side of the property which acts as a buffer to the homes
that will be built to the north.
As I have said above, I appreciate the city taking charge and changing a
zoning that makes no sense to anyone. I only make this suggestion as
something to consider but will gladly accept what the planning department
feels is appropriate.
P.O. Box 11 52, Temecula, CA 92593 - 909-676-58 10 (Fax) 909-699-0648
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
REVISED LAND USE ELEMENT TABLES
R:\GEMPLAN\CLEANUP2.CC1 1/21/97 dwh 22
EXHIBIT A
Table 2-2
'reiiiectila Geiieral Plaii
Laiici Use Piin Statistical Stitiini,-iry
CITY AREA SPHERE of INFLUENCE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AREA
Dwelling Square Fee@ Target
Units' (in thousands) Target ng Square Fee( DUsisq.ft Dwelli et Target
Land Use Desi ons a e Low - Hiqh @ Lo h s ft' e uw
Un@iting Square Fe
A I (in thou@d -1 ft!
RESIDENTIAL3
Hillside (O-.1 DU/AC) 264 0 26 26 3,303 0 - 331 330 n/a
Very Low ( 2 -.4 DU/AC) 3,367 673 1,346 1,010 2,279 456 - 912 683 3,552 711 .1,421 1,065
Low ( 5 - 2 DU/AC) 245 123 482 319 1,306 653 - 2.612 1,697 159 80 - 318 208
Low Medium 531.950 23,963 4,075 12,225 -
(3 - 6 DU/AC) 5,325 15,97 24,450 18,338 685 2,055 - 4,110 3,082
Mediuri) (7 - 12 DU/AC) 612 4,284 7,344 5,814 490 4,837 - 4,655 479 3,353 - 5,748 4,551
8,292 1 1
High (13 - 20 DU/AC) 0 4,940 7,600 6,270 191 2,483 - 3,151 114 1,482 - 2,280 1,881
1 3,820 11
Subtotal 10,193 25,995 48,748 37,402 654 - 28,854 4,989 7,681 - 13,877 10,787
217
NON-RESIDENTIAL 4
Neighborhood Co mercial 113 934 1,969 1,231 30 261 522 392 25 218 - 436 272
-(20- 40 FAR) m
Community Commercial 570 6,207 24,829 7,449 190 2,069 - 8,276 5,173 110 1,197 - 4,791 2,994
(.25 - 1.0 FAR) 1
Highway[Tourist Comm 313 3,409 13,634 4,090 117 1,274 - 5,096 3,185 8 87 - 348 218
(.25 - 1.0 FAR) 1
Service Commercial 378 4,116 24,699 4,940 20 217 - 1.306 762 0 0 - 0 0
-(.25 - 1.5 FAR)
Proffessional Office 487 6,364 21,214 10,607 21 274 - 915 457 19 248 - 827 579
(.30 - 1,0 FAR)
Business Park 1,258 1,@ 82,198 21,919 1,005 13.133 - 39,400 149 1,947 - 9,735 5,841
(.30 - 1.5 FAR) - 65,666
Public/Institutional 696 6,094 21,222 9,095 512 4,460 - 10,036 37 322 - 1,128 725
(@ 0 - @70 FAR) 15,611
open Space/Recreation 2,377 NA NA NA 2,350 NA NA 560 NA NA
Subtotal 6,192 0 4,245 21,6811. 908 7,681 4 9 - 10,629
28,818 189,765 6 489 97,392 59,405 13,877 1 "
II- -- I i,266
GRAND TOTAL 1 16,386 1 5,889 5,8
FRangeofdwelling units and square footage is the productofupper and lowerthreshold ofdensitylinlensity range multiplied bythe numberofacres
Target density/intensity is the probable level of de elopment as defined in Table 2-4 of the Land Use Element
Dwelling units rounded down to the whole number
Non-residential uses, greater than 5 rounded up and less than 5 rounded down to the nearest w@iole number.
EXHIBIT B
Table 2-3
Laiid Use Plaii Poptilatioii Estiniate at Btiild-out
ENVIRONNIENTAL STUDY
CITY AREA SilliERE of INFLURNCE AREA
Residen(ial TOTAL
Land Use T;ii-get STUDY AREA
Desigiiatioins Detisitv Acreage Acr( Ai __(Population) -
.Hillside 0.1 264 26 75 3,303 330 9331 n/a - -- 1,008
.Very Low 0.3 3,367 1,010 2,859 2,279 683 1,932 3,552 1,065 3,013 7,804
Low 1.3 245 319 901 1,306 1,697 4,802 159 208 589 6,292
.Low Nlediuin 4.5 5,325 23,963 67,814 4,075 18,338 51,897 685 3,082 8,722 128,433
Mediuin 1 9.5 5,8141 16,4,541 4901 4,655 13,174 4,551 12,879 42,5@7
ihi@ii I 16.51 6,2701 17,744]1 191[ 3,1511 8,917 I 1 84
1 1 10.1931 37.44)21 105.846 11.6441 28,854 1 4.9891 10,787 218.0271
1 GRANI),rOTAI, 224,43!
N-
IF--,,, f 2-83 persons per household utilized. This faior is less than the persons per household reported by 1990 Census, as it assumes it veancy rate of 5 peroent at build-mi.
T@
2F sity is (he anticipated or probable density or dcvcl@ipment for the designation.
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT LOCATION MAPS
R:I.G@L"CLEANM.CCI 1/21/97 dwh 23
CITY OF TEMECULA
c
CALIFC
s
Pi
;k'D
CASE NO. - PA96-0043
LOCATION NUMBER 4 ZONING MAP CHANGE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE -JANUARY 28, 1997
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. PA96-0043
LOCATION NUMBER - 5
ip, BoAll
ZONING MAP CHANG
,,___CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE - JANUARY 28,1997
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
R:\GENP@CL CCI 1/21/97 dwh 24
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
This Initial Environmental Study has been prepared to evaluate the impacts
of the following General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map changes in the
context of the Certified Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan.
I . Project Title: Planning Application No. 96-0043 (General Plan Land
Use Map Amendment No. 2, Zoning Map Amendment
No. 1, and updating of some of the Land Use Element
tables)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Temecula
43714 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
3.Contact Person and Phone Number: Stephen Brown (909) 694-6400
4.Project Location: Throughout the City of Temecula, as described below:
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT NO. 2
NO. APN PROJECT LOCATION
1 1
911-150-039 North General Kearney Road, south of Sierra Madre
945-110-001 South west corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
2
945-110-002 South west corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
45-110-003 South west corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
3 921-300-006 Margarita Road east of Stonewood Road
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 1
NO. APN PROJECT LOCATION
1 911-150-039 North General Kearney Road, south of Sierra Madre
945-110-001 Southwest corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
2
945-110-002 Southwest corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
945-110-003 Southwest corner of Pauba Road and Margarita Road
3 921-300-006 Margarita Road east of Stonewood Road
R:\STAFFRP'n43PA96.EA 816/96 sib
4 954-020-005 Margarita Road north of Rancho Vista Road
5 953-150-038 North west corner of Rancho California and Butterfield Stage Roads
6 Not applicable Delete the General Plan residential land use densities from the
I Legend of the City Zoning Map
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Temecula
43714 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
6.Current General Plan Designation:
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT NO 2
NO. APN EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
1 911-150-039 Open Space
945-1 10-001 Neighborhood Commercial
2
945-110-002 Neighborhood Commercial
945-110-003 Neighborhood Commercial
3 921-300-006 Medium Density Residential
7.Current Zoning:
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO 1
NO. APN -F EXISTING ZONING
1 911-150-039 Specific Plan (SP)
945-110-001 Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
2
945-110-002 Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
945-110-003 Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
3 921-300-006 Medium Density Residential (M)
4 954-020-005 Specific Plan (SP)
5 953-150-038 Specific Plan (SP)
Not applicable Not applicable
8.Description of Project: To make a number of amendments to the General
Plan Land Use and Zoning District maps as shown in the following two
R:\STAFFRPT\43PA96.EA 8/6/96 sib
tables. These changes represent adjustments in primarily urban land uses.
This Initial Environmental Study is evaluating the overall impacts of these
potential land use changes in context of the overall General Plan and
associated Environmental Impact Report. Any specific development
proposals for any future development activities will receive detailed
environmental review at the appropriate time.
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT NO 2
LAND USE DESIGNATION
NO. APN EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS
1 911-150-039 Open Space Low Medium Density The site is a developable
Residential lot that is owned by a
private party.
945-110-001 Neighborhood Low Density The City Council has
2 Commercial Residential expressed a concern that
945-110-002 Neighborhood Low Density commercial designation on
this site may be
Commercial Residential inappropriate.
945-110-003 Neighborhood Low Density
Commercial Residential
3 921-300-006 Medium Density Open Space/ This site is City owned and
Residential Recreation is being designed as a
park.
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO 1
LAND USE DESIGNATION
NO. APN EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS
1 911-1 50-039 Specific Plan (SP) Low-Medium Density Needed to make
Residential (LM) proposed property
consistent with revised
GP designation.
945-110-001 Neighborhood Low Density Needed to make
2 Commercial (NC) Residential (Ll) proposed property
consistent with revised
GP designation.
945-110-002 Neighborhood Low Density Needed to make
Commercial (NC) Residential (Ll proposed property
consistent with revised
GP designation.
R:\STAFFRP'n43PA96.FA 8/6196 sib
945-110-003 Neighborhood Low Density Needed to make
Commercial (NC) Residential (Ll) proposed property
consistent with revised
GP designation.
3 921-300-006 Medium Density Public Parks and City owned park site.
Residential (Ml Recreation (PR)
4 954-020-005 Specific Plan (SP) Public Institutional (PI) Mapping errors, not
I - part of the adjacent
5 953-150-038 Specific P Public Institutional (PI) Specific Plan.
6 Not applicable Delete the General Plan residential land use The General Plan
densities from the Legend of the City Zoning density information is
Map unnecessary and could
cause some confusion.
9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT NO 2
NO. APN LAND USE SURROUNDINGS AND SETTING
1 911-1 50-039 Project site is currently vacant with a few eucalyptus trees.
Surrounding uses are single family residential, flood control
channel, City park and vacant lands.
945-110-001 Project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
2 single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park.
945-110-002 Project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park
945-110-003 Project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park
3 921-300-006 Project site is vacant with a pronounced wash that traveresses the
site. The surrounding land uses are apartments, single family
residential, and a school.
R:NSTAFFRPTN43PA96.EA 816196 @lb
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO 1
NO. APN LAND USE SURROUNDING AND SETTINGS
911-
1 150-039 Project site is currently vacant with a few eucalyptus trees.
Surrounding uses are single family residential, flood control
channel, City park and vacant lands.
2 945-110-001 Project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park.
945-110-002 Project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park.
945-110-003 Pro'ect site Is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses consist of
i
single family residential, Temecula Valley High School and the City
of Temecula sports park.
3 921-300-006 Pro'ect site is vacant with a pronounced wash that traveresses the
site. The surrounding land uses are apartments, single family
residential, and a school.
4 954-020-005 The site is currently utilized by the Rancho California Water District
for a water tank and by Pacific Bell as a wireless communications
facility. The surrounding land uses are primarily residential. The
I First Methodist Church is located to the south.
5 953-150-038 A pump station currently occupies the site. Surrounding land uses
are residential and the Heart and Thornton wineries.
6 Not Applicable Not Applicable
1 0. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None.
R:\STAFFRM43PA96.EA 8/6/96 sib
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.
I Land Use and Planning Hazards
I Population and Housing Noise
I Geologic Problems Public Services
I Water Utilities and Service Systems
I Air Quality Aesthetics
I Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources
I Biological Resources Recreation
f I Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[XII find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on
the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added
to the project. A 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 significant effect(s) 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
R:\STAFFRM43PA96.EA 8/6196 sib
remain to be addressed.
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 all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in a earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature Date
Printed Name For
R:\STAFFRP'T\43PA96.EA 8/6196,iib
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially i
@Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant:@ Mitigation Significant: No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact. Incorporated Impact Impact
1.LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with general plan designation or x
zoning? (1, F2-1, p. 2-17)
b. Conflict with applicable environmental x
plans or policies adopted by agencies with
jurisdiction over the project?
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in x
the vicinity? (1, F2-1, p. 2-17)
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations x
(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or
impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(1, F5-4, p. 5-17)
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement x
of an established community (including
low-income or minority community)?
2.POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or x
local population projections?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area x
either directly or indirectly (e.g. through
project in an undeveloped area or
extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially x
affordable housing? (1, F2-1, p. 2-17)
3.GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rupture? x
b. Seismic ground shaking? x
c. Seismic ground failure, including x
liquefaction?
d. Seiche, tsunamis or volcanic hazard? x
R:%STAFFRFn43PA96.EA 8/3196 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitilgation Significant No
issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact
e. Landslides or mudflows? x
f. Erosion, changes in topography or x
unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill? (
g. Subsidence of the land? x
h. Expansive soils? ( ) x
1. Unique geologic or physical features? x
4.WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage x
patterns, or the rate and mount of surface
runoff? (
b. Exposure of people or property to water x
related hazards such as flooding? (l., F7-
3, p. 7-1 0 and 1, F7-4, p. 7-1 2)
c. Discharge into surface waters or other x
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)? ( )
d. Changes in the amount of surface water x
in any water body?
e.Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements? ( )
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, x
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations or through
substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of x
groundwater? ( )
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? x
R:\STAFFRPT%43PA96.EA 8/3196 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less@Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact
Substantial reduction in the amount of x
groundwater otherwise available for
public water supplies? ( ) I - I
5.AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or x
contribute to an existing or projected air
quality violation? ( )
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? x
c. Alter air movement, moisture or x
temperature, or cause any change in
climate?
d. Create objectionable odors? x
6.TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic x
congestion? ( )
b. Hazards to safety from design features x
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersection or incompatible uses (e.g.
farm equipment)? ( )
c. Inadequate emergency access or access x
to nearby uses? ( )
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or x
off-site? (
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or x
bicyclists? (
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting x
alternative transportation (e.g. bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( )
g.Raii, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
R:\STAFFRKn43PA96.FA 813/96 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless : Less Than
.Significant Mitigation Significant No
issues and Supporting Information Sources lrno@ Incorporated impact Impact
7.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or x
their habitats (including but not limited to
plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)?
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage x
trees) ?
c . Locally designated natural communities x
(e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and x
vernal pool)? ( ) I
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? x
8.ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation x
plans? ( )
b. Use non-renevval resources in a wasteful x
and inefficient manner? (
c. Result in the loss of availability of a x
known mineral resource that would be of
future value to the region and the
residents of the State? ( ) 1
9.HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release x
of hazardous substances (including, but
not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemical or
radiation)? ( )
b. Possible interference with an emergency x
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or x
potential health hazard?
R:\STAFFRFn43PA96.FA 8/3/96 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of x
potential health hazards? ( )
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with x
flammable brush, grass, or trees?
10.NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) x
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? x
ii.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:
a. Fire protection? x
b. Police protection? x
c. Schools? ( ) x
d. Maintenance of public facilities, including x
roads? ( )
e. Other governmental services? x
1 2. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems
or supplies, or substantial alterations
to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? x
b. Communications systems? x
C. Local or regional water treatment or x
distribution facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? x
e. Storm water drainage? x
f. Solid waste disposal? x
g. Local or regional water supplies? x@
R:\STAFFRPT'\43PA96-F-A 8/3196 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless, Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
13.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? x
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic x
effect? ( )
c. Create light or glare? x
14.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources? x
(2, F55, p.280)
b. Disturb archaeological resources? x
(2, F 5 6, p. 2 8 3)
c . Affect historical resources? (2, p. 281 x
d . Have the potential to cause a physical x
change which would affect unique ethnic
cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses x
within the potential impact area?
15.RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or x
regional parks or other recreational
facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? x
R:\STAFFRP-R43PA96.E.A 913/96 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation. Significant No
issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
16.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to x
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number of
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 the potential to x
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental goals?
c. Does the project have impacts that area x
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental x
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
17. 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 1 5063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
R:\STAFFRFM43PA96.EA 8/3/96 sib
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a.Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are
available for review. The environmental documentation and studies used to
prepare the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports used to approve
the City General Plan.
b.Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check
list 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. This Initial
Environmental Study has been prepared to evaluate the impacts of the
previously described General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map changes. The
impacts of these changes have been compared to the various impacts
associated with the original City General Plan that was adopted in 1993.
Based upon this evaluation it has been determined that these General Plan
and Zoning Map changes will have no new impacts on the environment that
were not previously identified in the Final EIR for the General Plan. In
addition, any and all appropriate mitigation measures identified in the
mitigation monitoring program for the General Plan EIR will be applied to
these properties when development occurs.
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. Any and all appropriate
mitigation measures identified in the mitigation monitoring program for the
General Plan EIR will be applied to these properties as -specific development
occurs.
SOURCE LIST
I - City of Temecula General Plan
- City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
R:\STAFFRP'M43PA96.F-A 8/3/96 sib
DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (BEYOND THOSE IDENTIFIED
IN THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN)
Land ljse and Planninc,
l.allThe project will not result in any conflicts with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with Jurisdiction over the project. The project proposes
to amend the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps. The corrections to the zoning
map are needed to make the parcels consistent with the revised General Plan
designation. The amendments to the land use map recognize the existing land uses or
correct inappropriate designations to private property. No impacts beyond those
identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan (FEIR) are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Poi2Lilation and Housinc.,
allThe project will not cui-nulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections or induce additional growth. The project proposes to recognize the
existing land use patterns and corrects mapping errors. The project will not be a
significant contributor to population growth which will cumulatively exceed official
re-ional or local population projections. No impacts beyond those identified in the
FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
Cieolo.-ic Problems
3. all.The project will not have a significant impact on people involvin- fault rupture,
seismic around shaking, selsi-nic ground failure, expansive soils, liquefaction,
subsidence, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or affect unique -eologic or physical
features. No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result
of this project.
Water
4. all.The project will not result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate
and amount of surface ruiioff, discharges into surface waters, alter the amount or
quality of surface or ground waters quality. No impacts beyond those identified in
the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
Air Quality
5. allThe project will not violate any air quality standards or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, create
objectional odors, or alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any
change in climate. No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as
a result of this project.
R:@TAFFRP'F\43PA96.F-A 8/3/96 sib
Tran si2orta ti nnIC ircul ation
6.allThe project will not result in an increase in vehicle trips, affect rail, waterborne or air
traffic, result in hazards to safety from desi-n features, affect emergency access or
access to nearby uses, or create hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists since
the project does not propose any construction. No impacts beyond those identified in
the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
Biological Resources
7. allThe project will not result in an impact to any endangered, threatened or rare species
or their habitats, result in impacts to locally designated natural communities, or affect
wildlife dispersal or migration corridors beyond those impacts identified in the FEIR.
No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Ener,-,y and Mineral Resources
8.allThe project will not ii-npact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans,
cause the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner, or
.result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future
value to the reclon and the residents of the State. No impacts beyond those
identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
Hazards
9. allThe pr 'ect will not result in a risk of explosion, the release of any hazardous
Oi
substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions, will not interfere with an
emergency response or evaluation plans, create a health hazard, expose people to
existing sources of potential health hazards, or increase to fire hazard in an area with
flammable brush, -rass, or trees. No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR
are anticipated as a result of this project..
10.allThe proposal will not result in increases to existing noise levels or the exposure of
people to severe noise levels and vibrations. No impacts beyond those identified in
the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
PublicSe@@
I 1. allThe project will not cause an increases in the demands for any public service. In
addition, the ability of the Community Services District to build a park on the
Mar-arita Road is not effected by the proposed amendment to the General Plan and
m
Land Use Maps. No ii-npacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a
R:\STAFFRP'n43PA96-EA 8/3196 sib
result of this project.
Utilities and Service Systems
12. allThe project will not result in a need for any new public utilities or systems. No
impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetici
13.allThe project will not affect anv scenic vistas or highway, or cause additional li-ht and
glare beyond the levels addressed in the General Plan EIR. No impacts beyond
those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project
Cultural Resources
14. allThe project will not have a significant impact to paleontological resources, unique
ethnic cultural values, or restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the project
areas. No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of
this project.
Recreation
15. all.The project will not have an impact or increase in demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant
numbers of people to relocate to the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in
impacts or in an increase in dei-nand for neighborhood. No impacts beyond those
identified in the FEIR are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRM43PA96.EA 8/3/96 sib 18
ITEN4 16
7
A
CITY ATTORNE
DIRECTOR OF I
CITY MANAGE
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council/City Manager
FROM:Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Development Code Amendment Number 2
Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE CHANGES TO TABLE 17.08(a) OF
THE DEVELOPMENT CODE"
BACKGROUND
The proposed changes to the Land Use Matrix contained in this Agenda Report are the second
part of the first amendments to the City Development Code. The City Council considered the
first part of these Development Code amendments at their November 12, 1996 meeting. Most
of these previous Development Code amendments represented relatively minor corrections and
additions.
In the agenda report presented to the Council on November 12, 1996, it was identified that
additional changes to the land use matrix were still being considered by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission has completed its deliberations and is recommending
a number of changes to restrict new private schools and day care centers in the City's Business
Park and Light Industrial zones.
DISCUSSION
The remaining amendments to the land use matrix concern the issue of allowing private schools
and day care centers in the City's industrial areas. Staff is concerned that putting schools, with
large numbers of young children, in the middle of industrial areas could result in a significant
risk in the event of an industrial accident, hazardous material release, fire or explosion. In the
interest of protecting the public health, safety and welfare, staff is recommending the following
changes to Table 1 7.08(a).
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 113/97 dwh
1 Add the following land use to the Permitted Use Matrix:
NC cc HT SC PO BP LI
Schools, Private c p p c p
(Kindergarten through Grade 12) 1 j
2.The second change is to modify the existing Religious Institution category to
differentiate between religious institutions with day cares and/or schools to be
consistent with the other proposed changes to the Development Code. The specific
changes are as follows:
NC cc HT SC PO BP LI
Religious Institution, without a c c c c c c c
daycare or private school
Religious Institution, with a private c c c c c c
SC ool
Religious Institution, with a daycare c c c c c c
3.The third change is to add Day Care Centers in the Business Park Zone as a conditionally
permitted use as shown below:
NC cc HT SC PO BP LI
Day Care Centers c p p c p c -
If the Council makes the proposed changes to the Development Code, some of the current
private schools or daycare centers that currently legally operate in the City's Light Industrial and
Business Park zones will become non-conforming uses. A non-conforming use is a business
that was legally established, but which is now not permitted because of changes to the City's
Development Code. Non-conforming uses are allowed to remain in place and in operation, but
if the use is discontinued for one year or if the facility is destroyed, they may not be re-
established. In addition, non-conforming uses may not expand beyond their current area of use.
The Commission's Resolution recommending approval of the proposed changes is included in
Attachment No. 2.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed amendments do not have the potential to cause a significant impact on the
environment and are consistent with the impacts included in the previous Negative Declaration
for the Development Code and Zoning Map as well as the Final Environmental Impact Report
of the City General Plan for the City and its environs. Therefore, the Planning Manager has
determined that the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to
Section 1 5061 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 2
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed cleanup amendment to the Development Code is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Attachments:
1 . Ordinance No. 97 Page
2. PC Resolution No. 96- Page
3.September 30, 1996 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 3
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 113/97 dwh 4
ATTACHMIENT NO. I
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE
CHANGES TO TABLE 17.08(a) OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings, The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the
following findings:
A. That Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plan as may be in effect in any such city; and
B. That there is a need to amend the Development Code to ensure its clarity and
completeness; and
C. That this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law
and local ordinances.
Section 2. Table 17.08(a) of the Development Code is hereby amended as follows:
A.Add the following land use description to the land use matrix:
NC CC HT SC PO BP Li
Schools, Private
(Kindergarten through Grade 12) -P
B.Replace the current line for Religious Institution with the following:
NC CC HT SC PO BP LI
Religious Institution, without a c c c c c c c
daycare or private school
Religious Institution, with a c c c c c c
private school
Religious Institution, with a c c c c c c
daycare
R:\STAFFRP@DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 5
C.Amend the line for Day Care Centers to read as follows:
NC cc HT SC PO BP LI
Day Care Centers c p p c p c -
Section 3. Environmental Determination The City Council hereby determines
that these amendments to the Development Code do not have the potential to cause a
significant impact on the environment and are consistent with the impacts included in the
previous Negative Declaration for the Development Code and Zoning Map as well as the Final
Environmental Impact Report of the City General Plan for the City and its environs; and are
exempt from California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
Section 4. Severability The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or Section of this ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this ordinance.
Section 5. Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30)
days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City
Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this
Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption
of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish
a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and
against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this -th day of 1997.
Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. 97- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the - day of 1997, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 6
passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the _ day of
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS
June S. Greek, City Clerk
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. PC 96-31
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 8
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 96-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE TYPOGRAPHIC AND
OTHER MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE"
WHEREAS, On November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, On January 25, 1995, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
City's Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City has identified a need to amend the adopted Development Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library,
Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce;
and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on September 30, 1996, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCH, APPROVE AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMLECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
MAKE TYPOGRAPHIC AND OTHER MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT
CODE" THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED TO THIS
RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT A.
R:@STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 9
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 30th day of September, 1996.
Linda Fahey, Chairman
I HEREBY CERTEFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 30th day of
September, 1996 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 1 0
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.CC2 1/3/97 dwh 1 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM:Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
DATE:November 18, 1996
SUBJECT: Educational Institutions and Day Care Facilities in Industrial Areas
Prepared By: David W. Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT PC Resolution No. 96- entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING
CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
MINOR CHANGES TO THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL LAND USE
MATRIX"
BACKGROUND
A number of Development Code amendments were presented to the Planning Commission at
its September 30, 1996 meeting. The Commission was able to reach a decision to recommend
most of the proposed textual amendments to the Development Code to the City Council. The
remaining amendments, which are changes to the land use matrix, were continued by the
Commission to allow staff an opportunity to send an informational letter to all private schools
and day care centers in the Business Park and Light Industrial zones informing them that this
issue will be considered by the Commission.
DISCUSSION
The remaining amendments to the land use matrix concern the issue of allowing private schools
and day care centers in the City's industrial areas. Staff is concerned that putting schools, with
large numbers of young children, in the middle of industrial areas could result in a significant
risk in the event of an industrial accident, hazardous material release, fire or explosion. In the
interest of protecting the public health, safety and welfare, staff is recommending the following
changes to Table 17.08(a).
1.The first change is to add the following line:
NC cc HT SC PO BP LI
Private chools (Kindergarten p p c p c
through Grade 12)
R:kSTAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.PC2 1/9/97 klb
2.The second change is the modification of an existing category, religious institutions.
The specific changes are as follows:
NC cc HT SC PO BP Li
Religious Institution, without a c c c c c c c
daycare or private school
Religious Institution, with a private c c c c c c
SC 00
c c c c c
Religious Institution, with a daycare 'I
If the Planning Commission makes the proposed changes to the Development Code, some of
the current private schools or daycare centers that legally operate in the City's Light Industrial
and Business Park Zones will become non-conforming uses. A non-conforming use is a
business that was legally established, but which is now an unpermittable use because of
changes to the City's Development Code. Non-conforming uses are allowed to remain in place
and in operation, but if the use is discontinued for one year or if the facility is destroyed, they
may not be re-established. In addition, non-conforming uses may not expand beyond their
current area of use.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed amendments do not have the potential to cause a significant impact on the
environment and are consistent with the impacts included in the previous Negative Declaration
for the Development Code and Zoning Map as well as the Final Environmental Impact Report
of the City General Plan for the City and its environs. Therefore, the Planning Manager has
determined that the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to
Section 1 5061 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed cleanup amendment to the Development Code is consistent with the adopted
General Plan.
FINDINGS
1 .The proposed amendments are necessary to protect the public health, safety and
welfare.
2.The proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan.
Attachments:
1 . PC Resolution No. 96- - Blue Page 3
R:\STAFFRPT\DCAMENDl.PC2 1/9/97 kib
ITEI\4 17
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY_
DIR. OF FINANTE,
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Manager/City Council
FROM:Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director
DATE:January 28, 1 997
SUBJECT:Review and Approval of the 23rd Year Community Development Block
Grant Applications for FY 1 997-98
PREPARED BY: Allie Kuhns, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funding recommendations submitted by the Finance Committee, and provide final
recommendations to be forwarded to the Riverside County Economic Development Agency
(EDA) for consideration.
DISCUSSION: The CDBG program is a federal grant program administered by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through local governments. The
objectives of this program are to develop adequate housing, a suitable living environment, and
to increase economic development in the community. In order for a project to be considered
for funding, it must meet one of the following national goals:
1 . Low/moderate income persons primarily benefit from the activity; or,
2.The activity aids in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or,
3. The activity meets an emergent community development need.
A total of eleven (1 1) qualified applications were submitted to the City for consideration. The
applications are summarized in priority order in Attachment A.
Preliminary estimates from the EDA allocate approximately $236,000 for non-public service
projects, and approximately $49,000 for public service projects. The City received two (2) non-
public service applications requesting funds in the amount of $236,000, and nine (9) public
service project applications totaling $96,400. A prioritized breakdown of all projects, requested
funding, and Finance Committee recommendations is summarized in Attachment B.
The Committee recommendations were based on the assumption that the entire amount of
$49,000 will be available. Since there is still an uncertainty as to the actual amount to be
funded, and the amount of funding available for public service projects may be less than the
estimated amount, the recommendations have been listed in priority order to provide the EDA
with the City's preferred projects to which appropriated funds should be allocated.
FISCAL IMPACT:All CDBG funds allocated to City projects will replace other funding
sources (i.e., GeneralFund, Community Services District), which can then be used for other
appropriate projects.The CDBG funds allocated to outside agencies have no impact on the
City, since the City merely serves as a conduit for administering funds provided by the County.
Attachments:
A.Community Development Block Grant Application Summary
B. Prioritized CDBG Funding Recommendations
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION SUMMARY
FUNDING QUALIFYING
APPLICATION TITLE AGENCY REQUESTED CRITERIA APPLICATION SUMMARY
ACQUISITION/CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Temecula Community TCSD $211,000 Acquisition/ Request to purchase/construct
Center Acquisition Low-Mod Income improvements to Temecula
Beneficiaries Community Center to benefit
residents of Old Town Temecula
Valley Family Support, MVUSD Parent $25,000 Construction/Low- Request ftinding to construct a facility
Health, & Recreation Center Mod Income to house recreation services for
Services Beneficiaries low/mod income families, seniors, the
disabled, and migrant workers.
PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAMS
Temecula Recreation and TCSD $15,500 Public Service/ Provide recreation and human service
Human Services Low-Mod Income programs to residents of Old Town
Beneficiaries Temecula
V.I.P. Tots V. I. P. Tots $1,500 Public Service/ Provide educational and recreational
Limited Clientele opportunities for disabled children.
Boys & Girls Club of Boys & Girls Club $32,400 Public Service/ Provide a scholarship program for low
Temecula of Temecula Low-Mod Income income families to take advantage of
Beneficiaries Club activities
ATTACHMENT A
FUNDING QUALIFYING
APPLICATION TITLE AGENCY REQUESTED CRITERIA APPLICATION SUMMARY
Operation School Bell Asst League of $10,000 Public Service/ Provide clothing to children identified
Temecula Valley Low-Mod Income by TVUSD to desperately need
Beneficiaries clothes
Emergency Food & Aid Temecula Senior $10,000 Public Service/ Provide emergency food and financial
Center Limited Clientele aid based on referrals from Social
Services and local churches.
SafeHouse - Emergency Operation Safe $1,000 Public Service/ Provide emergency shelter, including
Shelter for House Limited Clientele supervision and counseling, for
Runaway/Homeless Youth runaway and homeless youth
Parent Center Parent Center $5,000 Public Service/ Provide educational seminars,
Limited Clientele workshops, classes, & support groups
to assist low-mod income pare
Alternatives to Domestic Alternatives to $15,000 Public Service/ Provide 24-hour crisis intervention,
Violence Domestic Violence Limited Clientele advocacy services, emergency shelter,
and community education
oys Girls Club of Boys & Girls Club $6,000 Public Service/ Provide a boxing program for
Temecula - Boxing of Temecula Low-Mod Income children from low income families.
Program Beneficiaries
ATTACHMENT A
CDBG FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
IN ORDER OF PRIORITY PRIOR
YEAR
ACQUISITION/FACILITIES PROJECTS AGENCY AWARD
Temecula Community Center TCSD $242,000
Acquisition
Valley Family Support, Health Parent Center N/A
& Recreation Services
TOTAL ACQUISITION PROJECTS $242,000
PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS
Temecula Recreation and
Human Services
Family Friends
Scholarship Program
Operation School Bell
Emergency Food & Aid
SafeHouse - Emergency Shelter
for Runaway/Homeless Youth
Parent Center
Alternatives to
Domestic Violence
Boxing Program
TOTAL PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS
GRAND TOTAL OF ALL PROJECTS
$284,403
TCSD $13,403
VIP Tots N/A
Boys & Girls Club $10,000
Of Temecula
Assistance League of $5,000
Temecula Valley
Temecula Senior Cent $10,000
Operation Safe House $500
Parent Center $1,000
Alternatives to $2,500
Domestic Violence
Boys & Girls Club N/A
Of Temecula
$42,403
FINANCE
COMMITTEE
FUNDING FUNDING
REQUESTED RECOMMENDED
$211,000 $211,000
$25,000 $25,000
$236,000 $236,000
$15,500 $15,500
$1,500 $1,000
$32,400 $10,000
$10,000 $10,000
$10,000 $10,000
$1,000 $500
$5,000 $1,000
$15,000 $1,000
$6,000 $0
$96,400 $49,000
$332,400 $285,000
ATTACHMENT B
ITEIN4 18
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTOII
CITY MANAGERhg
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
qk
FROM:City Clerk / Director of Support ServicesT)
DATE:January 28, 1 997
SUBJECT:Selection of City Council Committee Assignments
RECOMMENDATION:
1Appoint a member of the City Council to serve on the following committees:
Riverside County Conservation Habitat Agency
Riverside Transit Agency
0Riverside County Transportation Commission
0WRCOG (Western Riverside Council of Governments)
0French Valley Airport Committee
0The Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors
a Temecula/Murrieta Joint Transportation/Traffic Committee
2.Appoint two members to each of the following Advisory Committees
Economic Development Committee
Finance Committee
Old Town Steering Committee
Public Works/Facilities Committee
3.Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City
Commissions and Committees and to the Pechanga Tribal Council.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council has established the policy of appointing one of its members to serve as liaison
to each of the City Commissions and Committees. This policy also included appointing
Councilmembers to serve as the Council's representatives to external organizations and on a
number of Council ad-hoc sub-committees.. Attached, for your convenience, is a list of the
Committee Assignments for 1 996.
ATTACHMENTS:1 996 Committee Assignments List
TENIIECULA CITY COUNCIL
1996 Committee Assignments
Commission Liaison (One Member)
Conununity Services Commission: Jeff Stone
Planning Commission: Pat Birdsall
Public/Traffic Safety Commission: Steve Ford
Redevelopment Advisory Committee: Karel Lindemans
Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Ron Roberts
Representative Assignments (External Organizations)
French Valley Airport Committee Pat Birdsall
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency: Steve Ford/Jeff Stone(alt.)
Riverside County Transportation Commission: Ron Roberts
Riverside Transit Agency Representative: Karel Lindemans
WRCOG Representative: Ron Roberts, Steve Ford (alt.)
Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors Jeff Stone
Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/Traffic Committee Steve Ford
Murrieta Creek Advisory Board Jeff Stone & Steve Ford
Council Committee Assignments (Two members) - Standing Committee, meetings must be
noticed at least 72 hours in advance.
Economic Development Committee: Ron Roberts, Jeff Stone
Finance Committee: Karel Lindemans, Jeff Stone
Old Town Steering Committee: Steve Ford
Public Works/Facilities Committee: Jeff Stone, Ron Roberts
Council and Other Offices -
Mayor - Patricia H. Birdsall Old Town Westside Community Facilities
Mayor Pro-Tem - Ron Roberts District Financing Authority
Chairperson - Karel Lindemans
Temecula Community Services District Vice Chair - Steve Ford
President - Jeff Stone
Vice President - Steve Ford Old Town Westside Community Facilities
District Improvement Authority
Temecula Redevelopment Agency Chairperson - Karel Lindemans
Chairperson - Steve Ford Vice Chair - Steve Ford
Vice Chairperson - Karel Lindemans
Y@13-19W li:02 FFM M"IN WFICE TO %941@ P. o3
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency
COY of CKY of H~ + Cky of Lake ECity of Mweno Vidley CKy of Muftft
CRY of Poft + C4ty of Rin@ + CRy of Ta + County ofa
VIA FKCSIMILE TOWSMIS&O
Janumy 13,1997
Mr. Steve Ford
Council member
City of TaFnmAa
43200 SU31ness Park Drive
Tom@in, CA 925W
SUBJECT:RE(IUEST FOR RETENTION OF CURRENT REPRESENTAVM To
RC"CA BOARD OF DIRECTORS PENDING CONSIDERATION OF
OARD MEMBERSHIP ISSUES
Dear Cber Ford;
Over tMpast few years the nine mwnber goveffwmnts of the Riverside C@ Habitat
ConIon Agency ("RCHCX) have dianged dwir mpmer"ves to the agmWvAth
incrs"inofrequency. As a result the mwnbomhip of #m RCHCA Board of Diredore Is
@ anof experiwm n ary to ensure that policy maken fully
to s mission and the complex fram within which it operates. This situation
disrupts the continuity of leadership which is near for effwwe policy oversight.
As Chairp of tm RCHCA I wfll be placing this
at the February 20. 1997 m@ng of Um Board of Di
agency representatives.
i would sincerely ate ww
an the ag@a for dimmlon
Until ffo RCHCA @rd has
had anopporimity to consider and act upon this issue I am respectfully requesfing that
irig of the nine RCHCA member agenda& make no chwq@s to their current
with this re@. If you have any quembons
or co regarding this m@ pisase call mm at your oonvenionoo at 782-6991.
SWmroly,
LaLffa Pearson
Chaoerson, RCHCA Board of Directors
4080 Lemon ftek 121h Flm
ToWphone:(gM 275-1 100
CA 2=1
F= (W 27S-1 I 06
ITE?\4 19
VERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
January 1 7, 1 997
TO:All Mayors, Councilmembers and Citv Manaaers of Riverside Countv
Riverside County Board of Supervisors and Executive Officer
FROM:Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Commission
SUBJECT:RCTC and Institutional Change Issue
At the Riverside County Transportation Commission meeting on January 8, 1 997, staff
presented a report (attached) regarding RCTC and institutional change issues. The
staff memorandum addressed two issues. These issues are: 1) Should a spot bill be
introduced to change the composition and/or organization of the Commission?; and,
2) The issue of the funding distribution related to granting the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments independent 'transportation commission" status. The
Commission directed staff to forward the memorandum to all elected officials and city
managers for their input on these issues. I understand that this is a short notice but
we would sincerely appreciate your input by January 31, 1 997. If you have any
questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 787-7141.
nk
Attachment
cc:Coachella Valley Association of Governments
Western Riverside Council of Governments
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:January 8, 1997
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: RCTC and Institutional Change Issues
We have been informed by Wes McDaniel that he will not be prepared for a joint
meeting of RCTC, WRCOG, and CVAG in January. Wes has proposed a meeting on
February 3, 1997, either prior to or following the WRCOG meeting. There are at least
two issues which I intended to propose to Wes for discussion during such a joint
meetina. Absent a joint meetin-, I believe it is apprc,-,r;.ate to prov:le t'i@ information
lu Is
concerning issues to the Commission for its consideration and guidance to staff.
Those issues are as follows:
1 .Should a spot bill be introduced to change the composition and/or organization
of the Commission?
During the November 13, 1996 joint meeting there was some discussion
regarding the potential for legislation to enable whatever might come out of the
joint RCT-C, WRCOG, and CVAG meetings. The deadline for introducing bills
for the 1 997 Session is January 24th.
It might be possible to have a local member of the Legislature introduce a spot
bill which might be modified once the specifics of a joint agencies' proposal,
if any, are known. The following are four reasons why I believe such a spot bill
strategy should not be supported by the Commission:
a.Supporting the idea of a spot bill would send a message that something
is wrong with the Commission. In fact, from the standpoint of
performar-l-e and p.--.-.Iuct;.vt'*Iy, ",=- have a record ol' exceiience.
b.A proposal at this time is presumptuous that an acceptable proposal for
change will come out of the joint meetings. Issues of representation and
resource allocation may be so controversial that no consensus may be
reached.
C.It is possible that some of the changes which our Commissioners might
want may be accomplished through means other than legislation. As a
Commission, we have not yet articulated what those "wants" might be.
d.Given the controversial nature of these issues, area legislators would
feel more comfortable if outstanding issues are resolved between
affected parties which would be included in a comprehensive legislative
proposal.
2.The issue of the funding distribution related to granting CVAG independent
"transportation commission' status.
Although alluded to by Supervisor Buster during the first joint RCTC, WRCOG,
and CVAG meeting, one issue which has not been directly addressed is the
implication of resource distribution for county wide programs in the event
CVAG was granted independent 'transportation commission' status. The
pos-@ib!e ;Implications regarding rriaiur revenue categories currently administered
by the Commission are as follows:
a.Measure A
There would be no impact, since the voter approved Measure A provided
for a guaranteed 'return to source" to the Western County, Coachella
Valley, and Palo Verde Valley areas over the life of the 20 year measure.
Although the Commission has the authority to borrow against
subregional allocations, its policies and accounting procedures currently
guard against subregional diversions.
b.Transportation Development Act; Local Transportation Funds and State
Transit Assistance Funds
State law now provides for a distribution of Local Transportation Funds
to counties and apportionment areas within counties based on
population rather than origin of sales. With respect to population
versus taxable retain sales, the Western County area benefits from the
P.-ovi;sions ol' existing law by approximately $'I,200,000.
State Transit Assistance (STA) funds are also distributed to counties
based on population. The Commission is legally authorized to allocate
STA funds which do not flow directly to transit operators based upon
their farebox recovery at its total discretion. . However, RCTC's current
policy is to distribute STA funds based upon the same formula as LTF
funds. Therefore, the Western County area realizes a benefit of
approximately $75,000 per year from a population based distribution.
In the past, Coachella Valley interests have sought a "return to source"
distribution of Transportation Development Act funds, including an
unsuccessful lawsuit. It is reasonable to assume CVAG might seek such
distribution with independent "transportation commission" status. In
light of the statewide implications of such a proposal, as well as loss of
funding to Western County transit operators, such a change would pose
political challenges.
C.Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies
Distribution of SAFE revenues by geographic areas would result in a
76.3% Western County and 23.7% Eastern County split. This is based
upon using population as a proxy for vehicle registration, which is the
basis for SAFE revenues. This would yield an estimated annual SAFE
revenue for the Eastern County area of approximately $247,000. In
comparison, Commission staff estimates that 46.3% of the current
$1,259,186 SAFE budget for the callbox program is expended to
support services within the Eastern County areas. Granting CVAG
Separate -+C,-anspo,-tat.;.on coi.-im,:stion', and presur-riably SAFE, status
would require necessary reductions in SAFE services within the Eastern
County area. On the other hand, greater proportionate revenues for the
Western County area would enable program expansions.
d.STIP "county minimum' funds
STIP "county minimum' funds are distributed based upon a formula
which is based on 75% population and 25% highway miles. According
to information provided by Caltrans District 8, the Eastern County area
has approximately 63% of the highway miles within the county.
Considering this mileage in conjunction with population world result in
a proportionate split of STIP funding of 66.5% for the Western County
area and 33.5% for the Eastern County area. Presumably, if CVAG
were granted independent "transportation commission" status, there
would be an expectation of proportionate return of STIP funding.
This would pose a major dilemma with respect to the sanctity of the
voter approved Measure A Expenditure Plan and the recent Commission
=,-Iop4-@' -e -1 - -71 0-ti-ai-egy. -oacheiia Valley Area
'VeaS,,, V,,'Sio a,
L-@ I I u The
portion of the Measure A Expenditure Plan was prepared by CVAG.
Projects included in that plan for state highways included construction
of State Route 86 on a new alignment and improvements to State Route
1 1 1. In response to the Commission's long standing priorities and
advocacy from the Coachella Valley, these.projects were advanced to
-the earliest possible years as the Commission initiated implementation
of Measure A. With the exception of a few minor SR 1 1 1
improvements, the planned improvements for the Coachella Valley which
might be eligible for STIP funding as envisioned by Measure A are either
completed or ready for eminent implementation. The Measure A Vision
and Strategy programs the balance of STIP funding assumed to be
available through 2009 (with expenditures going out as far as 201 5) for
as yet uncompleted projects within the Western County area.
Commission staff estimates that a proportionate distribution of STIP
funds to the Eastern County area (assuming July 1 997 as a beginning
date for calculation) would create a $102.5 million additional funding
shortfall for Western County area projects.
Based upon the project level priorities approved by the Commission
within the Measure A Vision and Strategy the Western County area
projects which would be added as unfundable would add 4 and 5 to the
following list of unfundable project:
1)SR-91; Second additional lane in each direction from Magnolia
Avenue (or I- 1 5) and SR-71 ($184 million)
2)SR-21 5; One additional lane in each direction from the 91/60/1-
21 5 interchange to the San Bernardino County line ($1 9.7 million)
Cc@i-r-.muter rail; San jacin-Lo branch line from Riverside to
Hemet/San Jacinto ($25.5 million)
4)SR-91; One additional lane in each direction from Cridge to the
91/60/1-215 interchange ($83.5 million); and
5)SR-91; one additional lane in each direction from Mary to Cridge
($19 million of $90 million).
e.Federal local assistance programs (Surface Transportation Program and
Con gestion Mitigation/Air Quality fund)
The Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds are now allocated
based upon urbanized area entitlements (approximately 5@.5%) and
discretionary programs (approximately 47.5%). Granting CVAG
independent "transportation commission" would not impact the urbanized
area entitlement. It is also unlikely to impact the discretionary funds
since the Commission's current practice is to earmark such funds
equitably between the Wes ' tern County and Coachella Valley areas.
Such earmarks have also generally applied to Congestion Mitigation/Air
Quality (CMAQ) funds.
f. Transit Capital Improvement funds
TCI funds are currently programmed at the discretion of the California
Transportation Commission (CTC), but they seek identification of
priorities from our Commission. Priorities are generally based upon need
and most rail capital needs have been in the Western County area.
However, the Commission has sought to provide for some measure of
equity with its support of multi modal station improvements in Palm
Springs, Palm Desert, and Indio. Granting CVAG independent
"transportation commission' status may have little influence over the
judgements of CTC.
DEPARTI\4ENTAL
REPORTS
A
CITY ATTORNE
DIRE TOI OF I
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Manager/City Council
FROM:Debbie UbnoskV, Planning Manager
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Monthly Report
RECOMMENDATION:Receive and File
Discussion:The following is a summary of the Community Development
Department's Planning Division caseload and project activity for
the month of December 1996:
Caseload Activity:
The Department received 17 applications for administrative cases and 6 applications for public
hearing cases for the month of December.
The following are the public hearing cases:
Minor Conditional Use Permit 1
Parcel Map-schedule E-sewers 2
Development Plan (subject to CEQA) 2
Development Plan-w/CEQA 1
Total 6
Onaoina Proiects:
Old Town Streetscape Iml2rovement Project: The development of the Sixth Street
Parking Lot is under construction.
Staff is preparing to send out a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for development of the
construction plans for the Streetscape and storm drain improvements in mid December.
Murdy Ranch S12ecific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: Staff is reviewing the draft
Specific Plan and EIR. Staff will review and determine if the screen check draft EIR can
be circulated and Specific Plan can be set for Development Review Committee (DRC)
meeting.
R:\MONTHLY.RPT\1996\DEC.WPD 1/14/97 Idb
Roripauah Ranch Specefic Plan: The Planning Commission held a public workshop on
September 11, 1995 and directed the applicant to reduce the density and the total
number of units as well as to be more sensitive to the surrounding land use by
increasing the buffer area and providing a transition of lot sizes. No future hearing date
has been established.
Temecula Shuttle: Temecula Shuttle will begin the construction of their facility after a
building pad is provided by the City. The anticipated ground breaking is set for January
1, 1 997.
Sign Ordinance: After the Planning Commission hearing, staff started a series of
meetings with the comment group which was assembled at the Planning Commission.
This group has recommended a number of changes to the proposed ordinance which will
be presented to the Planning Commission in January 1997.
New Pro.jects Trend: The Department is currently processing or in preliminary
discussions with eight to ten different applicants for new industrial and warehouse
facilities within the city. New applications include a 300 unit apartment complex,
Golden Corral Restaurant and Peony Restaurant.
Desian Gumdelines: The Planning Commission has concluded their review of the Design
Guidelines. These Guidelines will be before the city Council shortly.
R:\MONTHLY.@\1996\DEC.WPD 1/14/97 klb 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
REVENUE STATUS REPORT
R:\MONTHLY.@\1996\DEC.WPD 1/14/97 klb 3
REVPRIN2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
01/08/97 10:15:56 REVENUE STATUS REPORT
DECEMBER 1996
001 GENERAL FUND
161 PLANNING
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ADJUSTED DECEMBER 1996-97 BALANCE % COL
ESTIMATE REVENUE REVENUE
4101 AMENDED FINAL MAP
4102 APPEALS
4103 CERT. OF LAND DIV. COMPLIANCE
4104EXTENSION OF TIME
4105SINGLE FAMILY TRACTS
4106MULTI-FAMILY TRACTS
4107PARCEL MAPS
4108LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
4109MINOR CHANGE
4110PARCEL MERGER (2-4 LOTS)
4111RECORDABLE SUBDIVISION MAPS
4112REVERSION TO ACREAGE (5+LOTS)
4113SPECIAL SERVICE LETTER
4114SECOND UNIT PERMITS
4115CHANGE OF ZONE
4116CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
4117CONSISTENCY CHECKS
4118GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
4119PLOT PLAN
4120PUBLIC USE PERMIT
4121REVISED PERMIT
4122SETBACK ADJUSTMENT
4123SPECIFIC PLAN
4124SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE
4125TEMORARY OUTDOOR EVENT
4126TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
4127VARIANCE
4128ZONING INFORMATION LETTER
4129CEQA (INITIAL STUDIES)
4130CEQA ENVIROMENT IMPACT REPORT
4131DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
4132GEOLOGY CEQA
4133GEOLOGY ORD. 547 APZ
4134LAFCO
4135PARCEL MAP/WAIVER
4136MERGER
4137AMENDED FINAL TRACT/PAR. MAP
4138CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION
4139CONDO TRACT MAP
4140REVERSION TO ACREAGE
4141LOT REVISION AFTER CHECK
4142LOT LINE ADJUST. PLAN CHECK
4143CERT. OF CORRECT. PLAN CHECK
4144CERT. OF COMPLIANCE PLAN CHECK
4145COND. CERT. OF COMPL. PLN. CK.
4146CERT. OF PAR. MERGER PLAN CK
.00 .00 .00 .00
702.00 .00 .30 701.70 0.0
3,348.00 .00 .00 3,348.00 0.0
6,750.00 855.00 939.00 5,811.00 13.9
9,396.00 .00 12,970.00 3,574.00- 138.0
6,590.00 .00 .00 6,590.00 0.0
7,173.00 5,231.80 10,760.00 3,587.00- 150.0
2,300.00 690.00 2,530.00 230.00- 110.0
470.00 .00 459.00 11.00 97.7
1,000.00 .00 .00 1,000.00 0.0
.00 .00 .00 .00
392.00 .00 .00 392.00 0.0
.00 .00 .00 .00
1,483.00 .00 .00 1,483.00 0.0
10,984.00 .00 .00 10,984.00 0.0
15,108.00 532.00 15,720.00 612.00- 104.1
5,735.00 .00 .00 5,735.00 0.0
8,256.00 .00 .00 8,256.00 0.0
19,075.00 7,133.00 50,186.85 31,111.85- 263.1
.00 .00 295.00- 295.00 ***
11,261.00 .00 .00 11,261.00 0.0
528.00 .00 .00 528.00 0.0
9,254.00 .00 .00 9,254.00 0.0
880.00 185.00 4,070.00 3,190.00- 462.5
.00 176.00 2,232.00 2,232.00- *--
2,640.00 .00 .00 2,640.00 0.0
2,952.00 .00 .00 2,952.00 0.0
.00 .00 .00 .00
15,904.00 1,675.45 12,352.85 3,551.15 77.7
6,202.00 .00 .00 6,202.00 0.0
16,000.00 4,000.00 .00 16,000.00 0.0
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00-
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
.00 .00 .00 .00
REVPRIN2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
01/08/97 10:15:56 REVENUE STATUS REPORT
DECEMBER 1996
001 GENERAL FUND
161 PLANNING
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ADJUSTED DECEMBER 1996-97 BALANCE % COL
ESTIMATE REVENUE REVENUE
4147 VACATIONS PLAN CK .00 .00 .00 .00
4148 DOCUMENT PROCESSING .00 .00 .00 .00
4149 CONDEMNATION PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00
4150 REVERSION TO ACRE. PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00
4151 PARCEL MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00
4152 TRACT MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00
4153 AMENDED MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00
4154 4TH & SUBS. SUBMITTALS .00 .00 .00 .00
4155 FEMA STUDY REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00
4156 LOMA REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00
4157 DRAINAGE STUDY REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00
4169 IMPROVE INSPECTION ON-SITE .00 .00 .00 .00
4170 K-RAT STUDY FEES 1,480.00 .00 .00 1,480.00 0.0
4175 FAST TRACK PLANNING .00 .00 .00 .00
4180 FORMA FAST TRACK .00 .00 .00 .00
4200 IN HOUSE PLAN CHECKS .00 670.00 5,700.00 5,700.00-...
4206 ANNEXATION FEES 710.00 .00 .00 710.00 0.0
4226 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT .00 .00 .00 .00
4260 ACCESSORY WIND ENERGY .00 .00 .00 .00
4261 LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE .00 .00 .00 .00
4262 HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY .00 .00 .00 .00
4369 LAND DIV UNIT MAP 374.00 .00 187.00 187.00 50.0
4370 LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK 15,296.00 4,244.00 28,021.00 12,725.00- 183.2
PLANNING 182,243.00 25,392.25 146,833.00 35,410.00 80.6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTO
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council/City Manager
FROM:Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE:January 28, 1997
SUBJECT:Public Works Monthly Activity Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly
Activity Reports for December, 1 996.
r:\agdrpt\moactrpt/ajp
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Monthly Activity Repoit
DECEMBER, 1996
Submitted by: Joseph Kicak
Prepared by: Don Spagnolo
Date:January 28, 1997
1.WORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION:
1. 1-15/Winchester Road Interchange Modifications:
The contractor is almost finished with the installation of the reinforcing steel required for the new
bridge deck. The contractor is scheduled to place concrete in the bridge deck during the week of
January 21, 1997. The contractor is continuing the grading operation for the new northbound loop
on-ramp and will be installing a storm drain underneath the existing southbound on-ramp.
2. Fire Station #84:
The interior of the building is nearly complete with the installation of the finish flooring, doors,
and appliances scheduled for the final week of January. Application of the exterior stucco will
be completed by the third week of January. Placement of the on-site parking lot was performed
in mid-December. Adverse weather has delayed delivery of the large roll-up doors; the
anticipated installation date is January 21. Pauba Road sidewalks are in place and asphalt over
laying and striping of Pauba Road has been re-scheduled for the final week of January due to rain
delays.
3. Walcott Corridor:
The contractor is currently working on the storm drain systems. The utility companies are in the
process of installing the first phase of the dry utilities and are expected to be completed by the end
of January. After completion of the utility work the contractor will begin preparation of the road
bed for the asphalt pavement. The contractor expects to complete the entire project in June, 1997.
4. Sam Hicks Monument Park improvement PrQ.ject:
Two-thirds of the 90-day maintenance period is now complete. The installation of the park
lighting system and bare-root roses will occur during the final 30 days of the maintenance period
due to long lead time for delivery of these items. The maintenance period will end February 17.
5. Traffic Signal at Route 79S and Margarita Road/Redhawk Parkway:
The traffic signal has been installed and is currently operating on flashing red, since the existing
striping does not align with the signal heads. Upon completion of the assessment district's road
work and re-striping of the intersection, the traffic signal will be put into full operation.
6. Interim Trafric Signal at Route 79S and La Paz Street:
Installation of the traffic signal at this location has been completed and the signal is fully
operational. City and Caltrans have made minor changes to the signal timing for optimum
operation.
r:Vnoactrpt\cip\g 7/jan.updr
Monthly Activity Report
January 28, 1997
Page 2
7. Sports Park Creek Restoration:
The 90-day maintenance period ended January 2. The city is awaiting submittal by the contractor
of the specified affidavit and bonding documents prior to recommending final acceptance of the
project by City Council. The project consisted of the construction of channel bank protection,
landscaping, subdrain lines, and walkway paving along the channel south of the Sports Park.
8. Emergency Generator:
A walk through inspection of the project, including a trial operation of the generator was
performed on December 31. The generator successfully powered the CRC's electrical systems.
The generator and 1,000 gallon tank will power the CRC during an emergency situation for a
minimum of 72 hours. Recommendation to City Council for acceptance of the project is
anticipated for the February 1 1 Council meeting.
9. City-Wide Trafric Control Device Inventory
All data has been collected and been inputted into the computer. The consultant demonstrated the
system on December 5 and is currently malting the final adjustments to the system. The complete
system will be in operation by the end of January.
10, City Maintenance Facility:
Rough framing of the building along with interior electrical, plumbing, and HVAC work is nearly
complete. The plywood roofmg is also in place. Application of the roof membranes and exterior
stucco along with the installation of the windows and placement of the parking lot slab are
scheduled to start the last week of January.
11, City Wide Intelligent Trafflc Management System (ITMS):
Plans and specifications for Phase R of this project have been completed and submitted to Caltrans
to obtain and encroachment permit for work within the Caltrans right-of-way. Upon completion
of Phase 11, all traffic signals on the city's major arterials can be monitored and signal timing
coordinates from the city hall.
11. BID
1. Acoustic Panels at the CRC Gym:
On January 14, City Council authorized solicitation of formal bids for this project. This project
will include installation of acoustical panels on the walls and on the ceiling in the basketball gym
at the Community Recreation Center. Also, additional protection pads will be placed at both ends
of the basketball court to provide a cushion for the ball players. The bid opening will be in March
and the project should be completed by April 16 due to scheduling of the gym facility.
r:\moactrpt\cip\97/jan.updr
Monthly Activity Report
January 28, 1997
Page 3
111.WORK IN DESIGN:
1. 1-15/Rancho California Road Interchange Modiricationse
Final roadway plans have been resubmitted to Caltrans (District 8) for final approval. The
structural plans have already been approved and signed by Caltrans Division of Structures. The
Construction Cooperative Agreement has been approved by both Caltrans and the City Council.
The project will be bid as soon as Caltrans approves the plans. This project includes widening
the Riancho California Bridge and providing a north bound loop on ramp.
2. 1-15/Overland Drive Overcrossing improvements:
The structural plans were approved and signed by Caltrans Division of Structures. Roadway plans
were revised by the consultant on December 30, 1996 and were resubmitted to Caltrans (District
8) on January 17, 1997 for final review. The Construction Cooperative Agreement has been
approved by both Caltrans and the City Council. SCE is considering where to move the 115 KVA
overhead power lines currently located in the way of the proposed Overland Drive Street
Improvements.
3. Margarita Community Park-
Second plan check is presently underway by the Public Works Department and the Community
Service District. Bidding of the project is anticipated to occur the first week in March. The
project includes picnic areas, a tot play area, restroom facilities, and open turf areas. The
development of the two ball fields on the school district property will include two lighted tennis
courts, and one lighted hockey facility and will be an add-altemate bid item.
4. Traffic Signal at SR-79S and Bedford Court
Plans and specifications have be revised per Caltrans comments and have been resubmitted for
final approval.
5. Trafric Signal at Margarita Road & Solana Way
The preliminary design has been competed and staff will finalize the plans this month. This traffic
signal will be constructed using the existing equipment that are stored in the city yard.
6. FY95-96 Pavement Management System
City Council authorized the solicitation of public construction bids at the January 14 meeting.
This project includes removing and reconstructing the A.C. pavement and providing only an
overlay in some areas on Rancho Vista Road, Solana Way, and La Serena Way. Bid opening for
this project will be at the end of February.
7. FY96-97 Pavement Management System
Staff has selected a consultant for the project and will be meeting the week of January 20 to
discuss the scope of the project. A consultant agreement to provide the design services will be
presented to the City Council at the next earliest meeting. This project will rehabilitate Jefferson
Avenue from the northerly city limits to Rancho California Road.
,:Vnoact,pt\cip\g 7/jen.updr
Monthly Activity Report
January 28, 1997
Page 4
8. Pavement Management System @-Date,
Staff has selected a consultant for the project and will be meeting the week of January 20 to
discuss the scope of the project. A consultant agreement to provide the design services will be
presented to the City Council at the next earliest meeting. This project will review and up-date
the existing Pavement Management System which will include adding all new streets, preparing
a new 5-year street maintenance program, and up-date the computer generated city map.
r:\moactrpt\cip\g 7/jan.updr
LAND DEVELOPMENT
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
SPECIAL PROJECTS
DECEMBER 1996
Submitted by: Joseph Kicak
Prepared by: Ronald J. Parks
Date:January 16, 1996
1. -PW95-07 - Phase I Western Bypass Corridor:
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District response on review
of the storm drain plans has not yet been received and the review process of the
bridge plans has not began. The design engineers are in the process of finalizing and
coordinating the Assessment District improvement plans for the ramp widening at
Interstate 15 and State Route 79 South and the new intersection configuration of
Front Street and Western Bypass Corridor.
2.PW95-08 - First Street Extension:
Thebridge plans were reviewed and returned to the bridge engineers to comply with
thecomments provided by the bridge plan checker. Riverside County Flood Control
andWater Conservation District response on review of the storm drain plans has not
yetbeen received. Caltrans permit for the modification to Santiago Road overcrossing
Interstate 1 5 has been obtained. Property acquisition necessary for the right-of-way
is underway. Final design coordination are in progress.
3. PW95-26 - 6th Street Parkina Pro-ject:
Construction is ongoing. The pad area for the transportation depot project will be
ready by mid-JanuarV. Completion of the driveway approach and the parkway
improvements along Front Street and Sixth Street and completion of the restroom
facility structure will commence early January. Delay is anticipated due to rain.
4.PW96-05 - Pro-mect Study Report (PSR) And Project Report (PR) For Ultimate
lnterchana ients at Interstate 1 5/State Aoute 79 South (I- 1 5/SR7@-
The preparation of the PSR, Project Study Report, will be completed in January based
on the alternatives agreed upon by Caltrans and the impacted property owners. The
PSR will then be presented to Caltrans for review.
R:\MOACTRYnDEV\96kDECEMBER.WPD
to U)
z
CL LU
-i CV) 0
Go 0 cm
IL -i U)
:3 ui <
z U) z
0 0
ce o: w w 0 co 0
4 w cn 0 0
13
a z to Cl) 0
z LU CO) cn 0 C,4 to
w
-1 0 w co co P. co cn C,4
o 4 C4 cn cq
m 2 a C4 co 0 4a &a le
E m w F- V- C,4 4a -e
CL LA 0 4a 4a 4a
m x ui
cn IL 0
0 o: co C4 0 C4
6 <0 n o w v
o: 4 z CD a; vi 1:
< 0 ui 0 C4 &a en
w 52 -i 00 to -e cn V-
u- W C4 w CD < <
C,4
w 4a to cn
m >- v-
w
w
U. -i w 44 40 0 co
-i < w cn 40 0 to
to
0 -i 6 -i 6 i
0 W a) co cn
EL IL) C4 C4 CL It CL It
LLJ LL C4 0) W) C4 Cl) co
a) C4 Cl)
ft 409 C,4
> CD
cn
v-
> lx
cn 0 CD 0
LU IR q It
(n to -e in co -e
LLJ LU z co 0 C,4 co
0 > 0
w o: 0 40 C4 Pt Wt
L) o ix C4 M co
>- W 0 CL F- Cl) 40,k Cl)
LLJ CL U) I* C4 4a w
I-
ca
cv)
z
0
UJ Z
z co
0: 0
0 3: 3:
w
C4 w co
LL 5 0
co w
U) o LLJ 9L
z
0 0 CD 0 0 e
0 cn CD CD cn
z
w ui 0 ui a; 6 Cd C4 C6 co
z co co
i3 > 2 Cl)
o: 0 0 CD W)
M T- C,4 0 W) @ -e
o 0: C4 U)
CL
co C4 0) co
LU Ul) U)
ui Cl) Cl)
cn LL. -e
-i C2
co CO) 40 co C4
0 C3 cn M
LLJ 0 z qt
z 0 to W) w; rz -
2 co co Cl* t- co C4 cn
o 4n C,4 co cn
-4 co C4 >
m (O C4
06
40W 00
cn
CL
LL z 0
0 Z m 2 F-
z IX w L) 0 C,4 C*
z W LU 0 CL w w w 3:
w 0 CL LU Z
F- IL
m LU 13 0 IL . 0 w 0 0 0 0
z 0 -i 0
0 x =! E w > L) 0 0 0 9
o: 06 z 2 Z 0 @o w 0 4i 4i 10
>
w u LLI F- 0 u u
CL z IL ci: LU IL u u 0 u
> IL w z >
w ui z z -i U) LLI w 0
a m LL 4) E
a iL LLI < LL IL z IL C3 r-)
MEMORANDUM
TO:Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM:vli@Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
DATE:January 3, 1997
SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - December, 1996
The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-
house personnel for the month of December, 1996:
1. SIGNS
A. Total signs replaced 15
B. Total signs installed 1
C. Total signs repaired 1
TREES
A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 5
Ill. POTHOLES
A. Total square feet of potholes repaired 246
IV.CATCH BASINS
A. Total catch basins cleaned 112
V.RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 0
VI.GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A. Total locations 22
B. Total S.F. 2,170
VII.STENCILING
A.0 new and repainted legends
B. 0 L.F. of red curb new and repainted
1 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96\1 2.DEC rh
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - December, 1996
Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 54 service order requests ranging from weed abatement,
tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings.
This is compared to 24 service order requests for the month of November, 1996.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in 179.5 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special
events and response to street emergencies.
I.P.S. STRIPING AND STENCILING COMPANY has completed the following
263,367 L.F. of new and repainted striping
0 L.F. of sand blasting
The total cost for I.P.S. striping services was $19,100.02 compared to $0.00 for November, 1996.
PESTMASTER SERVICES has completed the followenom
0S.F. of right-of-way weed control, total cost $0.00 compared to $0.00 for
November, 1996.
The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of December, 1996 was
$57,309.00 compared to $34,020.60 for the month of November, 1996.
Account No. 5402 $33,511.00
Account No. 5401 22,070.00
Account No. 999-5402 1,728.00
cc:Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
Ron Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development
Alli Kuhns, Senior Management Analyst
2 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96\1 2.DEC rh
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS
The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of December, 1996.
DATE STREETICHANNEL/BRIDGE DESCRIPTION OF WORK TOTAL
ACCOUNT COST
. ..... .. .. .
N p@ G@.@ con
.. ........
.. .. .. .. ..... ..
12/10/96 Pauba Road Construct over-the-drain, includes 450
325 East of La Primavera Street L.F. of 6" A.C. berm and 176 S.F. of
5402 slurried rip-rap
Total S.F. 1,215
Total A.C. 15 Tons
TOTAL COST $8,514.00
..............
.. .....
12/07/96 Citywide P.C.C. Repairs
Sidewalk S.F. 1,184
5402 Curb & Gutter 38
Spandral S.F. 416
Total S.F. 1,638
Total P.C.C. 20 Yards
TOTAL COST $9,877.00
.. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. ..
L.@ WILLIAMS:@LANDSCAPE @CO@@@@@
12/03/96 41740, 41848 & 41755 Asteroid Removed four tree stumps
Way
5402
3051 1 Spica Court Class l Trim one tree
TOTAL COST $895.00
A-PAR K @@AVEN U E@@ @B UILDERS.
12/03/96 Via Norte at Avenida Del Sol and Del Removed and replace 1,080 S.F. of A.C.
Rey Road
#5402
Avenida Del Reposo Install 183 L.F. of 6' A.C. Berm
Total S.F. 1080
Total L.F. 183
Total A.C. 20 Tons
TOTAL COST $7,400.00
3 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96Nl 2.DEC rh
December, 1996
Contractors Report
DATE STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE DESCRIPTION OF WORK TOTAL
ACCOUNT COST
5402
.. ..... .. .. .. .. ..
............
.. .. ..
.. .. .. .. ..
....@@@@@@.@@@@MONTELEONE@@EXCAVATING
. .. .. .....
........ ..
.. .. .. .. .. I.., .. .. .. . ... .. .. .. ... .
12/16/96 Parkview Site (Pauba Road) Emergency erosion control and site
clean-up
#5402 $2,500.00
Ridge Park Road at Rancho California Repair slope and build desilting pond
Road $4,325.00
F- ITOTAL COST 1 $6,825.001
TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT $33,51 1.00
#5402
DATE STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE
ACCOUNIA
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TOTAL COEI
. . .. .... ..
A PARK AVENUE@@BU !LT)ERS
.. .. .. .. ..
12/03/96 Jedediah Smith Road at Calle De Construct two desilting ponds
Velardo $4,500.00
12/05/96
Santiago Road Construct three desilting ponds
12/07/96 $8,670.00
Ynez Road north of Santiago Road Clear and grubb natural drainage course
east side 340' x 6'
$3,200.00
Santiago Road at Front Street Clear and grubb natural drainage course
400' x 12'
$2,700.00
Pala Road north of Loma Linda Clear and grubb natural drainage course
420' x 25'
$3,000.00
TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT 1 $22,070.00
#5401
4 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96\12.DEC rh
December, 1996 Contractors Report
DATE STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE DESCRIPTION OF Wm TOTAL
ACCOU@ COST
999-5402 @z
...........
.. . . . .. ..... ..... . ...
.. .. ......
.. . ..... .. .
. .. .. .. ...
. .. ..... ..
!]@:MQNIELEONE@EXCAVATING@
.. .. .. ..... .. .. .
12/23/96 Various Roads Grading of dirt roads within Level "R'
service area.
-54
Level "R" TOTAL COST $1,728.00
TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT $1,7
999-5401
R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96\1 2.DEC rh
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
STREET MAINTENANCE
FY 1996-1997
Date Submitted: January 3, 1997
Submitted By: JOSEPH KICAK
Prepared By: BRADBURON
2ND QUARTER
..............
....... ..
........
.......................
TOTAL COST TOTAL COST
WORK WORK
. .........
FOR THIS FOR LAST
OS.T
COMPLETED COSTFOR COMPLETED COSTFOR '::,.,::Co
...........
... . ...... ..... .. ....
SCOPE OF WORK OCTOBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER NOVEMBER ECEM:BE.-R::: FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR
.................
. ............
.... . ...........
............
ASPHALT AC $203,184.64 $7,800.00 $241,388.64 $97,444.00
Square Footage: 116,739 1,512
Tons: 1,953 31
......
...........
.. . . ....... 1. I I.: :::: :::::.,
. . . ..... ..
.. .........
...........
:-:-- . ............
. ... ......
......................
SIDEWALK CURBIGUTTER REPAIR $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $49,677.45
Square Footage: 0 0
............
PCC Yards: 0 0
.. .. ......
... .....
... . .. .... .....
.........
........... I
..........
STRIPING LINEAR FEET: 0 $0.00 0 $19,000.02 $74,018.43
.....................
.. ........
.....................
...................
..........
.........................................
. ... .......
.............
IN-HOUSE PAINTING LEGENDS: 0 $0.00 2 $16.00
10,672.00 $18,176.00
.............. ............................
............ .....
............
..........................
..............
........
SIGNS REPLACED
...... ... ..........
...........
$4,650.00 $7,250.00
Material: 3 $150.00 35 $1,750.00
........ $1,623.57 $2,885.65
Labor: $46.11 $537.95
SIGNS INSTALLED
.. .........
Material: 51 $2,550.00 5 $250.00 Po 00 $4,400.00 $9,750.00
................
...........
Labor: $783.87 $76.85
'$'.., .@ $1,494.52 $2,913.95
..............
..................
.........
GRAFFITI
...................
. .........
Square Footage: 1,916 783 $0.00
Cost: $536.46 $219.24
$2,376.62
...............
..........
DRAINAGE CHANNELS CLEANED $645.54
................... . .
$1,190.68 $72,690.71
..........
Basins: 42 113 $1,736.81
. ......... .
Channels: 0 9 $20,515.85
..........
IN-HOUSE TREES TRIMMED: 132 $2,028.84 113 $1,736.81 $11,098.56 $6,599.40
SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS: 27 $0.00 24 $0.00 P.. $0.00
.. .. . .. .....
. . .......................
$13,346.16 $14,538.32
AFTER HOURS CALL OUTS: 89 $2,012.29 92 $2,080.12
............................
. . .........................
..............
.... ..
R.O.W. WEED ABATEMENT: 62,962 $2,246.16 31,275 $1,291.08
$11,684.20 $31,753.20
.............
...........
..........
.. .......................
..........
........
TOTALS 183,914 $214,183.91 33,994 $38,010.71 $419,954.07 $387,697.11
r:Xmoactr main@97rpt.wb2
MAINTENANCE WORK COMPLETED Date Submitted: January 3, 1997
FISCAL YEAR 1996-1997 Submitted By: JOSEPH KICAK
Prepared By: BRADBURON
......................
.............
.. ... .. .
Asphalt Tons 108 0 0 1,953 31 2,127
Asphalt Square Feet 15,576 0 0 116,739 1,512 136,305
0
Concrete Square Feet 0 3,885 0 0 5,523
9
Drainage Channels 0 0 0 0 13
Total Costs $14,490.00 $41,108.00 $0.00 $203,184.64 $28,315.85 $330,459.49
...... ......... .......
...............
I.P.S. STRIPING 0 0 0 0 0
0
Striping Linear Feet 0 0 0 0 263,367
. ..........
Sandblasting Linear Feet 0 0 0 0 0 0
. .........
Total Costs $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
.. $19,100.02
TREE CONTRACTORS
...... ....
.....
............ . .
.............
0
................
...............
Trees Trimmed 0 200 0 16 217
...............
................
................
0
Trees Removed 0 1 3 1 9
Tota I Costs $0.00 $6,695.00 $1,530.00 $1,675.00 $0.00 $10,795.00
...........
..........................................
...................
PESTMASTER 0 0 0 0 0
0
R.O.W. Spraying - Sq Ft 0 0 0 0 0
Total Costs $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
CITY MAINTENANCE CREW
Signs Replaced 15 22 3 3 35 93
Signs Installed 13 16 2 51 5 88
Catch Basins Cleaned 9 13 6 42 113 295
Trees Trimmed 84 86 162 132 113 582
R.O.W. Weed Abatement 245,483 20,548 6,689 62,962 31,275 366,957
Potholes Repaired - Sq Ft 187 202 128 94 127 984
After Hours Call Outs 103 78 47 89 92 589
Service Order Requests 19 31 16 27 24 171
Graffit Removal - Sq Ft 333 446 2,840 1,916 783 8,488
$65,994.58
Total Costs $13,997.89 $16,114.81 $7,677.42 $10,999.29 $9,694.86
r:\moactrpt\96\stmaint\maintwk.wb2
CITY OF TEIN4ECULA
--- 1996 GRAFFITI REMOVAL
COSTS
Janumy $1,367.24
TOTAL CALLS Feb@ 2,178.40
Janu@ 23 March 1,752.24
February 31 20000 - April 1,642.76
March 25 May 6,296.92
April 57 June 488.04
July 93.24
May 39 August 124.88
June 11 15000 - September 795.20
July 2 October 536.46
August 4 Noveinber 219.24
September 8 December 607.60
October 8 10000 -
November 7
December 22 SQUARE
FOOTAGE
January 4,883
5000 February 7,780
March 6,258
April 5,867
May 22,489
June 1,743
Totals for the Year July 333
0 Aupst 446
To Date: September 2,840
Janaury 3, 1997 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC October 1,916
November 783
Sq. Foot 57,508 Dm=ber 2,170
Cost $16,102.22 COST SQFT
Calls 237
R:\BURON\96\GRAFFM.WPD
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG
DECEMBER, 1996
. .. ..... .. .. .. .. . . ..
........
..........
............
........ ....
t)A 0 O@RK COMPLETED
...........
12-02-96 Rainbow Canyon Tract Graffiti 12-02-96
-12-02-96 30210 Milano Road Tree trimming 12-02-96
12-05-96 29741 Del Rey Road A.C. repairs 12-05-96
12-06-96 26631 Ynez Road Sign down 12-06-96
12-09-96 30056 La Primavera Erosion control 12-09-96
12-10-96 30291 Nebula Lane Tree & storm drain concerns 12-10-96
12-10-96 41869 Borealis Drive Tree roots 12-10-96
12-12-96 41844 Fourth Street Mud & debris 12-12-96
12-12-96 32114 Corte Florecita Tree stump 12-12-96
12-13-96 40535 Calle Tiara Catch Basin 12-13-96
Safety bar mi sing
-12-13-96 Motor Car Parkway Pothole 12-13-96
12-16-96 40010 Holden Circle Street sweeper concern 12-16-96
-12-16-96 Liefer Road Grading of road 12-16-96
12-16-96 Citywide "winds' R.O.W. 10 trees 12-16-96
Down due to winds
12-17-96 Citywide "winds' R.O.W. 4 trees 12-17-96
Down due to winds
12-17-96 31065 Ave. Del Reposo Requesting A.C. curb 12-17-96
-12-17-96 Jedediah Smith Debris pick-up 12-17-96
-12-18-96 45570 Classic Way Shoe in catch basin 12-18-96
12-18-96 27711 Diaz Road Tumble weeds in parking lot 12-18-96
12-18-96 32033 Calle Novelda Pauba Road concern 12-18-96
12-18-96 Lolita Road Street grading 12-18-96
12-18-96 Citywide "winds" R.O.W. 1 0 trees 12-18-96
Down due to winds
-12-19-96 31888 Corte Mendoza Tree trimming 12-19-96
12-19-96 Rancho Calif. Road @ Debris in street 12-19-96
Lyndie Lane
12-19-96 43615 San Fermin Sweeper concern 12-19-96
1 R:XROADS\VMCMPLTD\96\12.SER
SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG - DECEMBER, 1996
................ .. .. .. ..
...........
..OFtK:,:COMP@LF-TED.:
.. .. .. .. .. .. .....
12-20-96 31241 Corte Alhambra Tree trimming 12-20-96
12-20-96 45587 Classic Way Tree trimming 12-20-96
12-22-96 Calle Girasol @ Riverton Flooding 12-22-96
12-23-96 39415 Liefer Road Road grading 12-23-96
12-23-96 39195 Liefer Road Road grading 12-23-96
12-30-96 30631 Milky Way Potholes 12-30-96
12-30-96 Liefer Road Trash pick-up concern 12-31-96
12-31-96 Via de Velardo @ Pescado Tree pick-up 12-31-96
TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 54
2 R:IROADS\NWCMPLTD\96\12.SER
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
DECEMBER, 1996
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
. ........ ..
. .. ..... ..
........ .. ..
.. .. .. ..... ...
..... .. .
... .. .. .. .. .
.. .. .. .....
. . ....... WORK:COMPLETED
....... .. ..
12-02-06 Sports Park/Skate Park Removed 544 S.F. of Graffiti
12-02-96 Clubhouse @ Creekside Removed 40 S.F. of Graffiti
12-02-96 Masters @ Para Road Removed 45 S.F. of Graffiti
12-04-96 Night Hawk Pass @ Calle Banuelos Removed 48 S.F. of Graffiti
12-06-96 Meadows @ McCabe Removed 20 S.F. of Graffiti
12-10-96 Calle Medusa @ Enfield Removed 4 S. F. of Graffiti
12-13-96 Tower Plaza Parking Structure Removed 144 S. F. of Graffiti
12-16-96 Pujol Street @ Main Street Removed 53 S. F. of Graffiti
12-16-96 28552 Pujol Street Removed 210 S.F. of Graffiti
12-16-96 28550 Pujol Street Removed 32 S.F. of Graffiti
12-16-96 Margarita 200' s/o Moraga Road Removed 35 S. F. of Graffiti
12-16-96 La Serena @ S. General Kearney Removed 300 S.F. of Graffiti
12-17-96 Woodcreek Apartments Removed 38 S. F. of Graffiti
12-18-96 28550 Pujol Street Removed 84 S. F. of Graffiti
12-19-96 Armetia Way Removed 23 S.F. of Graffiti
12-27-96 Moraga Road @ R. Calif. Road Removed 13 S. F. of Graffiti
12-27-96 Moraga Road @ Removed 3 S.F. of Graffiti
First Baptist Church
12-27-96 Rancho Calif. Road @ Car wash Removed 115 S. F. of Graffiti
12-27-96 Rancho Calif. Road @ Removed 147 S. F. of Graffiti
Lyndie Lane
12-27-96 Mira Loma @ Removed 16 S.F. of Graffiti
Rancho Vista Academy
12-31-96 28790 Puiol Street Removed 6 S.F. of Graffiti
12-31-96 28747 Pujol Street Removed 250 S.F. of Graffiti
TOTAL S.F. 2,170
TOTAL LOCATIONS 22
R:\ROADS\WKCMPLTD\96\12.GRA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
DECEMBER, 1996
CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE
.. ........ ..
.. .. .. .. ..
. ..... .. ..
....... ... ........ .. ..
. .. . .. ..... ...
.. .. .. ..... .. .. .. . ..
........ .. ..
..... .. .. ..... .. ..
CATION@@ .@....WO@R@K.COMPLETED I..,..,..@
. ................
..... ..... .
12-09-96_ Citywide "Rain' Cleaned & Checked 27 Catch Basins
12-10-96_ Citywide "Rain" Cleaned & Checked 49 Catch Basins
12-11-96 Citywide "Rain" Cleaned & Checked 27 Catch Basins
12-12-96_ Citywide "Rain" Cleaned & Checked 3 Catch Basins
12-16-96 Area #1 Cleaned & Checked 6 Catch Basins
TOTAL CATCH BASINS
CLEANED & CHECKED
R:\ROADS\WKCMPLTD\96\12.CB
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SIGNS
DECEMBER, 1996
..... ..... ..
........
.. .. ... ...
.. .. ..... .. .. I.. III
. .. ..... .. .
.. .. ...........
............
..... ....................
..... .....
D E.
12-02-95 Citywide (See Daily for locations) Replaced 42 R-26-D
"Faded"
12-06-96 26631 Ynez Road Repaired R-1 1
12-09-96 Margarita @ Replaced R-7 - R-7A
Rancho California Road "T.C."
12-10-96 Muirfield @ Pala Road Replaced R-1 4'T.C.'s
12-11-96 Margarita @ Winchester Replaced R-7
12-12--96 Pala Road @ Muirfield Replaced R-81 "Missing"
12-12--6 De Portola @ Butterfield Stage Replaced R-1 "T.C.11
-12-16-96 Butterfield Stage @ Pauba Replaced R-1 'Wind"
12-18-96 Loma Linda @ Dulce Court Replaced R-1 "Stolen"
12-19-96 Margarita @ Replaced W-41 "Wind"
Rancho California Road F/S /B/T
12-20-96 Corte Encinas @ Paseo de las Olas Replaced W-53 "T.C."
-12-23-96 Del Rey Road @ Via Norte Replaced R-1 "T.C."
-12-30-96 Marqarita @ De Portola Road Replaced W-32 "Stolen'
12-30-96 Oak Cliff Drive @ Rainbow Creek Installed W-53
-12-30-96 Masters @ Pala Road Replaced R-1 "Stolen'
12-31-96 Santiago Road @ Front Street Replaced R-1-2 "Faded'
TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 15
TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 1
TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 1
R;\ROADS\WXCMPLTD\96\12.SGN
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
R.O.W.TREE TRIMMING
DECEMBER, 1996
.. .. ..... .. ...
..... .. .. . .
........... ..
........ ........ ....
.. .. ..... .. ..
.. ..... .. ..
TIO@N, ORK:@COMPL@ETED ...... .. .. ...
12-02-96 Front Street N/o McDonaids Trimmed 2 Trees
12-04-96 3021 0 Moreno Trimmed 1 Tree
12-04-96 Del Rio Road Trimmed 2 Trees
TOTAL R.O.W.
TREES TRIMMED 5
R:\ROADS\%KCMPLTD\96NI2.TrR