Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout010802 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title Iii AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE JANUARY 8, 2002 - 7:00 P.M. At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 11:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 11:00 P.M. 5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to such matter, the City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City based on existing facts and circumstances and the City will decide whether to initiate litigation. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) with respect to two matters of existing litigation involving the City. The following case will be discussed: 1) Ruiz vs. City of Temecula and 2) Eddie Roy Elder vs. City of Temecula. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. CALL TO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2002-01 Resolu{ion: No. 2002-01 Mayor Ron Roberts Jonathan Santos, Jr. Pastor Scott Treadway of Rancho Community Church Cub Pack No. 148 C, omerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts R:~Agenda\010802 1 PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Certificate of Appreciation for Map/ann Edwards PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motionto.waivethereading ofthetextofallordinances andresolutionsincludedinthe agenda. 2 Approval of Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of September 25, 2001; 2.2 Approve the minutes of October 9, 2001; 2.3 Approve the minutes of October 23, 2001; 2.4 Approve the minutes of November 13, 2001; 2.5 Approve the minutes of November 27, 2001. R:~Agenda\010802 2 4 6 7 Resolution Approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2001. Parcel Map No. 29974 (located at the northwest corner of Winchester Road and Roripau~qh Road n the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 5.2 Approve Parcel Map No. 29974 in conformance with the conditions of approval; Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Certificate of Deposit as security for the agreement. Parcel Map No. 30060 (located at the northeast corner of Marqarita Road and Winchester Road in the Winchester Meadows Shoppin.q Center) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 6.2 Approve Parcel Map No. 30060 in conformance with the conditions of approval; Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Certificate of Deposit as security for the agreement. Approval of the Plans and Specifications and authorization to solicit Construction Bids for Mar.qarita Road Interim Wideninq - Phase II - Project No. PW99-01 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Margarita Road Interim Widening - Phase II - Project No. PW99-01. R:~Agenda\010802 3 8 Approval of the Plans and Specifications and authorization to solicit Construction Bids for Citywide P.C.C. Repairs FY2001-2002 - Project No. PW01-30 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Citywide P.C.C. Repairs FY2001-2002 - Project No. PW01-30. Pala Road Phase I Improvements - Proiect No. PW99-11 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the Negative Declaration and Environmental Report for the Pala Road Phase Improvements, Project No. PW99-11; 9.2 Approve the Plans and Specifications for the construction of Pala Road Phase I Improvement, Project No. PW99-11 and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids. 10 Joint Fundin,q A,qreement with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for Detailed Desi,qn for the Murdeta Creek Improvement Proiect - Proiect No. PW01-25 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve a Joint Funding Agreement in the amount of $125,000.00 with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for detailed engineering design costs associated with future flood control and recreational facilities within Murrieta Creek. 11 12 Amendment to Prqfessional Services A,qreement Land Development Construction Inspection Services RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Construction Inspection Services Agreement with Vail Cooper and Associates, Inc. for an amount equal to $54,284.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Ali-Way Stop Si,qn Installation (located on Butterfield StaRe Road at De Portola Road) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING AN ALL-WAY STOP AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD R:~Agenda\010802 4 RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:~Agenda\010802 5 TEMECULA coMMuNITY SERVICES~DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2002-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2002-01 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be flied with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 11, 2001. DISTRICT BUSINESS 2 Status of the Chaparral Pool Construction (At the request of President Stone) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file a report on the status of the Chaparral Pool Construction. R:~Agenda\010802 6 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 22, 2002, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\010802 7 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2002-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2002-01 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson JeffComerchero ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Robeds, Comerchero PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and flied with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 11, 2001. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 22, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\010802 8 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 13 Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 (continued from the December 11, 2001, City Council meeting) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SP-4 AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019) 13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0102 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION 13.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 R:~Agenda\010802 9 13.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 01t7 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 293 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CENTER LOT, 1 PARK SITE LOT, AND 16 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, AND PARK SITES OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, AND 955-030-032 COUNCIL BUSINESS 14 Selection of City Council Committee Assiqnments RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 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; Commission Liaison (One Member) · Community Services Commission · Old Town Local Review Board · Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee · Planning Commission · Public/Traffic Safety Commission · Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison 14.2 Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Advisory Committees; Advisory Committees (Two Members) · Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee · Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee · Finance Committee · Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee · Library Task Force · Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee · PublicWorks/Facilities Committee R:~Agenda\010802 10 15 14.3 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following external committees; Representative AssiRnments (External Organizations) · City of Murrieta Liaison · County General Plan Update Committee - RCIP (attend meetings) · French Valley Airport Committee · League of California Congress - 2002 Voting Delegates · Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee (attend meetings) · Murrieta Creek Advisory Board · National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2002 Voting Delegate · Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency · Riverside County Transportation Commission · Riverside Transit Agency Representative · Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors · Trails Master Plan Development Committee · WRCOG Representative 14.4 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Council Subcommittees. Council Subcommittees · Animal Shelter Subcommittee · Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee · City's General Plan Update Committee · Development Overlay Subcommittee · Electrical NeedsAd Hoc Subcommittee · Homeless Programs & Services Subcommittee · Lennar Project Subcommittee · Rancho Community Church Subcommittee · Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee · SAF-T NET Subcommittee · Sports ParkAd Hoc Subcommittee · Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Water Park Subcommittee · Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Committee Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Appoint two applicants to serve on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for full three-year terms through October 10, 2004. R:~Agenda\010802 11 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\010802 12 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 The City Council convened in Open Session at 7:01 P.M., on Tuesday, September 25, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Councitmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Comerchero Absent: Councilmember: Stone PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Mathew Kim and Oliver and Sarah Koughlin. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Rabbi Yitzchok Hurwitz of Chabad of Temecula Valley. ALLEGIANCE The salute to the Flag was led by Councilman Naggar. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Fall Rod Run Presentation In appreciation of the City's continued support of this event, Mr. Vesey presented to the City a Plaque of Appreciation; briefly commented on the upcoming event; and distributed event memorabilia to the Councilmembers. Fire Prevention Week Presentation This presentation was continued to the meeting of October 9, 2001. Boys and Girls Club Presentation This presentation was continued to the meeting of October 9, 2001. Annual "Memory Walk" Awareness and Fundraiser Proclamation Reading the proclamation into the record, Mayor Comerchero noted that it would be forwarded to the organization. Inland Empire Race for the Cure Month Proclamation Thanking the City Council for its continued support and dedication, Ms. Joan Sparkman, Ms. Sheila Crane, Race Chair; and Mr. Bruce Cripe, Co-Chair, accepted the proclamation. R:\Minutes\092501 1 Proud American City Proclamation In an effort to express national unity and support in light of the September 11, 2001, tragedy, Mayor Comerchero read into the record the Proud American City Proclamation and relayed his desire that other cities consider proclaiming a similar proclamation. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Encouraging continued public support, Mr. Wayne Hall, 27715 Jefferson Street, representing the American Red Cross, provided a brief update of on-going fundraising efforts in light of the September 11,200, tragedy. B. Commenting on the diminishing affects of freedom of speech if abused by an individual or group of individuals who hire signature gathers to stand in public places and tell lies about actions of the City Council/Lennar/Harveston, Mr. Ray Becket, 6529 Riverside Avenue, Suite No. 133, representing Lennar Communities, assured the Council and the public that Lennar Communities/Harveston will continue to abide by the tenants of the agreement with the City and continue to move forward with the street improvements, school site improvements, and will continue to live by the agreement with the City. C. Mr. David Rosenthal, 27315 Jefferson Street, relayed his support of the Harveston project. D. Commenting his dismay with those individuals opposing the Harveston project even though the developer has adhered to the imposed requirements, Mr. Rodolfo Martinez, 43714 Buckeye Road, relayed his support of the Harveston project. E. Mr. Ed Dool, 28464 Old Town Front Street, expressed appreciation to the City Council for its support of the Hot Summer Nights in Old Town, commenting on the citizenry participation and invited the public to the upcoming Rod Run event in Old Town. F. Quoting Mayor Comerchero in a recent letter published in the Californian, Mrs. May Lorah, 35555 Monte De Crc, noted that although she may not live in the City of Temecula, Mayor Comerchero's election committee still invited her to participate in his reelection fundraiser and advised that she shops in the City and that her children attend the Temecula Valley Unified School District. G. Ms. Tomi Arbogast, 27450 Ynez Road, representing the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, encouraged the public to exercise its right to vote, commenting on the importance of the upcoming election; invited the public to watch a Chamber Candidates' Forum on Wednesday, October 10, 2001, and advised that the last day to register to vote will be Monday, October 22, 2001. H. As a senior citizen of this community, Ms. Joan Tussine, 28165 Jefferson Street, noted that she would be proud to live in the Harveston project; relayed her opposition to the derogatory slurs with regard to this project; and expressed dismay with the viciousness that Councilman Stone has been subjected to as a result of his support of this project. I. At this time, City Clerk Jones distributed to the City Council a letter from Ms. Pamela Miod. R:\Minutes\092501 2 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. in response to Mr. Hall's comment, Mayor Comerchero thanked City Manager Nelson and staff for their efforts associated with obtaining the updated equipment at Fire Station No. 73, noting that the equipment will be purchased. Mr. Comerchero advised that the American Red Cross raised $14,000 toward the September 11, 2001, tragedy, proudly noting that of those fundraising efforts, $1,708.751 were raised by City Hall employees and commenting on everybody's efforts to assist with this tragedy. 5 CONSENT CALENDAR Standa~ Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motionto waivethe mading ofthete~ ofallordinancesandresolutionsincludedinthe agenda. Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the minutes of July 17, 2001. Comment Letter on the Riverside County Circulation Element RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the comment letter for transmittal to the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Comment Letter on the Domeniqoni-Barton Specific Plan No. 310 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the comment letter for transmittal to the Riverside County Planning Commission. R:\Minutes\092501 3 6 Acceptance of an Easement Deed for a Meanderin,q Sidewalk along Winchester Road with portions within Parcel No. 13 of Parcel Map No. 21383 (located near the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Diaz Road) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT DEED FOR A MEANDERING SIDEWALK ALONG WINCHESTER ROAD WITH PORTIONS WITHIN PARCEL NO. 13 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 21383 AS REQUIRED PER THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0409 7 Acceptance of Jeffrey Hei,qhts Road and a portion of Calle Giraso] into the City-Maintained Street System within Parcel Map No. 14493 (located on the north side of Calle Girasol and east of Riverton Lane) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING JEFFREY HEIGHTS ROAD AND A PORTION OF CALLE GIRASOL INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN PARCEL MAP NO, 14493} 8 Parcel Map No. 29406 (located on the south side of Enterprise Circle West at the Knuckle) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 29406 in conformance with the conditions of approval; 8.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond as security for the agreement; 8.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Bond as security for the agreement. 9 Request to increase contingency for Professional Services Aqreement - Rancho California Road Bridqe Wideninq over Murrieta Creek - Proiect No. PW99-18 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract changes with T.Y. Lin International for an additional amount of $35,000 above the previously approved 10% contingency for the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project. R:\Minutes\092501 4 (Pulled for separate discussion; see pages 6-7.) 10 Purchase of City Equipment RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the purchase of the vibratory roller and equipment trailer from IngersolP Rand Equipment Sales for $26,916.93. 11 Completion and Acceptance of the Pala Road Bridge Soundwall Project - Project No. PW97- 15SW RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept the Pala Road Bridge Soundwall Project - Project No. PW97-15SW- as complete; 11.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 11.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. 12 Request to Desi.qnate Certain Property as No Skateboardinq, Rollerbladin,q or Similar Activity Area RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DESIGNATING PRIVATE PROPERTY AT 28820 AND 28835 SINGLE OAK DRIVE AS A NO SKATEBOARDING, ROLLERBLADING OR SIMILAR ACTIVITY AREA PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 10.36 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE 13 Interim Fire Station Work Plan - Proiect No. PW01-21 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the location of the Vail Ranch Interim Fire Station; 13.2 Approve an appropriation of $562,000 from the General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance for Fire Department staffing costs for the interim station. R:\Minutes\092501 5 14 Interim Fire Station Residential Facility RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the purchase of the residential module interim Fire Station from San Diego Manufactured Housing Company for a total amount of $34,240.00. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 8 and 10 - 14 (Item No. 9 was pulled for separate discussion; see pages 6-7). The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM CONSIDERED UNDER SEPARATE DISCUSSION 9 Request to increase contingency for Professional Services A,qreement - Rancho California Road Brid,qe Widenin,q over Murrieta Creek - Proiect No. PW99-18 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract changes with T.Y. Lin International for an additional amount of $35,000 above the previously approved 10% contingency for the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project. Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (of record), noting, for Councilman Naggar, that 60% to 70% of the structural design of the new bridge widening has been completed and that stopping the project, at this point in time, would compromise monies already expended on the project. Noting that roads do not solve the traffic problem, Councilman Pratt stated that other alternatives other than widening bridges need to be explored such as public transportation. Although he would not necessarily favor stopping the project, he would not favor expending more money toward the project. Because of the geotechnical investigation and in order to protect the existing bridge, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts indicated that additional monies are necessary. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved approve Consent Calendar Item No. 9. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who voted n_~o and Councilman Stone who was absent. At 7:47 P. M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and after a recess, resumed, at 8:16 P.M., with regularly scheduled City Council business. PUBLIC HEARING 15 Development Code Amendment (Planninq Application No. 01-0120 - non profit- clubs and Iod,qe meetin~q halls, compact parkinq spaces, courtesy curbs, temporary si,qna,qe, minimum lot area and commercial buildin~ offsets) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: R:\Minutes\092501 6 ORDINANCE NO. 01-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTERS 8 AND 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE TYPOGRAPHICAL AND OTHER MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE Senior Planner Hogan reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), advising that the proposed amendment would be consistent with the City's General Plan. At this time, Mayor Comerchero opened the public hearing. Because of incompatibility, Mr. Ron Knowles, 39675 Cantrall Road, representing Nicolas Valley Preservation Association, relayed his support of the Planning Commission's determination to not change zoning for lodge halls and social clubs in LowNery Low residential areas. Relaying his support of the Planning Commission's decision to not allow meeting rooms, lodges, etc. as well as the Commission's decision with regard to minimum lot areas, Mr. Larry Markham, 41750 Winchester Road, representing MDMA and Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association, noted that there are still inconsistencies between the General Plan and the Developm. ent Code and, therefore, encouraged the City Council to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission. In response to Councilman Naggar, Mr. Markham further elaborated on the effect the proposed action could have on the net and gross lot area. In response to Mr. Richard Harrison, 40025 Walcott Lane, it was noted that in light of the Planning Commission's decision to not adopt the proposed changes to allow non-profit clubs and lodge meeting halls in the Very Low, Low -2, and Low Medium residential zones, the issue would not be considered by the City Council. Senior Planner Hogan clarified that the proposed change would create consistency between the Development Code and the General Plan as to net lot area (the gross project less the portion used for roads, flood plain areas, etc.) For Councilman Pratt, Senior Planner Hogan provided clarification regarding Mr. Markham's request to allow acreage (for streets and roads) which would have to be removed from the property, and subsequently dedicated. For Councilman Naggar, it was noted that the proposed amendment would apply to Very Low, hillside residential, and the two Low density areas, advising that suburban lots are measured by square footage and not acreage. Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that the proposed amendment would result in a slightly lower yield per subdivision, depending on the size of the property. Mayor Comerchero closed the public hearing. At this time, City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 01-14 by title only. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved to introduce Ordinance No. 01-14. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. R:\Minutes\092501 7 16 Rancho Highlands Drive General Plan Amendment (Plannin.q Application No. PA99-0451) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR A LOCATION ON RANCHO HIGHLANDS DRIVE IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 944-330-019 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0451) Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per written material), highlighting the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the applicant's request to change the General Plan Land Use Map of the area of discussion to Highway/Tourist Commercial. At this time, Mayor Comerchero opened the public hearing. By way of a map, Mr. Anthony Polo, Avalon Consultants, P.O. Box 2497, Temecula, representing Global Hotel Network, advised that prior to the close of escrow, the current owner had requested verification from the City of Temecula that the potential use of this site as a hotel would be permissible since it is zoned Office Professional; that the current owner based his decision to purchase the properly on the information he had received from the City; that the plot plan for the proposed hotel is now on hold; that two large pads have been graded (one acre in sige); and that rather than consider this as an application request to change open space to commercial use, which would increase traffic generation, he requested that the City Council consider this application with the traffic generation approved under the original Specific Plan. At this time, Mayor Comerchero closed the public hearing. Although the Specific Plan is almost built out, Councilman Naggar noted that a Park and Ride has been indicated in the Specific Plan but has not been built; questioned where a Park and Ride could be built; and stated that, to his understanding, the property of discussion has been assessed and taxes have been paid as if it were commercial. In closing, Mr. Naggar noted that he would not be prepared to vote on this matter. Concurring with Councilman Naggar, Mayor Pro Tern Robeds questioned whether a one-acre pad would be sufficient in size for a hotel and parking; as well questioned where the Park and Ride would be built; and suggested that a traffic study be completed to determine the traffic generation impacts on Ynez Road as a result of the construction of a hotel. Councilman Pratt as well addressed the potential traffic impacts as a result of the construction of a hotel. Concurring with his fellow colleagues' comments, Mayor Comerchero supported a continuance in order to further explore the matter as well as the formation of an ad hoc committee and recommended that Councilman Naggar serve on that committee. R:\Minutes\092501 8 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to continue the matter for 60 days to the November 27, 2001, City Council meeting and to form an ad hoc committee to address the matter (to which Councilman Naggar was appointed). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. COUNCIL BUSINESS 17 Buttedield StaRe Road/CETAP Corridors RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Receive and file report. Public Works Director Hughes provided the staff report (of record). Mr. Eric Haley, Executive Director of the Riverside County Transit Commission, informed the City Council and the viewing public that the Commission had unanimously reinforced an earlier Commission decision of November 2000 to remove the CETAP Corridors (5A and 5B) from being considered as preferred alternatives and to emphatically state that these corridors will not be considered as preferred alternatives, reiterating that these alternatives do not have the endorsement of the Riverside County Transit Commission and, therefore, funding for such corridors would not be made available. Because the alternatives are viewed as part of a larger program to ensure proper review by all associated agencies, Mr. Haley advised that corridors 5A and 5B will continue to be studied by the various agencies. In response to Mayor Comerchero, Mr. Haley noted that there would be no additional measures necessary on the City's part to ensure these alternatives will never be viewed as viable options. Although appreciating Mr. Haley's comments and reassurance that these alternatives will not be considered, Ms. Michelle Anderson, 43797 Barletta Street, advised that an organization has been formed by the public (Citizens Against Neighborhood Expressways) to further ensure that these alternatives will never be viewed as viable and questioned why if these alternatives are viewed as not viable, why the County continues to expend monies on further studies regard to them. Mr. Ed Dool, 28464 Old Town Front Street, as well relayed his opposition to the expressway but expressed concern with the estimated traffic increase by 2020. Mr. Carl Ross, 43886 Butternut Road, questioned why the citizens of the City had to apprise the City Council of these potential routes when Mayor Pro Tern Roberts serves as the Riverside County Transit Commission liaison, noting that the City should have apprised the residents. For Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Mr. Haley commented on how Corridors 5A and 5B were designated as freeways by the consultants, clarifying that the RCTC had neither endorsed nor directed this change and stating that he as well as Mayor Pro Tem Roberts were surprised by the designation. Relaying his opposition to 5A and 5B, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts requested that the consultant provide a revised map to the City Council. To ensure a safe walking route for the children who attend Abby Reinke Elementary School, Ms. Linda MacDonald, 38925 Calle Breve, requested that a four-way stop at Juarez and Butteffield Stage Roads be installed. R:\Minutes\092501 9 Councilman Naggar suggested that the above-mentioned matter be agendized for the next School Board/City Council Subcommittee meeting. Thanking Ms. Miod for her effods with informing the public, by way of a flier, of the potential of an expressway, Ms. Diana Hammons, 33375 Fox Road, informed the City Council that she had received no notices at her home from the County nor the City and relayed her opposition to these corridors. Councilman Naggar reiterated that this City Council would not permit the construction of a freeway and requested that the City Council prepare a resolution of opposition to be forwarded to the Riverside County Transit Commission. Expressing concern with the County's tendency to upzone property, Mr. Naggar noted that Alternatives 5A and 5B continue to remain on the County's Circulation Element, noting that if RCTC has designated them as not viable, why would the County continue to study the matter. In response to Councilman Naggar, Public Works Director Hughes noted that Alternatives 5A and 5B are only reflected on the County's Circulation Element during the planning process to ensure other resource agencies have properly reviewed all alternatives prior to making a determination of the preferred alternative. Echoing previously made comments with regard to the opposition of Alternatives 5A and 5B, City Manager Nelson assured the attending and viewing residents that the City is of the same opinion as the residents and that the City will continue to monitor the matter. Mayor Comerchero thanked Mayor Pro Tern Roberts for his support role on the CETAP/RCTC Committees. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to receive and file the report and to prepare a resolution of opposition with regard to Alternatives 5A and 5B. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. 18 Proposed Urban Limit Line RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING AN URBAN LIMIT LINE FOR THE EAST AND SOUTH SIDES OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S PLANNING AREA TO IMPLEMENT THE GENERAL PLAN Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material). City Attorney Thorson noted that the above-recommended action would not bind the County because the City has no legal jurisdiction over the County but that it would tie all elements of the City's General Plan into this concept as policy of the City. For Councilman Naggar, it was noted that it would be appropriate to include this issue as part of discussion in the City's General Ptan update. R:\Minutes\092501 10 Mayor Pro Tern Roberts requested that the County's citrus/vineyard areas be reflected in the Urban Limit Line. For Councilman Pratt, Deputy City Manager Thornhill clarified the term sphere of influence, noting that it is the area likely to become future City boundary, advising that on the east side of the City the sphere of influence is co-terminus, meaning the City boundary and sphere of influence is the same, advising that the City would be establishing a differentiation between urban uses and rural uses and stating that the City's action would limit further urbanization to the east of the City boundary. Councilman Pratt suggested that the potentially affected residents to the east be apprised to ensure issues are properly represented. Having served on the General Plan Advisory Committee of Riverside County for almost two years, Mr. Steve Corona, 33320 Highway 79, commented on densities, General Plan designations, County General Plan process, and noted that it would be premature of the City Council to adopt the proposed resolution prior to discussing the matter with the General Plan Advisory Committee as well as the affected property owners east of Butterfield Stage Road or suggested that if approved, higher density be permitted. Serving on several of the Riverside County Integrated Plan committees, Dr. Robert Wheeler, 29090 Camino Alba, Murrieta, noted that the County is not following its own General Plan and spoke in support of the Urban Limit Line and encouraged the City Council to approve the proposed action. Concurring with Mr. Corona, Mr. Larry Markham1 41750 Winchester Road, representing MDMA, requested that the potential affected property owners be contacted to provide input and noted that a clear definition of the terms urban and rural need to be defined by the City. Viewing the passage of the proposed resolution as meaningless, Councilman Naggar suggested that the General Plan Committee review and address the issue and forward its recommendations to the City Council and relayed his opposition to the County upzoning any properties without proper mitigation. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts requested a clear definition as to where the citrus/vineyard district is located; noted that he would further address the matter with the General Plan Advisory Committee; and relayed his support of a continuance. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Roberts moved to continue this matter off calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. Mayor Comerchero echoed comments made by his fellow colleagues. Councilman Naggar encouraged the involvement of the City's General Plan Subcommittee in this process. At 9:51 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called a recess and reconvened the meeting at 10:04 P.M. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved that the City Council continue with its agenda and to complete the remaining items. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception Councilman Stone who was absent. R:\Minutes\092501 11 19 Appointment of Members to the General Plan Community Advisory Committee recommendation: 19.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CREATING THE GENERAL PLAN COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND SETTING FORTH THEIR DUTIES AND TERMS Appoint the remaining members of the General Plan Community Advisory Committee. Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record), clarifying that the Planning Commission (David Matthewson), Public Traffic Safety Commission (Darrell Connerton), and Community Services Commission (James Meyler) appointments have been made and that the City Council, this evening, is being requested to choose whether the Chamber of Commerce or the Economic Development Council should have representation, noting that which ever organization is chosen would then make its representative selection. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-87. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. City residents (one appointed by each City Councilmember) Councilman Naggar appointed Mr. Mark Broderick Councilman Pratt appointed Ms. Michelle Anderson Mayor Pro Tern Roberts appointed Mr. Paul Jacobs Mayor Comerchero appointed Mr. Greg Morrison Councilman Stone was absent (appointment to be made at the October 9, 2001, City Council meeting.) Representative of the Chamber of Commerce or the Economic Development Council ( as determined by the City Cguncil) In response to extensive discussion as to why either the Chamber of Commerce or the Economic Development Council should be chosen to select one representative, City Manager Nelson suggested that each organization be given the opportunity to select one representative. Councilman Naggar concurred that one representative from each organization be selected and that each representative must be a resident. AMENDED MOTION: CounciJman Naggar moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-87 as amended (Section 3d Members - A member of the Chamber of Commerce and the Economic Development Council and that each member be a resident). The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. R:\Minutes\092501 12 Representative of a local environmental or community or,qanization (as determined by the City Council) Mr. Chris Pederson, 31052 Wellington Circle, encouraged the General Plan Committee to listen to the individuals who had signed the Harveston Project and Wolf Creek Project petitions. Mr. Carl Ross, 43886 Butternut Drive, requested that the people be heard and that the Wolf Creek Project be voted on in the March election. Dr. Wheeler informed the City Council that he is associated with the Elsinore/Murrieta Anza Resource Conservation District. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved to appoint Dr. Robert Wheeler. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero. Voice vote reflected no action on the motion, as follows: AYES: Roberts, Comerchero NOES: Naggar, Pratt ABSENT: Stone MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to appoint Ms. Pamela Miod. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt. Voice vote reflected no action on the motion, as follows: AYES: Naggar, Pratt NOES: Roberts, Comerchero ABSENT: Stone Explaining his no vote for Dr. Wheeler, Councilman Naggar relayed his opposition to the SMART Growth concept, clustering density, etc. and requested that the General Plan Advisory Committee adequately address all viewpoints. In order to address the matter with Dr. Wheeler, Mr. Naggar suggested that the issue be tabled to the next City Council meeting. MOTION: Councilman Naggar suggested that the appointment of a local environmental or community organization be tabled to the next City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflect approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. Congratulations were extended to those individuals who were appointed to serve on the General Plan Advisory Committee. 20 Future City Hall Site Selection RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Appoint an ad-hoc committee to participate in the site selection process for a future City Hall; 20.2 Provide direction to staff to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to hire a consultant to lead this selection process. Assistant to the City Manager Yates presented the staff report (as per agenda material). R:\Minutes\092501 13 In light of the economy, the City's ability to determine its own location for a future City Hall site, and that a future location is not necessary for several years, Councilman Naggar suggested that the matter be continued off calendar. Councilman Pratt echoed Councilman Pratt's comments. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to continue the matter off calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was .absent and Mayor Comerchero who voted no. 21 Consideration of Increased Bus Service for Temecula (at the request of Councilman Pratt) RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Provide direction to staff regarding the possible increase in bus service for Temecula. Councilman Pratt presented the staff report. Having been in transportation for the past 20 years, Mr. Ed Dool, 28464 Old Town Front Street, commented on the limited and poor bus service provided by Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) for the City and, therefore, suggested the implementation of a demonstration project in order to determine the City's wants and needs. Although concurring with increasing bus service for the City, Councilman Naggar noted that another alternative could be to control the City's growth and monitoring the growth on freeways to ensure they are not overwhelmed. In response to Councilman Pratt, Mayor Comerchero advised that measures have been taken and noted that the Holiday Shuttle Service will again be provided and that the establishment of a Commuter Service has been placed into the 10-year Strategic Plan with the hopes of being redesignated into the short-range Transit Plan. MOTION: Councilman Pratt moved to receive and file the report and to authorize staff the necessary time to coordinate with RTA to ensure proper follow up. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who was absent. Although concurring with the motion, Councilman Pratt relayed his opposition to 10-year plans and encouraged to City to become financially involved in order to properly address this matter. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts further clarification with regard to RTA funding, commuter bus systems, and the Mobile Service Reduction Committee. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. R:\Minutes\092501 14 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that with regard to the real estate item, final action would be taken in public session at the next City Council meeting and that with regard to the litigation matters, the City Council gave direction and that there is no further action to report under Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT At 10:44 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 9, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\092501 15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 9, 2001 The City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, October 9, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CaLifornia. Present: Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Joanne Algier. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mr. Phil Oberhansley. ALLEGIANCE The salute to the Flag was led by Troop No. 911. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Excellence in Transportation Award of Overland Drive Overcrossinf:l Ms. Anne Mayer, District Director for the California Department of Transportation, presented to the City the 2001 Excellence in Transportation Award for the Overland Drive Overcrossing project (category of major structures), advising that the City had competed in a State-wide competition. Ms. Mayer as well presented Certificates to the following staff members associated with the completion of this project: Bill Hughes, Greg Butler, Steve Beswick, Mike Hudson, and Mike Wolfe. Introduction of County Supervisor Jim Venable (Third District) Introducing himself and his staff to the City Council and attending public, Supervisor Venable advised that he and his staff will primarily be serving the District through the Hemet and French Valley facilities. Welcoming Supervisor Venable, Councilman Stone requested his assistance with the resolution of obtaining free and clear title of certain properly (which was to be a portion of the annexed Vail Ranch area), noting that the property of discussion was to used for the use of the interim fire station. Certificate of Achievement to Jessica Garnett of the Case Batbusters Commending Ms. Garnett on her athletic achievements, Mayor Comerchero presented the Certificate of Achievement. R:\Minutes\100901 1 Presentation of City/County Marketing First Place Award for the City of Temecula Tourism Brochure Commending and thanking graphic designer Anne Howell of FFF Enterprises and City Marketing Coordinator Wolnick on their associated efforts and inspiration, Assistant City Manager O'Grady informed the City Council and public that the City's Tourism Newsletter had received first place award winner in the Best Publication/Calendars/Guides category. Boys and Girls Club Presentation Presenting to Mayor Comerchero a plaque of appreciation, Mr. Terry Gilmore and Ms. Michelle Arijan, President of the Boys and Girls Club, extended appreciation to Mayor Comerchero for his assistance in addressing a transportation need for the Club, advising that because of his efforts, RTA provided a 17-passenger van with a lift to the Club. Fire Prevention Week Proclamation City Fire Chief Windsor apprised the public of upcoming fire safety activities in honor of Fire Prevention Week and commented on the importance of fire safety. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Sharing her memories of times of City incorporation, Ms. Peg Moore, 43557 Savona Street, relayed her delight with being once again a City of Temecula resident and commended the City on a job well done with regard to the Overland Drive Overcrossing project as well as other infrastructure projects. B. Referencing City traffic problems of 1986, Mr. Jimmy Moore,, 43557 Savona Street, noted that those problems were insurmountable compared to today s traffic issues. Mr. Moore encouraged the City Council to solve problems by meeting the challenges versus stopping growth, commenting on the need for varied housing. C. On behalf of the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, Ms. Tomi Arbogast, 27450 Ynez Road, encouraged the residents to vote in the upcoming November 6, 2001, election and invited the public to participate in a Candidates' Forum on Wednesday, October 10, 2001, 8:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M., at City Hall, noting that the forum would be televised and reaired on Saturday at 10:00 A.M. D. In light of the September 11, 2001, tragedy, Ms. May Lorah, 35555 Monte De Oro, thanked Mr. David Lowry for hosting the upcoming Celebrate the Spirit event and thanked the City for permitting Mr. Lowry to host such a wonderful event. E. Ms. Melody Brunsting, representing the Theatre Foundation, invited the citizens to the Celebrate the Spirit of Temecula event on Sunday, October 14, 2001, at the Sports Park, 1:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M., advising that the event will be hosted by a non-profit organization and that it will be patriotic in theme. R:\Minutes~100901 2 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Having attended the National League of Cities Transportation Steering Committee meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts informed the City Council that this committee has been tasked with drafting policy on airport/airplane safety, which is to be forwarded to the National League of Cities, Congress, and the President, noting that a general policy was drafted requesting immediate changes. By way of overheads, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts commented on discussions, at a recent CETAP Committee meeting, with regard to downgrading service levels C with D in community development areas at intersections of any combinations, noting that the County has backed off from this action. B. Councilman Stone applauded and extended appreciation to Ms. Lorah for her positive comments. With regard to the City's Stop Light Abuse Program, Councilman Stone noted that he has been receiving citizen calls, noting that the abuses are again on the rise especially at the intersections of Margarita and Winchester Roads, Rancho California Road and Old Town Front Street, and Rancho California Road and Ynez Road. With the concurrence of the City Council, Mr. Stone requested that enforcement be immediately increased. In light of the September 11, 2001, tragedy, Councilman Stone requested that a representative from the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant brief staff/citizens on how to protect oneself in the event of an emergency at that particular facility. C. Concurring with Councilman Stone's request with regard to additional enforcement at specific intersections as it relates to light abuses, Councilman Naggar suggested that the good driver portion of the program be suspended in order to step up the enforcement issue. D. With regard to Councilman Stone's comment relative to the San Onofre Power Plant, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts suggested that the City obtain a copy of the Highway Patrol Evacuation Manual. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure. RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of July 24, 2001; 2.2 Approve the minutes of August 14, 2001 (RCIP Workshop). R:\Minutes\100901 3 3 Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 City Treasurer's Report as of Au.qust 31, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of August 31, 2001. 5 First Amendment to Professional Contract for Buildinq Inspection Staff RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with P & D Consultants amending Exhibit B (Hourly Compensation Rate Schedule). 6 Approval of the Urban Recreational and Cultural Centers, Museums, and Facilities for Wildlife Education or Environmental Education Proqram Grant Application for th~ Imagination Workshop - The Temecula Children's Museum RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0t-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR URBAN RECREATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTERS, MUSEUMS, AND FACILITIES FOR WILDLIFE EDUCATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM UNDER THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 7 Award of Contract for P.C. Workstations RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Award a contract for Pentium based computer workstations to Tech 101 - Arcus, Inc. of Irvine, California, in the amount of $44,618.25; 7.2 Appropriate $5,500 from Development Impact Fees - Corporate Facilities. R:\Minutes\100901 4 8 Purchase of C!t¥ Vehicle RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the purchase of one 2001 Ford Ranger, four door, from Rancho Ford Lincoln Mercury for $26,873.01. 9 Approval of Development Impact Fee Reimbursement A,qreement with Temeka Advertisin,q (42380 Zevo Drive) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Development Impact Fee Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Temecula and Temeka Advertising providing for the reimbursement of $10,400 of Development Impact Fees. 10 Professional Services A,qreement - Berryman & Heni,qar- Pavement Manaqement Update - FY2001-2006 - Project No. PW 01-22 (RFP No. 98) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve an agreement with Berryman & Henigar in an amount not to exceed $48,578.00 to provide the necessary design services needed to prepare the update of the Pavement Management Program - FY 2001-2006 - Project No. PW 01-22 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,857.80 which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 11 Parcel Map No. 29864 (located on the southwest corner of State Route 79 South and Butterfield Sta,qe Road) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 29864 in conformance with the conditions of approval; 11.2 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Bond as security for the agreement. 12 Authorize Temporary Padial Street Closures for Race for the Cure Event on October 21, 2001, in the Promenade Mall area (Margarita Road, Solana Way, Ynez Road, and Overland Drive) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:\Minutes\100901 5 RESOLUTION NO. 01-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PARTIAL.STREET CLOSURES FOR INLAND EMPIRE RACE FOR THE CURE EVENT ON OCTOBER 21, 2001, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT 13 Award of Construction Contract for the Site Gradinq & Pavinq of the Vail Ranch Interim Fire Station - Project No. PW01-21 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Award a contract for the Vail Ranch Interim Fire Station - Site Grading & Paving - Project No. PW01-21 to McLaughlin Engineering & Mining for a base amount of $82,000.00 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $8,200.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. (Amended to approve contingent upon receipt of appropriate legal access to the property.) 14 Second Readin.q of Ordinance No. 01-14 (Amendinq the Temecula Municipal Code) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTERS 8 AND 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0129 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 14 (Item No. 13 amended; see above). The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:45 P. M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and resumed at 7:46 P.M. with regularly scheduled City Council business. R:\Minutes\100901 6 COUNCIL BUSINESS 15 Inland Empire Airpods First RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Provide direction to staff on taking a formal position of suppod for the development of March Airport and other Inland Empire Airports. Senior Management Analyst Adams introduced Mr. Aaron of Harley-Knox and Associates who by way of a PowerPoint presentation provided an overview of the matter of discussion, commenting on the following: · Goal to redevelop March Air Force Base in to a commercial airport, focusing on air cargo · Needs to accomplish this goal · Lack of air freight throughout the Inland Empire · Advantages/pressures · Opposition to the LAX expansion or the development of an El Toro Airport until a full- range of Inland Empire passenger and air cargo flights are available · Primary focus for March Air Force Base would be air cargo with full passenger services within 10 to 20 years LAX expansion will require extensive infrastructure improvements ($20 billion) on freeways and auxiliary roadways, expressing concern with funding and its impacts on the Inland Empire MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution of support for the development of the March Air Force Base Airport as well as other Inland Empire Airports. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 16 Appointment of Members to the General Plan Community Advisory Committee, (continued from the September 25, 2001, City Council meeting) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Appoint the remaining members of the General Plan Community Advisory Committee. Councilman Stone requested that this matter be continued to the October 23, 2001, City Council meeting. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Councilman Stone's request. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\Minutes\100901 7 17 Disaster Relief for the American Red Cross (requested by Councilman Stone) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Provide direction to staff regarding a $25,000 donation to the American Red Cross to assist with the disaster relief effort for the victims of September 11, 2001. Councilman Stone provided an overview of his request to donate $25,000 to the American Red Cross with City Manager Nelson advising that the monies would be allocated through Community Service Funding. In response to Councilman Naggar, Mr. Wayne Hall, representing the American Red Cross, ensured the City Council that 100% of allocated funds would be designated toward the September 11, 2001, disaster. Advising that Congressman Issa has presented to the City a United States flag which was flown over the United States Capital on September 19, 2001, Councilman Stone informed the public that this flag will be put out for public bid (October 15 - November 15, 2001) and that all funds will be forwarded to the American Red Cross by way of United Way. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to allocate $25,000 to the American Red Cross with 100% of the funds to be designated toward the September 11, 2001, disaster. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson apprised the public of the upcoming Make-a-Difference-Day, Saturday, October 13, 2001, noting that volunteers are welcomed, as well as the upcoming Community Clean-up and Hazardous Household Waste Round-up Day, Temecula Valley High School, Saturday, October 13, 2001, 8:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With respect to one potential litigation item and one existing litigation item, City Attorney Thorson advised that the City Council gave direction with regard to those matters. With respect to a third item, the City Council authorized the following explanation of the action taken: that on Wednesday, September 26, 2001, the City Clerk had received signed referendum petitions forms requesting that the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement with Lennar Communities and Winchester Hills, LLC, be rescinded or submitted to the voters of Temecula; that this petition bears many similarities to the petition associated with the Wolf Creek development; that given the nature of the Harveston petition, it is probable that any action taken by the City Clerk in ruling on the Harveston petition would prompt a legal challenge by one or another of the parties; that it is important that the courts quickly consider this issue in order to provide a timely resolution of this issue; that if the petitions were found to be valid, the voters of Temecula could vote on this issue in March of 2002, as part of the already scheduled election; that, therefore, the City Council has directed the City Attorney to initiate a Declaratory Relief Action to determine the validity of the petitions; R:\Minutes\100901 8 that the 3-2 vote was a follows: Councilman Stone, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts, and Mayor Comerchero in support and Councilman Naggar and Councilman Pratt in opposition; that as with the Wolf Creek petition, the City Clerk would immediately forward the Harveston petitions to the Registrar of Voters for verification of signatures so that the verification process and legal actions could proceed at the same time. Considering the nature of this item, Mayor Comerchero stated that it was determined to release this information to the public and, therefore, offered each City Councilmember the opportunity to comment on the matter. Vehemently opposing the action being taken by the City, Councilman Naggar questioned its legality; noted that it circumvents due process; stated that there is no provision in the Elections Code that would permit such action; that there is a presumption being made that the submitted petitions are invalid; that the decision should be made by the Election Official/City Clerk; that by approving such action, the City will be suing its own citizens who are proponents of the referendum; and that the City Clerk should make a decision to reject or accept the petitions. Supporting Councilman Naggar's comments, Councilman Pratt commented on his support of term limits and setting a cap on capital spending prior to the approval of any additional construction permits/subdivisions/Specific Plans. Being of the opinion that the City will be sued whether the City Clerk determines the petitions to be valid or invalid, Councilman Stone advised that the City Council has decided to expedite the process in order to give the citizens the opportunity to vote on the matter in the March 2002 election; that by turning it over to the Courts at this time, the City will be able to meet the necessary deadlines to ensure a March 2002 election and, thereby, saving over $40,000 by not having to call a special election. Concurring with Councilman Stone's comments and trusting the opinion of the City Attorney, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts spoke in support of obtaining a court ruling as quickly as possible. Respecting the rights of the voters and wanting to expedite the matter to ensure the voters' ability to vote on the matter in March of 2002 if the judge were to rule the petitions were valid and in order to minimize cost, Mayor Comerchero noted that the City Council's action would be within the framework of the law. R:\Minutes\100901 9 ADJOURNMENT At 8:24 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\100901 10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL OCTOBFR 23, 200'1 The City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero Absent: Councilmember: None PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Natalie and Tiffany Vita. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Robert Gonzalez of House to House Ministry. ALLEGIANCE The salute to the Flag was led by Cub Scout Pack No. 301. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Performance bv the Musicians' Workshop Choir Under the direction of Choir Director, Esthern Dernbach, the Choir performed the City Song as well as another patriotic song. Mayor Comerchero noted that the words for the City Song will be posted on the City's Website and that he was under the impression that a CD may be forthcoming. Domestic Violence Awareness Month Proclamation Accepting the City's proclamation, both Ms. Eliza Daniely-Woolfolk, Executive Director, and Ms. Terra Rodi, Center Coordinator, thanked the City for its continuous support, noting that the City's support assisted in making the upcoming construction of a new 60-bed state-of-the-art shelter and training facility a reality. National and State Financial Reportincl Awards Honoring the Finance Department on its receipt of National and State Awards, City Manager Nelson commended Finance Director Roberts, Fiscal Services Manager Papagolos, Senior Accountant Brown, Accountant Ruddell, and Administrative Secretary Caravelli on a job well done. Presentation by the Temecula Firefiqhters Advising of the necessary recovery efforts undertaken during the September 11, 2001, tragedy, City Fire Chief Windsor advised that the Count!/Urban Search and Rescue Teams were activated to assist in New York City. With great pride, Fire Chief Windsor introduced Fire Captain Beech, Fire Apparatus Engineer Bucklay, and Fire Apparatus Engineer Juarez who R:\Minutes\102301 1 each proceeded with sharing their experiences and poignant moments and clarified the function of the Urban Research and Rescue Team. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Comerchero commended all the firemen on their heroic efforts. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. With this being the last official meeting prior to the November 6, 2001, election, Councilman Stone extended his appreciation to City staff and the citizens. Noting that this particular campaign has not been the cleanest of campaigns, Mr. Stone commented on the irresponsible mail pieces sent out targeting Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Mayor Comerchero, and himself, advising that each of the incumbents has lead his campaign with dignity, respect, and responsibility and, therefore, will not resort to such negative tactics. B. Advising that he has been contacted by residents of the Starlight Ridge area (Astroid Way and Milky Way Drive) with regard to speeding and safety concerns, Councilman Naggar requested that the matter be addressed by the Public/Traffic Safety Commission. Commenting on the City's interview process for a State Lobbyist, Councilman Naggar advised that the City is pursuing the hiring of a State Lobbyist in an effort to obtain grants, road improvements/transportation funds, etc. as well as to retain the monies the City is currently receiving from the State, addressing the following: · Reduction in Vehicle License Fees · Redistribution of Sales Tax Revenue · Library Grant In light of the September 11, 2001, tragedy, Mr. Naggar requested that the City review its Military Compensation Pay and recommended, if necessary, that changes be made. In closing, Mr. Naggar commended the Finance Department on its receipt of the National and State Awards. C. Providing information with regard to the redistribution of Sales Tax Revenue, Mayor Comerchero relayed his concurrence with the City's efforts to hiring a State Lobbyist. Mr. Comerchero also commented on the American Flag Auction, advising that to date $300 have been raised and that the auction will end November 15, 2001. Having attended the Susan G. Komen Race forthe Cure event, Mayor Comerchero commended those involved on another successful event. R:\Minutes\102301 2 CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 14, 2001; 2.2 Approve the minutes of August 28, 2001; 2.3 Approve the minutes of September 11, 2001. 3 Resolution approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECUL. A ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 Authorization to execute the Suoplemental Aqreement for the Fiscal Year 2001-02 - Community Development Block Grant Funds RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for Fiscal Year 2001- 02 - Community Development Block Grant Funds. 5 Amendment to Fire Protection Aqreement for Fiscal Year 2001-02 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the amended Exhibit A to the Fire Protection Agreement for Fiscal Year 2001-02. R:\Minutes\102301 3 6 Amendment to Professional Services Aqreement between the City of Temecula and Kelley Display, Inc. - City Banner Proqram RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Kelley Display, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $50,500.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. 7 Inland Empire Airports First RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE NEED TO MEET REGIONAL NEEDS FOR THE EXPANSION OF AVIATION FACILITIES 8 Acceptance of Median Landscape Bonds and Aqreement alonq Overland Drive - Parcel Map No. 30208 (Bel Villaqqio Development) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Bel Villaggio LLC to the landscaped medians along Overland Drive west of Margarita Road in Parcel Map No. 30208. 9 Butterfield Staqe Road/CETAP Corridor- Resolution in Opposition RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FORMALLY OPPOSING CORRIDORS 5A AND 5B OF THE COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION ACCEPTABILITY PROCESS (CETAP) AS IT RELATES TO BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD (Pulled for separate discussion; see pages 7-8.) R:\Minutes\102301 4 10 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for the first annual Antiaue and Craft Street Faire in Old Town RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0t-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR THE FIRST ANNUAL ANTIQUE AND CRAFT STREET FAIRE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT 11 Acceptance of a Storm Drain Easement and Riqht-of-Wav (located within Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map No. 28530-1) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR A STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN PARCEL NO. 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28530-t 12 Quitclaim a portion of a Storm Drain Easement (located within Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map No. 28530-1) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE QUITCLAIM OF A PORTION OF A STORM DRAIN EASEMENT TO THE UNDERLYING FEE OWNER LOCATED WITHIN PARCEL NO. 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28530-1 R:\Minutes\102301 5 13 Tract Map No. 28850 Reimbursement Aqreement for Development Impact Fee (DIF) - Richmond America Homes of Southern California RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the Reimbursement Agreement for Development Impact Fee (DIF) between the City of Temecula and Richmond American Homes of Southern California for Tract No. 28850 in the amount of $57,822.77 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 14 Solicitation of Construction Bids and Approval of the Plans and Specifications for Proiect No. PW00-31 - Traffic Siqnal and Delineation Modifications Winchester Road (State Route 79 North), Northbound 1-15 Ramps to Ynez Road RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit bids for Project No. PW00-31 - Traffic Signal and Delineation Modifications Winchester Road (State Route 79 North), northbound 1-15 ramps to Ynez Road. 15 Award of Construction Contract for the Installation of a Temporary Traffic Sianal on Pala Road at Loma Linda Road - Proiect No. PW98-14 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Award a construction contract for the installation of a temporary traffic signal on Pala Road at Loma Linda Road - Project No. PW98-14 -to DBX, Inc. in the amount of $76,426.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 15.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $7,642.60 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 16 Award of Construction Contract for the Installation of a Temporary Traffic Siqnal on Pala Road at Wolf Vatlev Ro.ad - Proiect No. PW98-15 16.1 Award a construction contract for the installation of a temporary traffic signal on Pala Road at Wolf Valley Road - Project No. PW98-15 - to DBX, Inc. in the amount of $72,040.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 16.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $7,204.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 17 Acceptance of Traffic Siqnal Improvements - Reimbursement A;lreement with MS Temecula II, LLC RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Accept the Traffic Signal Improvements at Winchester and Diaz Roads as completed, as installed by MS Temecula II, LLC; R:\Minutes\102301 6 17.2 Authorize the Finance Director to reimburse $130,721.97 to MS Temecula II, LLC in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Reimbursement Agreement for installation of said signal improvements. 18 Aqreement with the Countv of Riverside reqardinq property located at the northeast corner of Overland Trail and Redhawk Parkwav RECOMMENDATI©N: 18.1 Authorize the Mayor and/or City Manager to execute the agreement with the County of Riverside regarding property located at the northeast corner of Overland Trail and Redhawk Parkway. (Pulled for separate discussion; see page 8.) MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 8 and 10 through 17(Item Nos. 9 and 18 were pulled for separate discussion; see pages 7-8). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Consent Calendar Items considered under separate discussion 9 Butterfield Stacle Road/CETAP Corridor- Resolution in Opposition RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FORMALLY OPPOSING CORRIDORS 5A AND 5B OF THE COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION ACCEPTABILITY PROCESS (CETAP) AS IT RELATES TO BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD Public Works Director Hughes presented the staff report (of record), highlighting the following significant points of the proposed resolution: · City is declaring its opposition to either an expressway/freeway along routes 5A and 5B; · City will use all remedies in the event a corridor were pursued along those routes. Although wishing that the proposed resolution would have been presented for City Council adoption sooner than today, Ms. Michelle Anderson, 43797 Badetta Street, thanked the Council for taking a formal opposition to routes 5A and 5B; requested that a four-way stop at Jerez Lane and Butterfield Stage Road be installed as well painted crosswalks, school crossing signs, and truck tonnage to ensure a safe route for the school children. Mr. Naggar requested that Ms. Anderson's suggestions be forwarded to the Public Traffic Safety Commission for review. Public Works Director Hughes informed the public that the City had provided direction to the County in November of 2000 with regard to its opposition to a freeway corridor. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Roberts moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-93. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:~Minutes\102301 7 18 Aqreement with the Countv of Riverside reqardinq property located at the northeast corner of Overland Trail and Redhawk Parkway RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Authorize the Mayor and/or City Manager to execute the agreement with the County of Riverside regarding property located at the northeast corner of Overland Trail and Redhawk Parkway. Assistant City Manager O'Grady informed the City Council that the County Board of Supervisors has approved, in concept, a lease agreement with the City of Temecula which would provide the land necessary to construct the interim Fire Station; that supplies have been ordered; that fire fighters are trained and ready to begin service; and requested that the City Council approve, in concept, the lease agreement as provided by the Riverside County and authorize staff and the City Attorney to finalize language with County Counsel and staff and authorize the Mayor and/or City Manager to execute the documents. For Councilman Stone, Assistant City Manager O'Grady advised that the interim fire station should be functioning by the end of November. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts also thanked Supervisor Buster for his efforts associated with this matter. For Councilman Naggar, information was provided with regard to the ownership of the property of discussion with City Manager Nelson noting that it was staff's opinion that the property of discussion should have been included as part of the annexation; that the proposed lease agreement includes a caveat that once the ultimate park site has been constructed, the County would convey the property to the City; and that the City would expend no monies on the permanent improvements until resolution with regard to ownership of the property. For Councilman Naggar, City Manager Nelson noted that both the City and the County have the same intent to ultimately develop the property of discussion as a park site. Mayor Pro Tem Robeds provided additional clarification with regard to ownership and commented on efforts necessary to transfer the property to the City. Mayor Comerchero as well thanked Supervisor Buster and his Chief of Staff for their efforts associated with ensuring the construction of the interim fire station; noted that the land of discussion is public land; and that as public land, no matter who owns the property of discussion, the intent of an interim fire station and ultimately as a park site will not change. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to direct the City Manager and/or the Mayor to proceed with establishing a lease agreement with the County based on the deal points identified within the staff report with the additional provision that the City will not expend City funds for the permanent park site until such time the appropriate issues have been fully resolved between the County and the City. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 8:06 P. M., Mayor Comerchero called a recess and at 8:17 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and the Industrial Development Authority and resumed at 8:19 P.M. with regularly scheduled City Council business. R:~Vlinutes\102301 8 COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 Appointment of Members to the General Plan Community Advisory~Committee (continued from the October 9, 2001, City Council meeting) RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Appoint the remaining members of the General Plan Community Advisory Committee. Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record), advising that staff is requesting that Councilman Stone make his City resident appointment and that the City Council make its determination as to the one representative of a local environmental or community organization. Councilman Stone appointed Mr. Bob Ritchie a Vail Ranch resident. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Roberts appointed Dr. Bob Wheeler as the one representative of a local environmental or community organization. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone. (Voice vote ultimately reflected approval of the motion; see page below.) Relaying his opposition to the SMART Growth concept and commenting on Dr. Wheeler's support of this concept, Councilman Naggar questioned Dr. Wheeler's ability to objectively view this matter and as well noted that Dr. Wheeler is the treasurer of a political action committee in support of the incumbents and, therefore, relayed his opposition to the appointment of Dr. Wheeler. Although not having always supported Dr. Wheeler's comments, Councilman Stone stated that he is a well-educated and respected environmentalist in the Valley, noting that one's political affiliation should not be viewed as a criteria for the appointment. Although viewing Dr. Wheeler as competent in his field, Councilman Pratt noted that someone of a younger generation should represent the future. At this time, voice vote on the previously made motion reflected approval of the motion with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted n._9o. 20 Consideration of Harveston Ballot Initiative (At the request of Councilman Naggar) RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Provide direction to staff. Since the City Council's Closed Session action on October 9, 2001, Councilman Naggar advised that Lennar has expressed a desire to place the Harveston project on the March ballot; relayed that Mr. Pedersen's primary concern was to place the matter on the ballot; noted that Lennar has questions which should be addressed by staff; that the matter should then be evaluated prior to deciding to proceed with the Declaratory Relief Action; and requested that the City Council direct staff to work with Lennar representatives and Mr. Pedersen. R:~Vlinutes\102301 9 In response to Councilman Stone, it was noted that no Lennar representative was present at the meeting and, therefore, Mr. Stone suggested that the matter be continued for two weeks at which time, a Lennar representative should be present to relay Lennar's desire. Mr. Chris Pedersen informed the public that he is being sued by the City of Temecula for allegedly circulating a petition, noting that he had not circulated the petition and that the City has no evidence that he had circulated this petition; advised that Lennar has expressed no intent to file litigation; that Lennar has expressed no problem with placing the Harveston project on the March ballot; that by filing a Declaratory Relief Action, it was the City's intent to expedite the process to ensure the matter be placed on the March ballot, noting that such timeframe would not be feasible through this action; and that the City should have followed the same process as it did with the Wolf Creek project. Based on the recommendation of the City Attorney, Councilman Stone advised that the City choose to proceed as recommended in order to ensure the matter could be placed on the March ballot. Assistant City Attorney Curley provided additional clarification with regard to the Declaratory Relief Action, advising that signatures have been forwarded to the Registrar of Voters for validation and that the City Attorney's Office is proceeding in order to ensure the matter may be placed on the March ballot. For Councilman Naggar, Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that the City brought forth the suit to clarify the validity of the documents submitted and that if all parties that hold stake in this matter were to acquiesce to a stipulated conclusion that everything is appropriate, the City Council may conclude that pursuit of litigation would be meaningless. In order to ensure all questions are properly addressed, Councilman Naggar requested that City staff cooperate with Mr. Pedersen and Lennar representatives, noting that both parties had expressed a desire to not litigate. Councilman Stone voiced no objection to the City Attorney/City staff meeting with Lennar representatives but in light of there being no representation this evening, Mr. Stone recommended that the matter be continued for two weeks. It was the consensus of the City Council to concur with a continuance to the November 13, 2001, City Council meeting. Having talked with Lennar representatives, Mayor Comerchero noted that a 30-day continuance has been requested. Councilman Naggar relayed his opposition to the City suing a resident who claims that he did not circulate the petitions. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Assistant City Attorney Curley noted that the City Council would have to take final action by December 6, 2001, to ensure the matter may be placed on the March ballot. In response to City Manager Nelson's request, the City Council authorized staffto begin discussion with Lennar representatives and Mr. Bieri as it relates to this issue to assess all legal issues and its relation to the Declaratory Relief Action which will be transmitted to the City Council. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. R:\Minutes\102301 lO CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 8:43 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 13, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:'Wlinutes\102301 11 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 13, 2001 The City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, November 13, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Kate Welsh. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Murray Hollis of Southwest Christian Church ALLEGIANCE. The salute to the Flag was led by Boy Scout Troop No. 384. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Dutch Heritacle Day Proc amation Mrs. Elisabeth Cremers accepted the proclamation; apprised the City Council of Voorburg's sadness with regard to the September 11, 2001, tragedy; invited the Council and public to an upcoming Dutch American Heritage Day celebration on Sunday, November 18, 2001, at the Community Recreation Center, at 2:00 P.M.; and presented to each Councilmember a lapel pin with the Dutch and the American flag. City of Temecula Tourism Rack Brochure Award Assistant City Manager O'Grady proudly announced that the City has once again received a first place regional award for its Tourism Brochure through the Association of Professional Brochure Distribution, advising that competition included the western half of the United States and that over 7,500 brochures had been submitted. Mr. O'Grady commended the graphic designer and production coordinator Anne Howell and the City's Marketing Coordinator, Gloria Wolnick. Extending a special recognition to Scouts Cory Meeker, Patrick Snodgrass, Chris Ritzer, and Brendan Lepez, Mayor Comerchero advised that during an organized Scout event at the Colorado River, these boys had saved an adult from drowning. Mayor Comerchero as well extended congratulations to Scott McDonald from Troop No. 301 for achieving is Eagle Scout rank. Councilman Stone advised that Scott's brother is as well an Eagle Scout and commended their parents for their guidance. R:\Minutes\111301 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Mr. Wayne Hall, 42131 Agena Street, representing the American Legions and Veterans of Foreign Wars, introduced several members from the American Legions and the Veterans of Foreign Wars to the City Council and the viewing public who, in turn, presented a Certificate of Appreciation to the City Council for its support of the Boys' State Program, advising that not until a Women's Auxiliary is formed can a Girls' State Program be established. The Veterans of Temecula Valley requested that the City fly, in front of City Hall, the POW/MIA flag in conjunction with the United States flag to show continued support of the service personnel who are still missing in action. A picture was also shown of the POW/MIA memorial that will be placed at the Veterans Cemetery. B. On behalf of the Candlelight Committee, Ms. Karen Harkey, 29755 Pasada Road, extended an invitation to the City Council and the public to attend the Second Annual Candlelight Tribute, on Saturday, December 1, 2001, at 5:00 P.M., at the Promenade Mall, in loving memory of those loved and lost in the communities of Temecula and Murrieta, advising that non-perishable foods are being accepted in order to stock the local food pantries. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Advising that the vote of the public should be honored, Councilman Naggar congratulated and welcomed newly reelected Councilmembers Comerchero, Roberts, and Stone, advising that he would commit to the City Council and the public that he would take one fifth accountability toward ensuring that the current contention among the City Council be eliminated. B. Echoing Councilman Naggar's comments, Councilman Pratt relayed his disappointment with the Iow-voter turnout. C. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts advised that the California High-Speed Rail Authority will be recommending that the high-speed Inland route travel from San Diego to Los Angeles through the City of Temecula with a station in the Valley. D. Thanking Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt for their well wishes on his reelection, thanking those individuals who had voted for him, and concurring with Councilman Naggar's comment to eliminate the contentiousness among the City Council, Councilman Stone relayed his desire to reach out to those individuals who had not voted for him, advising that he has an open-door policy and would welcome their comments. E. Echoing Councilman Stone's comments, Mayor Comerchero encouraged the elimination of the politics from the dais and thanked those individuals who had expressed confidence in him and relayed his desire to earn the trust of those individuals who had not voted for him. Mr. Comerchero advised that the American Flag that was donated by Congressman Issa has reached a high bid of $600, noting that the auction will end November 15, 2001. R:\Minutes\111301 2 CONSENT CALENDAR I Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Resolution approvin,q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0t-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 3 City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2001. 4 Records Destruction Approval RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the schedules destruction of certain City records in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. 5 Approve Sponsorship Request for the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Association RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the event sponsorship agreement with the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Association in the amount of $35,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. R:\Minutes\111301 3 6 7 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula's Electric Light Parade on November 30, 2001, and Delegate Authority to issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to thc, Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURES FOR JEFFERSON AVENUE AND ABUTTING STREETS FROM DEL RIO ROAD TO OVERLAND AVENUE AND ALSO THE LOW FLOW CROSSING AT VIA MONTEZUMA FOR TEMECULA'S ELECTRIC LIGHT PARADE ON NOVEMBER 30, 2001, AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES Cooperative A.qreement between Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the City of Temecula and Shea Homes Limited Partnership for Tract Map No. 23209 Leiqh Court Storm Drain, StaCle 3 / Proiect No. 7-0-0303 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Cooperative Agreement between Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the City of Temecula and Shea Homes Limited Partnership for Tract Map No. 23209 Leigh Court Storm Drain, Stage 3 / Project No. 7-O-03O3; 7.2 Accept the bonds as security for construction of the said storm drain improvements. A.qreement between Riverside County Transportation and Land Mana.qement Aqency and the City of Temecula to provide AIquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Report Review Services RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Agreement between Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency and the City of Temecula to Provide Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Report Review Services. 8.2 Authorize the Mayor or City Manager to sign the agreement. 9 Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 (located west of Butterfield Staqe Road north of Ahern Place) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Drainage Improvements and Grading Agreements and accept the Bonds as security for the agreements; R:\Minutes\l 11301 4 9.2 Approve the Erosion Control Agreements and accept the Bonds as security for the agreements. 10 Completion and Acceptance for the Pala Road Brid,qe Replacement Proiect - Proiect No. PW97-15 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Accept the Pala Road Bridge Replacement Project - Project No. PW97-15 - as complete; and 10.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 10.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. 11 Environmental Enhancement and Miti,qat on Program (EEM) Grant Application for FY 2002- 2003 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Receive and file this report regarding our Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEM) Grant Application for the development of the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping/Rotary Park Expansion Project, and authorize the Director of Public Works to forward said application to the California Resources Agency. 11.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE FOR THE OLD TOWN SOUTHERN GATEWAY LANDSCAPING/ROTARY PARK EXPANSION PROJECT 12 PA96-0293 - Mar,qar ta Road Median Reimbursement RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the Reimbursement Agreement with the Zonos Center for one half of the cost to construct a raised landscaped median in Margarita Road in the amount of $45,446.86 and authorize the Mayor to execute the Reimbursement Agreement; 12.2 Approve a transfer from Development Impact Fees - Street Improvements funds, Ynez Road Median project in the amount of $45,446.88 for the reimbursement agreement. R:\Minutes\l 11301 5 13 Amendment to Military Leave Policy -Article 28 of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Temecula and the General Employees of the City of Temecula RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Amend Article 28 of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Temecula and the General Employees of the City of Temecula to reflect a change to the Military Leave Policy. 14 City Hall Office/VVorkstation Furnishings RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Award a contract in the amount of $38,093.00 to Business Furniture Group for the purchase of refurbished modular workstations and private office furniture for City Hall; 14.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed $3,809.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 15 Harveston Public Vote Discussion RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Receive and file report. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I - 15. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:30 P. M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and resumed at 7:32 P.M. with regularly scheduled City Council business. COUNCIL BUSINESS 16 Prima facie Speed Limit on Certain Streets RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01-15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS TO INCLUDE VALLE JO AVENUE BE'DVVEEN SANTIAGO ROAD AND CABRILLO AVENUE, AND JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD BETWEEN STATE ROUTE 79 AND DE PORTOLA ROAD/YNEZ ROAD Deputy Director of Public Works Parks reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material). R:\Minutes\111301 6 City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 01-15 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to introduce Ordinance No. 01-15. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 17 Holiday Schedule for City Council Meetings RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Direct the City Clerk to set the schedule for City Council Meetings during the holiday season and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. City Clerk Jones provided the staff report (of record). MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to schedule one City Council meeting for the month of December (December 11, 2001). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 18 Appointment of Councilmember to sit on Rancho Hiqh ands Advisory Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: 18.1 Appoint one council member to sit on the Rancho Highlands Advisory Committee. Advising that this matter was inadvertently placed on the agenda, Mayor Comerchero noted that Councilman Naggar had been appointed to serve on this Committee at a previous City Council meeting. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson wished everyone a Healthy and Happy Thanksgiving. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that was no reportable action to report under Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT At 7:35 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 27, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\l 11301 7 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 27, 2001 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula City Council convened in Closed Session at 5:30 P.M., on November 27, 2001, in the Main Conference Room of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The Open Session of the City Council meeting commenced at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. ROLLCALL Present: Councilmembers: Naggar, Roberts, Stone, and Mayor Comerchero. Absent: Councilmember: Pratt. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Ms. Eve Craig. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Randy Ponder from The Lamb's Fellowship. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 2001 Proiect of the Year Award - Pala Road Bridqe - American Public Works Association, Southern California chapter Riverside/San Bernardino Branch Director of Public Works Hughes accepted with gratitude the 2001 Project of the Year Award for the Pala Bridge Replacement Project from the American Public Works Association. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Art Zwe, 44735 Sage Road, Aguanga, noted his concern regarding the potential for the Super Rock use to mine the silica sand located off of Sage Road, highlighting the negative impacts this project would have on Highway 79 in the City of Temecula, in part, due to diesel truck travel; advised that on November 28th the County Board of Supervisors would be conducting a vote of hands in order to poll the communities' reaction to the mining; and recommended that all those with concerns call the County Board of Supervisors. R:\Minutes\112701 I in response to Mr. Zwe's comments, Mayor Comerchero requested that the City Clerk distribute to the City Council copies of the data regarding this issue, which had been submitted by Mr. Zwe. Councilman Stone provided a brief history of this project, which attempted to gain approval under a different name years ago, but was not approved by the City Council due to traffic concerns; and recommended that Director of Public Works Hughes investigate this matter, and update the City Council. Mr. Jimmy Moore, 43557 Savona Street, noted the upcoming 12th birthday for the City of Temecula, relaying his pride in the accomplishments of the City, thanking all of the City Councilmembers, the Commissioners, the staff, and the citizens of Temecula for their contributions towards making this City the greatest place to live in the world. Ms. Toni Arbogast, representing the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, congratulated Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Councilman Stone, and Mayor Comerchero for their recent reelection to the City Council, expressing gratitude for their past leadership, additionally thanking Councilmen Naggar and Pratt. Mr. Chuck Washington, Kahwea Road, thanked the City Council for its continued support of The Boys' and Girls' Club in southwest county, and in particular for the recent fundraising efforts; and advised that on December 1st, the Wal-Mart store in the City of Murrieta will be donating a percentage of the proceeds from the entire day's sales to the Boys' and Girls' Club of southwest county. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS No input at this time. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of ali ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Resolution Approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- 101 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:\Minutes\112701 :~ 3 Professional Services Aqreement for Landscape Architectural Services for State Highway 79 South, Sidewalk, Landscaping, and Irri.qation Improvements - Proiect No. PW01-02 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve an agreement with Peter D. Brandow & Associates in an amount not to exceed $38,920.00 to provide as needed landscape architectural services for the State Highway 79 South, Sidewalk, Landscaping, and Irrigation Improvements - Project No. PW01-02 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 3.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $3,892.00, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 4 Professional Desiqn Services Aqreement for Bridqe Barrier Rail Replacement - Project No. PW-01-09 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Simon Wong Engineering in an amount not to exceed $43,580.00 to provide design services for the Bridge Barrier Rail Replacement at the Rainbow Canyon Road Bridge over Pechanga Creek and the Del Rio Road Bridge over Empire Creek, Project No. PW-01-09, and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve amendments/change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,358.00, which is equal to 10% of the agreement. Completion and Acceptance for the Pavement Manaqement System - Project No. PW99-17 - Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept the project for the Pavement Management System - Project No. PW99-17 - Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation, as complete; 5.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 5.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. R:\Minutes\112701 3 6 Completion and Acceptance for the Installation of a Traffic Siqnal at Margarita Road and Stonewood Road - Proiect No. PW00-18 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Accept the project for the installation of a traffic signal at Margarita Road and Stonewood Road - Project No. PW00-18 - as complete; 6.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 6.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. 7 Solicitation of Construction Bids for Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center Plaza - Proiect No. PW00-02 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Project Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit bids for the Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center Plaza - Project No. PW00-02. This item was pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. 8 Award of Construction Contract for Traffic Siqnal and Delineation Modifications - Winchester Road (State Route 79 North), Northbound 1-15 Ramps to Ynez Road - Proiect No. PW00-31 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Plans and Specifications for Traffic Signal and Delineation Modifications, Winchester Road (State Route 79 North), Northbound 1-15 Ramps to Ynez Road - Project No. PW00-31; 8.2 Award a construction contract for Traffic Signal and Delineation Modifications, Winchester Road (State Route 79 North), Northbound 1-15 Ramps to Ynez Road -, Project No. PW00-31 to DBX, Inc in the amount of $32,390.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 8.3 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $3,239.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. R:\Minutes\112701 4 9 Maintenance Aqreement for the Pala Road Bridqe Habitat Restoration Area - Proiect No. PW95-15LS RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the Maintenance Agreement for the five-year maintenance of the habitat restoration area associated with the construction of the Pala Road Bridge within the amount of $38,000.00; 9.2 Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 10 Grant Writinq Services for Library Bond Act RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Award a contract in the amount of $27,815.00 to Beverley Simmons and Associates-Library Management Consultants for the preparation of the Library Bond Act Application; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed $2,781.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. This item was pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. 11 Award of Contract - State Lobbyist RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve the contract for State lobbying services to be provided by the Wilson Group, LLC in the amount of $3,500.00 per month for a total amount of $24,500.00 for the remainder ofthe current fiscal year. This contract will remain in effect through June 30, 2002 and may be extended based upon performance. This item was pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. 12 California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grants RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Authorize the City Manager to execute and accept the State of California Office of Traffic Safety Grant amount totaling $102,000.00 for Temecula Police Department; 12.2 Authorize the City Manager to execute and accept the State of California Office of Traffic Safety Grant amount totaling $49,000.00 for Temecula Fire Department. R:\Minutes\l 12701 5 13 Liability Insurance Renewal RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the City of Temecula Liability Insurance Policy Renewal with Royal Indemnity Company/Specialty National Insurance Company, in the amount of $140,291 general liability plus $10,198 automobile physical damage insurance for a total of $150,489 for the period of December 1, 2001, through December 1, 2002. 14 Second Readinq of Ordinance No 01-15 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01-15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(d) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS TO INCLUDE VALLE JO AVENUE BETVVEEN SANTIAGO ROAD AND CABRILLO AVENUE, AND JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD BETVVEEN STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH AND DE PORTOLA ROAD/YNEZ ROAD 15 Declaration of Results of November 6, 2001 Election RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-102 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2001, DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1- 6, 8-9, and 12-15, Item Nos. 7, 10, and 11 being considered separately. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. At this time Consent Calendar Item Nos. 7, 10, and 11 were considered. R:\Minutes\112701 7 Solicitation of Construction Bids for Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center Plaza - Project No. PW00-02 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Project Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit bids for the Rancho California Road Median modifications at Town Center Plaza - Project No. PW00-02. Presenting the staff report (of record), Director of Public Works Hughes highlighted the safety issues being addressed with this proposal, noting that these particular two left- turn movements have historically been one of the City's highest accident rate areas. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Roberts' queries, Director of Public Works Hughes provided the rationale for the design of this project, relaying the goal to provide controlled left-turn movements due to the existing negative stacking impacts (which backs up traffic into the through lanes of travel at peak hours); with respect to establishing a second left-turn movement, noted that at this time the width of the roadway was inadequate to provide double left-turn movements, relaying the potential at a future point in time for this area to be six lanes in width, as well as adding provision for an additional turning movement; with respect to the Via Las Colinas intersection, acknowledged that while this was not a direct intersection serving the active shopping area, that there was access if one traveled around the service area to enter the active plaza areas, advising that this portion of the project was proposed for situations when the first intersection becomes full due to left-turn movements; and elaborated on staff's efforts with the Plaza owner to re-vamp the on-site traffic patterns and utilize this access more effectively. In response, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts questioned the manner in which this proposed project would increase capacity. For Mayor Comerchero, Director of Public Works Hughes specified that while addressing the safety issue (which was of the utmost concern), the capacity would most likely not decrease with the lengthened left-turn pockets into the site. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent and Mayor Pro Tem Roberts who voted n_9o. It was noted that Consent Calendar Item Nos. 10, and 11 were considered together. 10 Grant Writinq Services for Library Bond Act RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Award a contract in the amount of $27,815.00 to Beverley Simmons and Associates-Library Management Consultants for the preparation of the Library Bond Act Application; R:\Minutes\112701 7 Speaking on behalf of the newly reelected Councilmembers, Mayor Comerchero relayed that it was a pleasure to continue serving on the Council for the City of Temecula; and advised that per tradition, the meeting would recess, and refreshments would be served. At 7:33 P.M. the meeting recessed, and at 7:53 P. M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and The Temecula Public Financing Authority. At 8:02 P.M., the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council business. RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Comerchero noted the beautiful, displayed artwork in the back of the Chambers, which depicted the City Seal, and was contributed by the 3r~ grade class at Ysabel Barnett Elementary School (which the Mayor had visited). 16 PA99-0451 - Rancho Hi.qhlands General Plan Amendment RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Continue this item off calendar. Mayor Comerchero opened the public hearing; there being no public input, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to continue this item off calendar. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. 17 Ridf:le Park Drive Rezoninq (Planninq Application 01-0460) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01-16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP ALONG A PORTION OF BOTH SIDES OF RIDGE PARK DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0460) Director of Planning Ubnoske provided an overview of this staff-initiated zone change (per agenda material), noting that at the Planning Commission meeting there was one resident who spoke, the comments being in favor of the proposal; and advised that the zone change was unanimously approved by the Commission. Mayor Comerchero opened the public hearing; there being no public input, the public hearing was closed. R:\Minutes\112701 ~) City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 01-16. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to introduce Ordinance No. 01-16. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. COUNCIL BUSINESS 18 Community Services Commission Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Appoint two applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Community Services Commission through October 10, 2004. City Clerk Jones presented the staff repod (of record), relaying that the Subcommittee had recommended that Mr. Jack Henz, and Ms. Felicia Hogan be reappointed to serve on this Commission. Confirming the recommendation of the Subcommittee, Councilman Stone elaborated on the merits of appointing these two particular individuals. Noting the importance of balance with the members of a Commission, Mayor Comerchero, echoed by Councilman Naggar, concurred with the recommendation. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to reappoint Mr. Jack Henz, and Ms. Felicia Hogan to the Community Services Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. 19 Appointment of Councilmember to the Rancho Community Church Subcommittee RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Appoint one Councilmember to sit on the Rancho Community Church Subcommittee. Highlighting the complexity of the Rancho Community Church Project, Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided the rationale for staffs recommendation to appoint a Councilmember to a Subcommittee for this project. After City Council discussion ensued, Mayor Pro Tem Robeds and Councilman Naggar noting their previous work with this project, it was the consensus of the City Council to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Roberts to serve on this Subcommittee, and that Councilman Naggar serve as an alternate Subcommittee Member, ergo the following motion was offered: R:\Minutes\l 12701 10 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed $2,781.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 11 Award of Contract - State Lobbyist RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve the contract for State lobbying services to be provided by the Wilson Group, LLC in the amount of $3,500.00 per month for a total amount of $24,500.00 for the remainder of the current fiscal year. This contract will remain in effect through June 30, 2002 and may be extended based upon performance. Senior Management Analyst Adams provided an overview of the proposals (or record); relayed that in order to better facilitate the City's grant application process for Proposition No. 14 (the Library Bond Act) funding, it was staff's recommendation that the City award a contract to a professional grant writer to work closely with City staff, Riverside County, and other associated parties; regarding Consent Calendar No. 11, noted that it was the recommendation of the Selection Committee to award a contract to the Wilson Group LLC, to represent the City of Temecula via lobbying services in Washington; introduced Ms. Beverly Simmons whose contract (associated with the Library Bond Act Application aid) was before the City Council for consideration; and additionally introduced Mr. Rick Sarles, noting that his efforts would be concentrating on the needs assessment portion of the contract. Ms. Simmons noted that it would be a pleasure to work with the City, relaying that the proposed library project was exciting; advised that the Proposition No. 14 funding process would be dynamic and competitive; for Councilman Stone confirmed that it was a benefit that the City's project was shelf-ready; and noted the high demand for these funds since the last bond act (of this type) was passed in 1988. Councilman Naggar concurred with staff's recommendation, additionally noting his concurrence with expending diligent efforts to obtain the funding for the library. Mr. Bob Wilson, president of The Wilson Group LLC, noted that the need for libraries in California exceeds $1.5 billion, reiterating that it would be a competitive, and potentially political process; and relayed that it would be a pleasure, and an honor to represent the City of Temecula. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 10, and 11. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. SWEARING IN CEREMONY OF NEWLY ELECTED CITY COUNCILMEMBERR City Clerk Jones duly swore in the newly reelected Councilmen, as follows: Mr. Jeff Comerchero, Mr. Ron Roberts, and Mr. Jeff Stone; and presented each Counciimember with their Certificate of Election. R:\Minutes~112701 8 MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to appoint Mayor Pro Tern Roberts to serve on this particular Subcommittee, and to appoint Councilman Naggar as the alternate Subcommittee member. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt who was absent. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With respect to the two litigation items discussed in Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson advised that while there were no reportable actions, the City Council did provide direction to staff; and with respect to the two Real Estate items, additionally noted that there were no reportable actions, clarifying that there would be no final action until an agreement is approved in Open Session. ADJOURNMENT At 8:21 P.M., Mayor Comerchero formally adjourned the City Council meeting to Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\l 12701 ! I ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $3,826,369.32. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 8th day of January, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 02- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of January, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos2OO2/Resos 02- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 12/06/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 12/13/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 12/20/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01/08/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 12/06/01 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 12/20/01 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 01108102 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: $ 410,255.07 654,000.77 722,553.47 1,537,772.77 254,056.09 $ 3,826,369.32 CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND 261 CFD 68-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 260 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-ClP 300 INSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLES FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 390 TCSD - DEBT SERVICE 471 CFD 98-1 ADMIN EXP 21,001.39 171,783.61 33,953.47 19,261.63 11,856.65 1,680.00 785,545,74 3,308.81 33,926.38 167,942.28 45,664.96 25,398.04 20,271.14 19,208.28 1,375.00 $ 3,324,582.08 100 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 ~NFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: PREPARED BY JADA YONKER, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST 362,005.57 8,439.87 88,537.19 130.42 8,466.90 1,075.99 4,036.89 14,373.38 3,816.16 9,178.80 501,787.24 $ 3,826,369.32 GENIE ROBERTS, DIRECTOR (~VFI ANCE · ~ ~w ~ , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. TELSON, CITY M.~IAG ~R VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 15 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - 300 INSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLES FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 390 TCSD DEBT SERVICE AMOUNT 279,326.42 7,431.55 60,953.57 46.33 10,528.77 766.68 22w069.69 6,308.58 1,175.98 629.68 5,956.50 lw459.14 12,352.18 1,250.00 TOTAL 410,255.07 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58637 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 CHECK DATE 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PRES PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERB PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB RET EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS'PRE EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR (EMPLOYEEB' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (HEALTH 1NSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (REALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD ~EALTH IBSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA tEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET qEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET REALTH INBUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISER HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PC HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS EHO HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS DED HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 PERS-ADM HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 UH! HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 UNI HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 001-2390 165-2390 190-2390 192-2390 193-2390 194-2390 280-2390 300-2390 320-2130 320-2390 330-2390 340-2390 001-2130 001-2390 165-2390 190-2390 192~2390 193-2390 194-2390 280-2390 300-2390 320-2390 330-2390 340-2390 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 330-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 193-2090 194-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 280-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001~2090 190~2090 001-2090 28,470.22 669.01 5,056.67 12.06 585.78 100.59 289.21 139.56 26.51 1,153.53 220.15 586.83 182.91 104.03 1.87 20.00 .05 2.75 .36 .92 .46 3.72 1.39 2.65 3,142.39 254.62 1,142.00 84.88 97.00 244.06 1,107.03 468.53 555.90 5~707.26 1,438.38 59.18 29.59 650.57 2,847.96 4,638.41 376.34 738.00 4,051.47 3.82 1.15 840.39 651.30 3,306.21 166.98 58.61 37,631.23 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 58713 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468903 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 CHECK DATE 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 VENDOR NUMBER 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 VENDOR NAME PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR, PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH IRSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH 1NSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 IHSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 IMSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 IRSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) ITEM DESCRIPTION 000245 AETNA 000245 AETNA 000245 AETNA 000245 AETNA 000245 BLSHIELD 000245 8LSHIELD 000245 HELTHNET 000245 HELTHNET 000245 HELTHNET 000245 KAISER 000245 PACCARE 000245 PERS CHO 000245 PERS REV 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE ACCOUNT NUMBER 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 190-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 193-2070 280-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 ITEM AMOUNT 123.68 119.01 41.22 8.13 55.47 54.51 147.66 31.24 .36 23.43 119.46 93.56 876.34- 29,082.23 531.98 7,050.32 19.24 639.01 137.98 210.90 95.22 1,268.19 244.52 641.37 7,023.44 159.78 1,690.30 2.80 165.~ 22.84 72.51 33.29 298.22 66.22 160.23 113.84 3.81 107.88 2.80 .79 7.10 3.68 3.80 7,898.87 141.28 1,812.57 6.21 151.28 43.31 CHECK AMOUNT 32,603.42 49,616.32 VOUCHRE2 CiTY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 468928 468928 468928 468928 468928 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73673 73674 73674 7~5674 73674 73674 73675 73675 73675 73675 73675 73675 73675 73675 73676 73677 73678 73679 73679 73680 73681 73681 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 IBBTATAX (EDD) 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 003552 A F L A C 001515 A S A P TRUCK~TRACTOR/F 001515 A S A P TRUCK~TRACTOR/F 001515 A S A P TRUCK,TRACTOR/F 001515 A S A P TRUCK,TRACTOR/F 001515 A S A P TRUCK,TRACTOR/F 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS DD0116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 003304 ADAMS ADVERTISING IBC 003859 ALL ABOUT SELF STORAGE AMATO~ KYM 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE 004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGE, 003865 ANDYS GLASS 003865 ANDYS GLASS 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 EXP PROT 003552 EXP PROT 003552 EXP PROT 003552 HOSP IC 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD WEED ABATEMENT SVC:BARCLAY WEED ABATEMENT SVC:R.C.ROAD WEED ABATEMENT SVC:MARGARITA WEED ABATEMENT SVC:LA SERENA WEED ABATEMENT SVC:VETERAN~S 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP DEC OLD TWN BILLBOARD AGRMBT MUSEUM STORAGE UNIT C354 RENT REFUND: TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PD/CHP CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PD/CHP DEC STORAGE UNIT F105 RENTAL RES IMPR PRGM: HILTON, MARIA RES IMPR PROM: HENTEL,JOHANNA 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2330 190-2330 193-2330 194-2330 340-2330 001-2330 190-2330 320-2330 001-2330 001-2330 190-2330 193-2330 194-2330 340-2330 193-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-2310 165-2310 190-2310 193-2310 194-2310 280-2310 330-2310 340-2310 280-199-999-5362 190-185-999-5250 190-183-4982 001-170-999-5328 001-170-999-5328 001-162-999-5234 165-199~813-5804 165-199-813-5804 49.89 23.08 282.25 60.99 149.02 357.70 14.34 14.34 4.78 14.34 128.30 55.80 27.90 17.50 598.40 155.20 9.60 3.20 20.80 360.00 990.00 900.00 275.00 895.00 729.48 17.60 95.17 11.73 1.68 5.86 5.59 42.23 1,926.00 192.00 13.75 42.00 294.00 117.00 215.01 375.00 10,862.45 1,422.20 3,420.00 909.34 1,926.00 192.00 13.75 336.00 117.00 590.01 7"5682 12/06/01 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC BOTTLED WTR SVCS: MUSEUM 190-185-999-5250 30.56 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73682 73682 73682 73683 73684 }3684 73685 73685 73685 73686 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 001323 ARROWREAD WATER INC 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN C 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT N.***** 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT H.***** 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT B.***** 002103 C A P I 0 ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT BOTTLED WTR SVCS: MNTC FAC BOTTLED WTR SVCS: CRC BOTTLED WTR SVCS:CITY HALL 340-199-702-5250 190-182-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 MEMBERSHIP: RICK SERVEN 190-180-999-5214 R&R CONCRETE SIDEWALK:VARIOUS 001-164-601-5402 R&R PCC CURB/GUTTER:DIAZ RD 001-164-601-5402 ENTERTAINMENT:OLD TWN SANTA ENTERTAINMENT:OLD TWN SANTA CREDIT:ORANGE CO. DA NOTICE 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 001-2140 MEMBERSHIP DUES: ~RON ADAMS 001-110-999-5226 18.06 42.11 273.62 44.00 1,500.00 5,000.00 75.00 75.00 56.25~ 175.00 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 001-2380 1,708.21 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 165-2380 39.10 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 190-2380 304.47 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 192-2380 .71 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 193-2380 30.92 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 194-2380 6.08 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 280-2380 17.29 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 300-2380 8.00 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 320-2380 66.99 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 330-2380 13.46 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 LTD 340-2380 37.68 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 001-2500 2f384.38 T5687 12/06/01 003553 C 1 G N A 003553 STD 165-2500 54.57 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 190-2500 424.99 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 192-2500 .99 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 193-2500 43.18 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 194-2500 8.49 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 280-2500 24.15 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 300-2500 11.15 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 BTD 320-2500 93.49 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 330-250D 18.79 73687 12/06/01 003553 C I G N A 003553 STD 340-2500 52.60 12/06/01 73689 AWARD APPLICATION FEE:FINANCE 001-140-999-5250 73690 73691 73692 73692 73692 73692 73692 73692 73692 12/06/01 LEGISLATIVE CONF:1/14-16:JC/RR 001-100-999-5258 MEMBERSHIP: SHAWN NELSON 001-110-999-5226 000154 C S M F 0 001-2360 165-2360 190-2360 192-2360 193-2360 194-2360 280-2360 000674 CALIF CONTRACT CITIES 000152 CALIF PARKS & RECREATIO 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 25.00 450.00 80.00 160.87 3.01 31.51 .08 3.68 .59 1.49 364.35 44.00 6,500.00 93.75 175.00 5,349.69 25.00 450.00 80.00 VOUCHRE2 12/06/01 09:19 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 5 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 AD&D 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS l~692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE 1NS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73692 12/06/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 73693 12/06/01 004161 CD TOONS DJ FOR CITY NOLIDAY PARTY 73694 12/06/01 003775 CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL ENTERTAINMENT:OLD TWN EVENTS 73695 12/06/01 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA CLEANING FRONT CANOPY @ C.HALL ACCOUNT HUMBER 300-2360 320-2360 330-2360 340-2360 001-2360 165-2360 190-2360 192-2360 193-2360 194-2360 280~2360 300-2360 320-2360 330-2360 340-2360 001-150-999-5265 280-199-999-5362 340-199-701-5250 73696 12/06/01 003997 COAST RECREATION INC 4 TUFF COATED RED SWING CHAINS 190-180-999-5212 73696 12/06/01 003997 COAST RECREATION INC FREIGHT 190-180-999-5212 73696 12/06/01 003997 COAST RECREATION INC SALES TAX 190-180-999-5212 73697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CNARIT 004405 CHC 73697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHAR1T 004405 CHC 73697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 73697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 73697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC }~697 12/06/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 73698 12/06/01 004414 COMMUNITY WORKS DESIGN 73699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS, INC. TJ699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS, INC. 73699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS~ INC. 73699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS, INC. 73699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS, INC. 73699 12/06/01 COMPASS-TS, INC. CONSULTANT SVC:IST BRDG PW0107 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01-0251 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01-0251 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01-0251 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01~0251 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01-0251 REFUND: PERMIT FEE PA01-0251 ENTERTAINMENT:HALLOWEEN EVENT CAROLERS:OLD TWN DICKENS X-MAS SANTA & MRS. CLAUS SUIT RENTAL REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 73700 12/06/01 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS 73700 12/06/01 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS 73700 12/06/01 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS CONSUMER CREDIT COUNSEL 73701 12/06/01 001-2120 190-2120 193-2120 194-2120 330-2120 340-2120 280-199-807-5804 001-162-4216 001-171-4036 001-161-4116 001-163-4388 001~163-4116 001-170-4125 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 190-183-999-5370 190-2900 ITEM AMOUNT ,75 6.00 2.25 4.27 697.13 13.01 136.51 .33 15.93 2,59 6.49 3.24 26. O0 9.75 18.52 600.00 100.00 45.00 76.00 10.00 5.70 123.49 5.60 .60 .20 5.51 .60 1,050.00 22.50 450.75 2,832.75 239.40 943.20 103.50 600.00 175.00 279.50 100.00 CHECK AMOUNT 1,144.00 600.00 100.00 45.00 91.70 136.00 1,050.00 4,592.10 1,054.50 100.00 73702 12/06/01 003059 COSTCO WHOLESALE MEMBER MEMBERSHIP:COMPANY CARD & J.p. 190-180-999-5226 35.00 73702 12/06/01 003059 COSTCO WNOLESALE MEMBER MEMBERSHIP:COMPANY CARD & J.p. 001-140-999-5226 45.00 80.00 VOUCHRE2 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 73703 12/06/01 CROWTHER, ROBERT 73704 12/06/01 001233 DANS FEED & SEED INC 73705 12/06/01 002990 ~r3706 12/06/01 003383 73707 12/06/01 004450 73707 12/06/01 004450 73708 12/06/01 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK 73709 12/06/01 DUNN, SUSAN CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION REFUND: TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG PROPANE GAS FOR PUBLIC WORKS DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATE RETAIN ADVOCACY FIRM:FED FUND DEAMER APPLIANCE SERVIC FIRE STN 84 OVEN REPAIRS DENNIS A NIBBERT PLUMBI PLUMBING SVCS:FIRE STN 92 DENNIS A HIBBERT PLUMBI PLUMBING SVCS:FIRE STN 92 73710 12/06/01 003223 EDAW INC 73711 12/06/01 ERNO, SUE E. 73712 12/06/01 001701 EXCEL RENTAL CENTER FANCHER DEVELOPMENT SVC 000478 FAST SIGNS 000478 FAST SIGNS 002832 FENCE BUILDERS FERSTLE, ALMA FIRE ENGINEERING FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST BANKCARD CENTER NOV SPECIAL EVENT INSURANCE REFD:SPRTS'SKYHWK FLG FOOTBALL OCT BIOLOGICAL SVCS:LG CANYON REFUND: ADMIN CITATION 1334 LIGHT TOWER FOR SPOOKTAKULAR REFUND:GRADING DEPT LDOO-206GR OLD TWN COMM THEATRE SIGNS SIGNS FOR MUSEUM EXHIBITS RES IMPR PRGM:TRAGER,BONNIE REFUND: SPORTS-MINI-HAWKS YRLY SUBSCRIPTION:FIRE/AHMAD ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-4982 001-164-601-5218 001'110-999'5248 001-171'999-5212 210-165-739-5804 210'165'739-5804 300-2180 190-183'4982 001-164-601-5275 001-161'4255 190'183-999'5370 001-2670 280'199'999-5250 190-185-999-5301 165-199-813'5804 190'183-4982 001-171-999-5220 73713 12/06/01 73714 12/06/01 73714 12/06/01 73715 12/06/01 73716 12/06/01 73717 12/06/01 003397 73718 12/06/01 003347 73718 12/06/01 003347 73718 12/06/01 003347 73718 12/06/01 003347 73718 12/06/01 003347 73718 12/06/01 003347 73719 12/06/01 002982 73720 12/06/01 000170 73721 12/06/01 003946 73722 12/06/01 004607 73722 12/06/01 004607 73723 12/06/01 000520 73724 12/06/01 000378 XX-7824 COMERCBERO:SW/AMER AIR 001-100-999-5258 XX-9798 STONE:OFFICE DEPOT 001'100-999-5220 XX'9277 ROBERTS,R:BTL/AIR FARE 001'100'999-5258 XX-2292 ROBERTS,G:LEAGUE/SW 001-140-999-5258 XX-6165 YATES:PROF MTGS IN TWN 001-110-999-5260 XX'6165 YATEG:P£OF MTGS IN TWN 001'150-999-5260 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD - W 002982 BT DED DAY TIMER SUPPLIES - FINANCE ENTERTAINMENT:BRKFT W/SANTA NOV CUSTODIAL SVC:PRKS/SBELTER NOV CUSTODIAL SVC:TES POOL PROPERTY TAX CONSULTING SVCS REIMB:01 COMDEX CONF:11/13-15 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY G T ENTERTAINMENT GRACE BUILDING MAINTENA GRACE BUILDING MAINTENA B D L COREM & CONE INC HAFELI, THOMAS 190-2140 001-140-999-5220 190-183-999-5370 190-180-999-5250 190-186-999-5250 001-140-999-5248 320-199-999-5261 ITEM AMOUNT 30.00 8.33 2,500.00 193.40 453.55 5,675.00 721.10 50.00 995.78 50.00 121.49 995.00 245.10 109.99 2~527.00 50.00 19.95 891.50 87.04 733.40 489.00 241.41 131.81 80.89 47.73 250.00 3,730.00 195.00 2,400.00 477.47 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 30.00 8.33 2,500.00 193.40 6,128.55 721.10 50.00 995.78 50.00 121.49 995.00 355.09 2,527.00 50.00 19.95 2,574.16 80.89 47.73 250.00 3,925.00 2,400.00 477.47 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE ? 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCNER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73725 73725 73725 73725 73725 7~725 73725 73725 73725 73725 73725 73725 73726 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMSER NAME 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 BANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HARKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HARKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HARKS RARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS NARDWARE INC 002906 HEMET FENCE COMPARY ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER HARDWARE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT HARDWARE SUPPLIES:PW MNTC CREW HARDWARE SUPPLIES:MNTC FAC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: CRC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: TCSD MNTC NARDWARE SUPPLIES: MUSEUM HARDWARE SUPPLIES: SR CENTER HARDWARE SUPPLIES- TlC 001-171-999-5242 001-164-601-5218 340-199-701-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-185-999-5212 190-181-999-5212 190-1~-999-5301 HARDWARE SUPPLIES:DIP DIVISION 001-165-999-5242 HARDWARE SUPPlIES:PW MNTD 001-164-601-5218 HARDWARE SUPPLIES:MUSEUM 190-185-999-5301 HARDWARE SUPPLIES:PW MNTC 001-164-603-5212 RES IMPR PRGM:CUNNINGNAM,J. 165-199-813-5804 ITEM AMOUNT 93.24 248.81 76.18 561.52 691.69 5.27 49.64 128.99 29.36 119.60 4.99 76.46 533.00 73727 12/06/01 002107 BIGNMARK INC 002107 VL ADVAN 001-2510 250.15 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 222.66 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 15.38 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 5.73 73727 12/06/01 002107 RIGNMARK INC 002107 VOL lIFE 194-2510 .74 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .79 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.85 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VL REVER 001-2510 243.15- 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 222.66 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL lIFE 190-2510 11.87 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOl LIFE 193-2510 2.22 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 .74 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGNMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .79 73727 12/06/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.87 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMERT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP INFOPLACE USA IRLARD EMPIRE RACE FOR INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL 73728 73728 73728 73728 73728 73728 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 004221 001407 000388 000388 001186 003832 003832 003832 73729 7373O 73731 73732 73732 73733 73734 73734 73734 001-2080 165-2080 190-2080 194-2080 280-2000 300-2080 MALL GIFT CERT:RECYCLE WINNERS 194'180'999'5265 FY 01-02 COMM SVC FUNDING 001-101-999-5267 POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-186-999-5250 INSPECTORS PUBLICATIONS-B&S 001-162-999-5228 INSPECTORS PUBLICATIONS: 8&S 001-162-999-5228 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS R&R STAGE DOORS @ THE CRC R&R STAGE DOORS @ THE CRC CABINET REHABILITATION @ CRC 190-183-999-5330 190-182-999-5416 190-182-999-5416 190-182-999-5416 INTL CONFERENCE BLDG OF INTL CONFERERCE 8LDG OF IRWIN, JOHN J T K CONSTRUCTIOR J T K CONSTRUCTION J T K CONSTRUCTIOR 5,771.82 445.84 655.83 16.49 168.50 50.00 345.00 25,000.00 190.28 86.52 29.00 236.00 4,200.00 500.00 840.00 CHECK AMOUNT 2,085.75 533.00 500.30 7,108.48 345.00 25,000.00 190.28 115.52 236.00 5,540.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 8 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73735 73736 73737 73737 73737 73737 73737 73737 73737 ~3738 73738 73739 73739 73740 73740 7374O 73740 73741 73741 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73742 73743 73744 73744 73744 73744 73744 73744 73744 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 004079 JENKENS& GILCNRIST 003046 K F R 0 G 95.1FM RADIO 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY IRC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY IRC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY IRC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC 004481 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATE 004481 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATE 003631 KLEINFELDER IRC 003631 KLEINFELDER INC 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. 003777 LINE X OF TEMECULA VALL 003777 LINE X OF TEMECULA VALL 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE~S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE~S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE'S 000394 MAINT. SUPERINTENDENTS 004141 MAINTEX INC 004141 MA1NTEX INC 004141 MAINTEX lNG 004141 MAINTEX IRC 004141 MAINTEX IRC 004141 MAINTEX INC 004141 MAINTEX INC ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER HR LEGAL SERVICES 001-130'999-5246 ANTIQUE EVENT ADVERTISING 280-199-999-5362 SNIP/CLEAN/STORAGE:ROD RUN BAN 001-111-999-5271 CNGE DATE ON ROD RUN BANNERS 001-111-999-5271 SALES TAX 001-111-999-5271 58 RACE FOR TNE CURE BANNERS & 001-111-999-5271 SNIPPING & NANDLING 001-111-999-5271 SALES TAX 001-111-999-5271 SHIPPING CHRGS:R/W/B BANNERS 001-111-999-5271 OCT DESIGN SVCS:DIAZ EXTENSION 210-165-684-5802 CREDIT:MILEAGE CNRGED TO CITY 210-165-684-5802 SEP-OCT GEOTECH SVC:SR CTR EXP 210-190-163-5804 SEP-OCT GEOTECN-AC ST REPAIRS 001-164-601-5248 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190"183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999~5330 BED LINER:FIRE PREVENTION VEH. 310-1910 BED TOOL BOX:FIRE PREVENTION 310-1910 TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MRTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC NARDWARE SUPPLIES:TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD NNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC TOOLS/EQUIP FOR TCSD MNTC 190-182-999-5242 190-185-999-5242 190-186-999-5242 190-184-999-5242 190-180-999-5212 190-181~999-5242 190-182-999-5242 190-185-999-5242 190-186-999-5242 190-184-999-5242 BASIC SUPERVISION:2/21:MNTC CR 001-164-601-5261 TCC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES MAINT FAC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CRC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES SR GTE CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES VAR PARKS CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CRC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 190-184-999-5212 340-199-702-5212 340-199-701-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-181-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 ITEM AMOUNT 4,693.41 300.00 138.81 858.00 64.35 4,676.00 90.00 350.70 584.00 4,713.88 50.32- 1,418.50 1,500.00 292.00 408.00 160.00 80.00 311.25 318.43 93.56 155.93 62.37 62.37 124.74 96.72 38.05 63.41 25.36 25.36 50.73 225.00 53.64 77.43 85.18 67.92 85.18 170.37 313.86 CREEK AMOUNT 4,693.41 300.00 6,761.86 4,663.56 2,918.50 940.00 629.68 798.60 225.00 853.58 73745 12/06/01 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP NELP W/E 11/04 MCCLANANAN 001-161-999-5118 432.15 73745 12/06/01 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 10/28 SEDLMEYER 001-163-999-5118 123.84 73745 12/06/01 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 10/28 SEDLMEYER 001-165-999-5118 123.84 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 9 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER HAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 73745 12/06/01 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV 73746 12/06/01 003090 MARGARITA MIDDLE SCHOOL 73747 12/06/01 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS 73747 12/06/01 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS 73747 12/06/01 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS 73748 12/06/01 004170 MATRIX IMAGING PRODUCTS 73748 12/06/01 004170 MATRIX IMAGING PRODUCTS 73748 12/06/01 004170 MATRIX IMAGING PRODUCTS 73748 12/06/01 004170 MATRIX IMAGING PRODUCTS 73749 12/06/01 002693 MATROS, ANDREA TEMP HELP W/E 10/28 GEDLMEYER 001-164-604-5118 ENTERTAINMNT:OLD TOWN 12/01/01 280-199-999-5362 OCT SPORTS PRGM UMPIRE SVCS OCT SPORTS PRGM UMPIRE SVCS NOV SPORTS PRGM UMPIRE SVCS 190-187-999-5250 190'187'999-5250 190'187-999-5250 KODAK MAINTENANCE KIT 854'6012 320-199'999-5215 KODAK WHITE EXPOSURE LAMP 320-199-999-5215 FREIGHT 320-199-999-5215 SALES TAX 320-199-999-5215 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 73750 12/06/01 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC CAFR REPORT COVERS-FRONT/BACK 001-140-999-5222 73750 12/06/01 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC CAFR TAB DIVIDERS 001-140-999-5222 73750 12/06/01 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC BLANK PAPER FOR CAFR 001-140-999-5222 ITEM AMOUNT 123.84 100.00 1,225.00 2,125.00 650.00 290.00 240.00 25.00 39.75 268.80 769.70 803.03 121.48 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMp 003076 DENTALML 001-2340 4,489.03 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 165-2340 200.93 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 190-2340 687.56 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 193-2340 61.12 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 194-2340 5.44 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 280-2340 100.45 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 330-2340 18.15 73751 12/06/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 340-2340 130.60 73752 12/06/01 MINA, ROBERTO REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-3071 190-2900 73752 12/06/01 MIHA~ ROBERTO ADD~L RENTAL HOUR NOT NEEDED 190-183-4989 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS WINDOW ENVELOPES FOR TCSD 190-180-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 190-180-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 0013B4 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS: D. THURMAN 190-180-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 190-180-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS: A. AHMAD 001-171-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 001-171-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS: K. CUMMINGS 001-171-999-5222 73753 12/06/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 001-171-999-5222 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 73754 12/06/01 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 73754 12/06/01 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 73754 12/06/01 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 73754 12/06/01 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 73754 12/06/01 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 73755 12/06/01 001067 MITY LITE INC ~755 12/06/01 001067 MITY LITE INC 73755 12/06/01 001067 MITY LITE INC R.V. TOT LOT PLAY EQUIP PARTS ONE WAY SCREWS 104-357. FLAT WASHERS 117-049. FREIGHT SALES TAX 340-199-701-5610 340-199-701-5610 340-199-701-5610 CITY RALL STANDARD MODEL FREIGHT SALES TAX 100.00 12.00 169.01 12.68 39.75 2.98 39.75 2.98 39.75 2.98 202.46 1.76 .80 22.08 15.23 925.00 70.23 64.~5 CHECK AMOUNT 803.67 100.00 4,000.00 594.75 268.80 1,694.21 5,693.28 112.00 309.88 242.33 1,059.98 73756 12/06/01 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING DESILT POHDS:SANTIAGO/J.WARNER 001-164-601-5401 4,950.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 10 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK HUMBER DATE }3756 12/06/01 73756 12/06/01 73757 12/06/01 73758 12/06/01 73759 12/06/01 73760 12/06/01 73761 12/06/01 73761 12/06/01 73762 12/06/01 73763 12/06/01 73763 12/06/01 73763 12/06/01 ~5763 12/06/01 73764 12/06/01 73764 12/06/01 73764 12/06/01 73764 12/06/01 73765 12/06/01 73766 12/06/01 73767 12/06/01 73767 12/06/01 73768 12/06/01 VENDOR NUMBER 000883 000883 000230 000727 000727 000718 002898 002898 004191 003964 003964 003964 003964 002105 002105 002105 002105 002668 VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER MONTELEONE EXCAVATING MONTELEONE EXCAVATING MUN1FINANCIAL NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTIO NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTIO NATIONAL RECREATION/PAR NIXON EGLI EQUIPMENT CO NIXON EGLI EQUIPMENT CO NORTH COUNTY T1MES-PMT OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OMEGA LAKE SERVICES ORANGE CO, DA FAMILY SU 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPAN 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPAN PACIFIC SETTLERS RESTAU DESILT PONDS:SANTIAGO/J.WARNER 001-164-601-5401 CLEAN-UP/SAND BAGS:VIA MONTEZU 001-164-601-5402 ARBITRAGE REBATE SERVICES 390-199-999-5248 RENEW MEMBERBNIP:ABDUL AHMAD 001-171~999-5226 ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION FIRE CODES 001-171-999-5228 VIDEO PRESENTATION AWARDS:TCSD 190-180-999-5228 REPAIR OF AIR COMPRESSOR-PW REPAIR OF AIR COMPRESSOR-PW 001-164-601-5214 001-164-601-5214 HALLOWEEN ADS FOR OLD TOWN 280-199-999-5362 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR STN 92 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR GIB OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PLANNING OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PLANNING CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VERICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 210-165-739-5801 001-161-610-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 190-180-999-5214 001-164-601-5214 001-163-999-5214 001-164-601-5214 DEC DUCK POND WATER MA1NT SVCB 190-180-999-5250 CHILD SUPPORT:BENOIT:16-28-86 001-2140 REC SUPPLIES FOR WTR WONDERLND 190-183-999-5370 EEC SUPPLIES FOR WTR WONDERLND 190-183-999-5370 REFUND:ENG DEPOSIT:LDOO-139GR 001-2670 73769 12/06/01 001958 PERB LONG TERM CARE PRO 001958 PERS L-T 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASN 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 001-2122 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-164-602-5222 001-171-999-5222 190-180-999-5222 190-180-999-5263 190-185-999-5220 001-140-999-5262 190-180-999-5260 190-180-999-5261 001-165-999-5260 001-120-999-5225 001-140-999-5262 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 001-140-999-5262 ITEM AMOUNT 4,250.00 3,200.00 1,250.00 115.00 700.00 40.00 2,1~.15 1,643.66 254.08 322.47 44.42 110.51 12.30 20.00 19.15 76.93 136.25 800.00 56.25 104.45 69.25 995.00 83.99 3.69 5.27 6.32 17.79 47.70 19.25 31.24 20.00 9.98 18.38 5.52 19.29 46.72 14.84 CHECK AMOUNT 12~400.00 1,250.00 115.00 700.00 40.00 3,820.81 254.08 489.70 252.33 800.00 56.25 175.70 995.00 83.99 VOUCHRE2 12/06/01 09:19 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 11 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73770 12/06/01 000249 PETTY CASH 73772 12/06/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN 73772 12/06/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN 73773 12/06/01 003493 PRO*CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR 73774 12/06/01 003697 PROJECT DESIGN COMSULTA 73775 12/06/01 000635 R & J PARTY PALACE 73776 12/06/01 004029 R J M DESIGN GROUP INC 73776 12/06/01 004029 R J M DESIGN GROUP INC 73777 12/06/01 004494 RAMONA TIRE IRC 73778 12/06/01 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK A 73778 12/06/01 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK A 73779 12/06/01 000262 RANCHO CAL[F WATER DIST 73779 12/06/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 73780 12/06/01 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN MER 73781 12/06/01 003761 RANCHO METALS & SUPPLY 73782 12/06/01 004584 REGENCY LIGRTING 73782 12/06/01 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING 73782 12/06/01 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING 73783 12/06/01 000266 RIGHTWAY 73783 12/06/01 000266 RIGNTWAY 73783 12/06/01 000266 RIGHTWAY 73784 12/06/01 RINCON, GREGORIA 73784 12/06/01 RINCOM, GREGORIA 73785 12/06/01 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE 73785 12/06/01 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE 73785 12/06/01 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE 73786 12/06/01 RIVERSIDE CO HEALTH SVC ITEM DESCRIPTION PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CABH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT OCT VAR. PUBLIC NTCS:PLANNING OCT VAR. PUBLIC NTCS:PLANNING RES IMPRV PRGM: HILTON OCT DSGN SVCS:PAUBA RD IMPRV AUCTION STAGE RENTAL:OLD TOWN JUL DSGN SVCS:AQUATIC FAC PH 2 AUG DSGN SVCS:AQUATIC FAC PH 2 REPAIR/MAINT FOR FIRE VEHICLES 1ST QTR MEMBERSHIP DUES:DIAZ 1ST OTR MEMBERSHIP DUES/C.H. VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-164-604-5260 001-170-999-5260 340-199-701-5212 001-162-999-5261 001-162-999-5261 001-171-999-5260 001-110-999-5260 001-164-601-5260 190-2920 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 165-199-813-5804 210-165-606-5802 280-199-999-5362 210-190-170-5802 210-190-170-5802 001-171-999-5214 001-164-604-5226 340-199-701-5226 190-180-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 REFURD:ENG DEPOSIT:LD94-206GR 001-2670 VAR PARKS METAL SUPPLIES VAR PARKS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES OLD TOWN LIGHT POLE RECEPTICLE SALES TAX DEC EQUIP RENTAL - RIVERTON PK DEC EQUIP RENTAL - PASEO PARK DEC EQUIP RENTAL-LNG CYN CREEK 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-164-603-5212 190~180-999-5238 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5238 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2648 190-2900 ADD~L RENTAL HOURS 190-184-4990 SEP/OCT COPIES SEP/OCT COPIES SEP/OCT COPIES EMS CERTIFICATION: L. HOLLOWAY 001-163-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 165-199-999-5250 001-171-999-5261 ITEM AMOUNT 44.28 20.00 6.50 20.94 17.00 43.37 20.00 42.22 14.99 59.25 194.75 795.00 4,085.00 137.25 3,179.85 2,271.76 403.92 1,813.72 1,319.07 1,162.12 6,525.39 8,625.00 21.50 265.10 420.00 31.50 70.88 115.75 127.35 100.00 62.50- 2.00 4.00 1.00 50.00 CHECK AMOUNT 495.29 254.00 795.00 4,085.00 137.25 5,451.61 403.92 3,132.79 7,687.51 8,625.0D 21.50 716.60 313.98 37.50 7.00 50.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 73787 12/06/01 73788 12/06/01 73789 12/06/01 73790 12/06/01 73791 12/06/01 73792 12/06/01 73792 12/06/01 73792 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73793 12/06/01 73794 12/06/01 73794 12/06/01 73794 12/06/01 73794 12/06/01 73795 12/06/01 73795 12/06/01 73795 12/06/01 73795 12/06/01 73795 12/06/01 73796 12/06/01 73797 12/06/01 , 73797 12/06/01 73797 12/06/01 73798 12/06/01 73798 12/06/01 73799 12/06/01 73799 12/06/01 73800 12/06/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. RODRIQUEZ, GUILLERMO 002226 RUSSO, MARY ANNE 001942 S C SIGNS 000403 SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 000645 SMART & FINAL 000645 SMART & FINAL 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 S0 CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPAL ATHL 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPAL ATHL 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPAL ATHL 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPAL ATHL 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR ST JEANNE DE LESTONNAC 000293 STADIUM PIZZA 000293 STADIUM PIZZA 000293 STADIUM PIZZA 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN 002224 SYNDISTAR INC 002224 SYNDISTAR INC 000305 TARGET STORE ITEM DESCRIPTION REIMB:LEAG CITIES CF:10/04-07 REFUND:SPORTS/MINI-NAWKS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS AUG-OCT PUBLIC NTC POSTINGS NOV TES POOL MAINTENANCE SVCS RECREATION SUPPLIES-HIGH HOPES RECREATION SUPPLIES-HIGH HOPES SISTER CITIES SUPPLIES NOV 2-22-575-0876 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-20-792-2444 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-19-685-3263 FRONT ST PED NOV 2-22-496-3439 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-00-397-5042 CITY HALL NOV 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-02-502-8077 MAINT FAC NOV 2-20-347-8409 MCCABE NOV 2-18-528-9980 SANTIAGO RD ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP: C. MCCARTHY ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP: J. WILCOX ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP: H. PARKER ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP: L. AMAVISCA CITY HALL PEST CONTROL SVCS CRC PEST CONTROL SERVICES TCC PEST CONTROL SERVICES PEST CONTROL FOR STATION 84 MAINT FAC PEST CONTROL SERVICE HOLIDAY PARADE AWARD REFRESHMENTS:WREATH DECORATING REFRESHMENTS:WREATH DECORATING REFRESHMENTS:WREATH DECORATING TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS FIRE PREVENTION TRAINING SUPP. FIRE PREVENTION TRAINING SUPP. SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT:STN 92 ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-100-999-5258 190-183-4982 190-183-999-5330 001-120-999-5244 190-186-999-5250 190-183-999-5373 190-183-999-5373 001-101-999-5280 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 001-164-603-5319 190-180-999-5319 340-199-701-5240 190-180-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 340-199-702-5240 190-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5226 190-100-999-5226 190-180-999-5226 190-180-999-5226 340-199-701-5250 190-182-999-5250 190-184-999-5250 001-171-999-5212 340-199-702-5250 190-2640 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 001-171-999-5296 001-171-999-5296 001-171-999-5220 ITEM AMOUNT 23.68 25.00 1,036.00 130.00 646.00 13.10 62.45 35.93 286.35 194.04 344.49 137.37 5,501.44 27.21 675.96 774.84 1,145.85 54.13 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 56.00 90.00 36.00 80.00 40.00 200.00 30.95 29.06 15.33 528.00 364.00 2,924.42 840.00 221.75 CHECK AMOUNT 23.68 25.00 1,036.00 130.00 646.00 111.48 9,141.68 200.00 302.00 200.00 75.34 892.00 3,764.42 221.75 73801 12/06/01 TAYLOR MADE POOLS INC REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:B01-2026 001-162-4285 282.50 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF FEMECULA PAGE 13 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73801 73801 738O2 73802 73802 73802 73802 73802 73802 73803 73804 738O5 73805 73805 73805 73805 73805 73805 73805 73805 73806 73806 73807 73808 73808 73808 73808 73808 73808 73808 73808 73809 73810 73811 73812 73812 73813 73814 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 TAYLOR MADE POOLS INC TAYLOR MADE POOLS INC ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:G01-2026 001-162-4200 REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:B01-2026 001-2290 108.00 1.25 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 001-2125 781.~ 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 190-2125 147.36 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 193-2125 18.00 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 194-2125 2.25 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 320-2125 67.50 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 330-2125 33.75 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UR DUES 340-2125 51.76 TEATOR, CARA TEMECULA AGLOW 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMEOULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL TEMECULA MURRIETA SOCCE 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000876 TEMECULA VALLEY BALLOON 003849 TERRYBERRY COMPANY 002452 TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS REFND:ARTS/CRAFTS-CREATIVE ART 190-182-4980 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS96-0510 190-2900 EMPLOYEE CONTRIRUTION TO FLEX 001-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 165-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 190-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 194-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 192-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIGUTION TO FLEX 193-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 280-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 330-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 340-1020 CREDIT:INCORRECT BILLING 001-2170 SUNSHINE FUND 001-2170 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2686 190-2900 NAMETAG: T. CHU NAMEPLATE: E. STEGER NAMEPLATE/HOLDER:PLAN/COMM MTG NAMETAG/NAMEPLATE: K. JESTER BRASS PLATE FOR FLAG CASE NAMESTAGS:TA/LW/SW/DT/AA NAMESTAGS:TA/LW/SW/DT/AA NAMESTAGS:TA/LW/SW/DT/~ FY 01/02 SPONSORSRIP FUNDING EMP SERVICE AWARDS/PINS MISC MATERIAL FOR PW MAINT CRW OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CIP DIV OFFICE SUPPLIES-PW ADMIN RESURFACE BSKTBLL COURTS:PALA 004124 TRUELINE 001-164-602-5222 001-164-604-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-140-999-5222 001-110-999-5222 001-162-999-5222 001-171-999-5222 190-180-999-5222 001-111-999~5266 001-150-999-5265 001-164-601-5214 001-165-999-5220 001-164-604-5220 190-180-999-5416 001-2080 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 16.00 100.00 4,060.76 225.00 934.00 3.75 1.25 9.75 75.00 466.66 11.25 71.97- 217.58 100.00 6.99 6.99 79.71 13.98 7.78 20.96 6.99 6.99 35,000.00 1,828.50 6.48 242.26 75.09 4,295.00 9,982.49 391.75 1,102.50 16.00 100.00 5,787.42 145.61 100.00 150.39 35,000.00 1,828.50 6.48 317.35 4,295.00 VOUCHER2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 14 12/06/01 09:19 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCRER/ CHECK NUMBER 73814 73814 73814 73814 73814 73814 73814 73814 73815 73815 73815 73815 73815 73815 T5815 73815 73816 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 001065 DEF COMP 190-2080 1,934.73 001065 DEF COMP 192-2080 2.50 001065 DEF COMP 193-2080 118.51 001065 DEF COMP 194-2080 29.49 001065 DEF COMP 280-2080 16.01 001065 DEF COMP 300-2080 88.55 001065 DEF COMP 320-2080 1~416.68 001065 DEF COMP 340-2080 145.17 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 001-2160 998.84 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 165-2160 91.70 000389 U S C M WEST (0BRA) 000389 PT RETIE 190-2160 979.18 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 193-2160 23.38 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 280-2160 26.60 000389 U S C M WEST (ORRA) 000389 PT RETIE 320-2160 59.20 000389 U S C M WEST (0BRA) 000389 PT RETIE 330-2160 30.68 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 340-2160 31.72 004435 U S CONFERENCE OF MAYOR MAYORS CONF:I/23-25:R.ROGERTS 001-I00-999-5258 450.00 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 001-2120 127.05 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 165-2120 8.75 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 190-2120 22.59 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 192-2120 .11 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 193-2120 2.20 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 194-2120 .50 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 280-2120 2.50 ;'3817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 320-2120 5.00 73817 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 340-2120 .60 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 12/06/01 000325 UNITED WAY 004504 VAIL RANCH SELF STORAGE 73818 73819 73820 004261 VER1ZON CALIFORNIA 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN WESTON, RETA 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000348 ZIGLER, GAIL 73821 73822 73823 73823 73824 GIFT GIVING CAMPMGN FUNDS 001-2120 AUDIO/VIDEO TAPE STORAGE 001-120-999-5277 NOV XXX-9897 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 CITYW[DE TREE MAINTENANCE SVCS 001-164-601-5402 EMP COMPUTER PRGM: R. WESTON 001-1175 SEPT 8ASR CHARGE 5830 COPIER 330-199-999-5217 OCT BASE CHARGE 5830 COPIER 330-199-999-5217 HOLIDAY PARTY RAFFLE PRIZES 001-2175 12/06/01 1,556.78 30.00 76.00 4,650.00 1,138.63 80.30 80.30 860.00 13,734.13 2,241.30 450.00 169.30 1,556.78 30.00 76.00 4,650.00 1,138.63 160.60 860.00 TOTAL CHECKS 410,255.07 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 10 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 261 CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 IRSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 256,871.97 6,043.68 50,887.45 33,864.19 2,830.49 234.24 1,680.00 114,925.93 1,058.81 13,517,86 164,929.82 3,560.05 22.20 3~565.28 TOTAL 654,000.77 VOUCHRE2 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER CATE 73827 12/13/01 73828 12/13/01 }3828 12/13/01 }3828 12/13/01 }3828 12/13/01 73828 12/13/01 73828 12/13/01 }3828 12/13/01 }3828 12/13/01 }3829 12/13/01 }3830 12/13/01 }3831 12/13/01 }3832 12/13/01 }3833 12/13/01 }3833 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 }3839 12/13/01 }3839 12/13/01 7~839 12/13/01 12/13/01 73841 12/13/01 }3841 12/13/01 }3842 12/13/01 }3843 12/13/01 }3844 12/13/01 }3844 12/13/01 }3844 12/13/01 }3844 12/13/01 VENDOR VENCOR NUMBER NAME AASIB 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM BERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM BERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM BERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM BERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV 004777 ANYTIME ICE COMPANY, IN 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN 0 004206 BANUELOS~ TERESA 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION BRV 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT H.***** 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT H.***** 003502 BUILDING INDUSTRY ASBOC 002099 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES 003138 CAL MAT 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL BURANCE ASSOCIATES 002520 CALIFORNIA T'S SCREENPR 002520 CALIFORNIA T~S SCREENPR 002520 CALIFORNIA T'B BCREENPR 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 003349 CAROUSEL FARM & CARRIAG 003349 CAROUSEL FARM & CARRIAG 002534 CATERERS CAFE 001193 COMP U B A INC 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM OESCRIPTION MEMBERSHIP DUE: WENDELL OTT FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL FLOOR MAT AND TOWEL RENTAL UNIFORM RENTAL:PW MNTC CREW UNIFORM RENTAL:TCSD MNTC CREW MAN MADE SNOW:"WINTER WNDLND" TEMP HELP W/E 11/24 SENG MEMBERBNIP RENEWAL:TOM COLE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-180-999-5226 340-199-701-5250 340-199-702-5250 190-181-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 190-184-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 001-164-601-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-183-999-5370 001-162-999-5118 001-161-999-5214 190-183-999-5330 R&R GUARDRAIL - RAINBOW CANYON 001-164-601-5402 REPAIR EMPIRE CREEK CHANNEL 001-164-601-5401 OLD TWN SANTA CLAUS 280-199-999-5362 CREDIT:ORANGE CO CHILD SUPPORT 001-2140 LAND DEVEL CONF:12/18:STAFF DEC OLD TWN RESTROOM RENTAL PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS MUM L[AB/AUTO PHYS RENEWAL EXCESS LIABILITY RENEWAL RACE FOR THE CURE T'SHIRTS RACE FOR THE CURE T'SHIRTS ADDL T-SHIRT:RACE FOR THE CURE HELIUM FOR BALLOON BLOWER CARRIAGE:DICKENS X-MAS OLD TWN CARRIAGE:DICKENS X-MAS OLD TWN REFRESHMENTS:C.M.BUSINESS MTGS COMPUTER EQUIPMENT:INFO SYB JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAM/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING 001-163-999-5261 280-199-999-5234 001-164-601-5218 300-1655 300-1655 001-150-999-5265 001-150-999-5265 001-150-999-5265 190-184-999-5301 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 001-110-999-5260 320-199-999-5242 340-199-701-5250 340-199-702-5250 190-185-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 75.00 23.85 8.55 12.84 21.06 9.24 7.91 54.52 36.65 2,402.50 312.00 44.00 170.00 6,528.00 4,360.00 600.00 225.00- 140.00 826.00 982.09 124~864.00 25,625.00 59.13 205.87 59.93 25.70 550.00 100.00 57.68 579.58 210.00 135.00 75.00 135.00 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 75.00 174.62 2,402.50 312.00 44.00 170.00 10,888.00 375.00 140.00 826.00 982.09 150,489.00 324.93 25.70 650.00 57.68 579.58 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK HUMBER 73844 73844 73844 73844 73844 73845 73845 73845 73846 73847 73847 73848 73849 73850 73851 73851 73851 73851 73851 73851 73851 73851 73851 73852 73852 73852 73852 73852 73852 73852 73853 73854 73855 73856 73857 73858 73858 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMGER NAME 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 001014 COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS 003383 DEAMER APPLIANCE SERVIC 003383 DEAMER APPLIANCE SERVIC 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL 002954 DIAMOND GARAGE 004579 DON SIDELL & ASSOCIATES 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 000523 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER 004130 ELSINORE ELECTRICAL SUP 003171 EMPIRE ECONOMICS LLC 002939 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS R 000164 ESGIL CORPORATION 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING JAN/FEB/MAR:ALARM MONITORING 190-185-999-5250 190-181-999-5250 190-184-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 190-188-999-5250 JUL-AUG GEOTECH SVC:MNTC FAC JUL-AUG GEOTECH SVC-MNTC FAC SEP GEOTECH SVCS:MNTC FAC 210-190-158-5801 210-190-158-5801 210-190-158-5801 FAC [MPR PRGM: TEM PSYCHIC 280-199-813-5804 SERVICE CALL TO FIRE STN 84 001-171-999-5212 THERMOSTAT REPAIRS FOR STN 84 001-171-999-5212 14 PORTABLE TOILETS:PARADE 190-183-999-5370 RES IMPR PRGM:CUNNINGHAM,JAMES 165-199-813-5804 MGMT SVCS:CHAPARRAL SWIM POOL 210-190-170-5804 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263 001-165-999-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-161-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 320-199-999-5262 001-111-999-5262 190-180-999-5263 001-165-999-5263 TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 RUSH TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 MONTECINO TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 MONTECINO TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 EBON TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 OBMANN TEMP RBLP W/E 11/30 HEER TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 MCCOY 95366-02 DIEGO DB LDSC 001-161-999-5118 340-199-701-5118 340-199-702-5118 340-199-701-5118 001-171-999-5118 001-162-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 193-180-999-5240 CRC TRANSFORMER KIT:OFFICE LGT 190-182-999-5212 MRKT ABSORPTION ANALYSIS:WOLF 001-2644 MAP OBJECTS CONSULTING SVCS 001-161-610-5248 OCT PLAN CHECK SVCB 001-162-999-5248 RECOGNITION:MUSEUM DOCENT 190-185-999-5250 CREDIT:MUSEUM BOARD PAYING 1/2 190-185-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 111.00 135.00 246.00 246.00 246.00 444.50 1,689.00 60.00 3,892.13 60.00 368.70 536.20 1,305.00 8,281.00 403.96 32.47 273.99 154.84 94.17 11.75 7.70 18.93 134.41 1,887.30 751.80 250.60 1,194.40 1,520.80 2,383.00 2,607.20 86.41 137.82 6,000.00 1,487.08 8,704.92 865.38 432.69- CHECK AMOUNT 1,539.D0 2,193.50 3,892.13 428.70 536.20 1,305.00 8,281.00 1,132.22 10,595.10 86.41 137.82 6,000.00 1,487.08 8,704.92 432.69 VOUCBRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73859 73859 73859 73860 73861 7-3861 73862 73862 73862 73863 73864 73864 7'3864 T3864 73864 7-3864 73865 73865 73866 73867 73868 73868 73868 73868 73868 73868 73869 73869 73869 73869 7387O 73870 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 CNECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 001701 EXCEL RENTAL CENTER 001701 EXCEL RENTAL CENTER 001701 EXCEL RENTAL CENTER 002037 EXPANETS 003053 FAGAN, MATTNEW 003053 FAGAN, MATTHEW 000478 FAST SIGNS 000478 FAST SIGNS 000478 FAST SIGNS 001511 FIELDMAN ROLAPP & ASBOC 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M 004239 FISHER MERR[MAN BENGAL 001989 FOX NETWORK SYSTEMS INC 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 003531 GATEWAY 003531 GATEWAY 003531 GATEWAY 003531 GATEWAY 003815 GFB FRIEDRICN & ASSOCIA 003815 BFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOGIA 000177 GLENNIEB OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 0001~ GLENNIEB OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIEB OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIEB OFFICE PRODUCT ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 30 LGT TWR RENTAL:CITY PARADE DELIVERY AND PECK UP. SALES TAX DIGITAL REMOTE TEC SERVICES 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5238 210-190-158-5610 ENTERTAINMENT:DICKENS X-MAS ENTERTAINMENT:DICKENS X-MAS 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 DECAL WINGS FOR PD MOTORCYCLES 001-170-999-5214 SALES TAX 001-170-999-5214 VIP SIGRS FOR PARADE 190-183-999-5370 FINANCIAL ADVISOR:WOLF CREEK 001-2644 XX-1405 UBNOSKE:PROF MTG 001-161-999-5260 XX-0515 TNORNHILL:UCR EXTEN/MT 001-161-999-5260 XX-0515 TNORNNILL:UCR EXTEN/MT 001-161-999-5261 XX-0432 ELMO:BOOKB/AIR/CONF 001-162-999-5258 XX-0432 ELMO:BOOKB/AIR/CONF 001-162-999-5228 XX-1143 PARKER:PROF MTGS 190-180-999-5260 CITY EMPLOYEE FIRST AID CARE CITY EMPLOYEE FIRST AID CARE 001-150-999-5250 001-150-999-5250 OLD TWN COMM THEATRE DESIGN 210-190-167-5802 MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIEB:INF SYS 320-199-999-5221 DAY TIMER SUPPLIES-FINANCE DAY TIMER SUPPLIES:FINANCE GOLF PLANNER REFILL FOR 2002 SEASONS PLANNER REFILL 2002 SHIPPING AND HANDLING SALES TAX 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-100-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 PENTIUM II1 COMPUTER:POLICE 001-170-999-5604 SALES TAX 001-170-999-5604 DIAMONDTRON MONITOR:POLICE DPT 001-170-999-5604 SALES TAX 001-170-999-5604 OCT SVCS:MARGARITA RD IMPR OCT SVCS:MARGARITA RD IMPR 210-165-706-5802 210-165-713-5802 OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY MANAGER OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY COUNCIL OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY CLERK OFFICE SUPPLIES-FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING OFFICE SUPPLIES-BLDG SAFETY AWARD PLAQUES:HOLIDAY EVENTS 001-110-999-5220 001~100-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 190-183-999-5370 2,294.30 345.00 172.07 236.00 150.00 150.00 164.99 12.37 219.46 826.11 39.07 31.59 125.00 1,007.95 125.00 93.43 121.95 121.95 36,750.00 675.85 34.79 30.32 31.60 25.20 15.00 5.39 1,387.31 104.06 317.69 23.84 1,350.87 128.13 433.06 12.86 17.44 231.49 29.85 489.64 169.98 2,811.37 236.00 300.00 396.82 826.11 1,422.04 243.90 36,750.00 675.85 142.30 1,832.90 1,479.00 VOUCBRE2 CITY OF TEMEDULA PAGE 4 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73871 73872 7~873 73874 73875 73875 73876 73877 73878 73879 73880 73881 73881 73881 73881 73882 73882 73883 73883 73884 73885 73885 73886 73886 73887 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 12/13/01 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 003640 GRAYNER ENGINEERING 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 002372 HARMON, JUDY 001013 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & 001013 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & 003198 HOME DEPOT, THE 004624 INGERSOLL-RAND EQUIPMEN 001517 INTEGRATED INSIGHTS DBA 003296 INTL FIRE CODE INSTiTUT JAMS 004796 JONS FLAGS & POLES 004796 JONS FLAGS & POLES 004796 JONS FLAGS & POLES 004796 JONS FLAGS & POLES 003046 K F R 0 G 95.1FM RADIO 003046 K F R 0 G 95.1FM RADIO 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT 004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS INC 001694 KNIGHT PRINTING & PUBLI 001694 KNIGHT PRINTING & PUBLI 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS 1NC 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS INC 004087 LOWE~S ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER AWARD PLAQUES:RECYCLING WINNER SALES TAX SALES TAX OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCOD OFFICE SUPPLIES:TCC OFFICE SUPPLIES:MUSEUM OFFICE SUPPLIES:TCSD 194-180-999-5265 190-183-999-5370 194-180-999-5265 190-180-999-5220 190-184-999-5220 190-185-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE PREVENTIO 001-171-999-5220 OFFICE SUPPLIES-RECORDS MGMT 001-120-999-527/ OFFICE SUPPLIES:ECONOMIC DEV 001-111-999-5220 AUG-NOV ENG SVCS:MNTC FAC III 210-190-158-5804 HARDWARE SUPPLIES:MNTC FAC TCOD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 340-199-702-5212 190-183-999-5330 SALES TAX RECOVERY FEES 001-140-999-5248 SALES TAX CONSULTING SERVICES 001-140-999-5248 PRIZES FOR HOLIDAY LGHT WINNER 190-2640 PW MNTC ROLLER & TRAILER EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRGM MEMBERSBIP: ABDUL AHMAD 001-164-601-5610 001-150-999-5248 001-171-999-5226 001-130-999-5247 NON. HARELSON SHARE FEES US FLAG FOR SHERRIFS POSSE CALIF FLAG FOR SHERRIFS POSSE FLAG POLE FOR TEMECULA FLAG SALES TAX 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5242 RADIO ADS:SANTA SEASONAL SALE 280-199-999-5362 RADIO ADS:OLD TWN X-MAS EVENTS 280-199-999-5362 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANALYSIS OLD TWN HOUSING ANALYSIS BVAC MNTC:CHILDREN'S MUSEUM PERMIT CARDS -3 PARTS:B&S SHIPPING/HANDLING/SET UP MISC POOL SUPPLIES - CRC MISC POOL SUPPLIES - CRC 165-199-999-5250 165-199-999-5250 190-188-999-5212 001-162-999-5222 001-162-999-5222 190-186-999-5212 190-186-999-5212 PRIZES FOR HOLIDAY LGHT WINNER 190-2640 ITEM AMOUNT 204.27 12.75 15.32 229.23 119.66 94.68 270.10 157.40 626.08 64.55 2,768.10 13.96 280.00 2,240.49 900.00 375.00 26,916.93 574.56 60.00 350.00 132.76 132.76 51.50 23.78 100.00 280.00 1,097.63 1,520.00 180.00 1,809.72 330.85 252.70 112.86 150.00 CHECK AMOUNT 3,178.36 2,768.10 13.96 280.00 3,140.49 375.00 26,916.93 574.56 60.00 350.00 340.80 380.00 2,617.63 180.00 2,140.57 365.56 150.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCBER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 5 VOUCHER/ CHECK CBECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 73888 12/13/01 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS MISC. SIGNS FOR PUBLIC WORKS 001~164-601-5244 161.25 161.25 73889 12/13/01 004107 MASBA-LAVITT, SANDRA 11/28-12/05 CONSULTING SERVICE 001-161-999-5248 73889 12/13/01 004107 MASSA-LAVITT~ SANDRA DEBIT MEMO;BILLING ERROR 001-161-999-5248 73890 12/13/01 001892 MOBILE MODULAR MOBILE MODULAR FOR FIRE BTN 92 210-165-739-5804 73890 12/13/01 001892 MOBILE MODULAR MOBILE MODULAR SECURITY DEPST 001-1660 73891 12/13/01 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING SANDBAG PUJOL STREET 001-164-601-5402 73891 12/13/01 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING SVC LEVEL "R" ROAD GRADING 195-180-999-5402 73892 12/13/01 001214 MORNINGSTAR PRODUCTIONS SOUND SYS. & ANNOUNCER:PARADE 190-183-999-5370 73893 12/13/01 003715 MORTON TRAFFIC MARKINGS STENCIL PAINT FOR PUBLIC WORKS 001-164-601-5218 7'5894 12/13/01 003039 MURRIETA VALLEY NIGB SC BIGB SCBOOL CHOIR:DICKENS 280-199-999-5362 1,352.20 171.00 5,197.85 1,300.00 3,000.00 1,680.00 1,300.00 1~948.99 300.00 1,523.20 6,497.85 4,680.00 1,300.00 1,948.99 300.00 ~895 12/13/01 001986 MUZAK INC DEC MUSIC BROADCAST:OLD TOWN 001"164'603-5250 59.50 59.50 73896 12/13/01 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS MISC AUTO SUPPLIES:PUBLIC WKS 001'164-601-5215 73897 12/13/01 002033 NATIONAL CRIME PREVENTI BAGS FOR SPOOKTACULAR EVENT 280-199'999'5362 219.24 384.50 219.24 384.50 73'5898 12/13/01 004512 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECR SVC:MARG RD:PW99-01 210-165'706-5802 73899 12/13/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES: POLICE 001-170-999-5229 73899 12/13/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES: POLICE 001'170-999-5229 73899 12/13/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 001'140'999-5220 73900 12/13/01 ORANGE CO. DA FAMILY SU CHILD SUPPORT #16-28-86:BENOIT P & D CONSULTANTS [NC CONTRACT BLDG INSPECTORS SVCS 73901 12/13/01 002256 001-2140 001'162-999-5118 73902 12/13/01 003762 P M X MEDICAL PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 001'171'999"5311 73902 12/13/01 003762 P M X MEDICAL PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 001'171'999-5311 73902 12/13/01 003762 P M X MEDICAL PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 001-171-999'5311 73903 12/13/01 002734 P V P COMMUNICATIONS IN 'COMMUNICATIONS ACCESSORIES:POL 001-170'999-5243 73903 12/13/01 002734 P V P COMMUNICATIONS IN COMMUNICATION ACCESSORIES:POL 001-170'999'5243 73903 12/13/01 002~4 P V P COMMUNICATIONS IN FREIGHT 001-170'999'5243 73903 12/13/01 002734 P V P COMMUNICATIONS IN SALES TAX 001-170-999'5243 5,018.00 28.34 150.79 141.88 225.00 17,839.10 51.10 35.57 54.93 210.00 70.00 6.81 21.00 5,018.00 321.01 225.00 17,839.10 141.60 307.81 73904 12/13/01 PERDUE,ROBERT S. & ROUT REIMB:FAC IMPRV PRGM:KRAWCHUK 280-199-813-5804 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S W-2 FORMS FOR PAYROLL 001-140-999-5222 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S ENVELOPES FOR W-2 FORMS 001-140-999-5222 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S 1099 FORMS FOR ACCTS PAYABLE 001~140-999-5222 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S ENVELOPES FOR 1099 FORMS 001-140-999-5222 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S FREIGHT 001-140-999-5222 73905 12/13/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S SALES TAX 001-140-999-5222 4,900.00 144.58 109.10 102.00 68.79 10.00 31.84 4,900.00 466.31 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6 12/13/01 11:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER 73906 12/13/01 73906 12/13/01 }3906 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 7'5907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 }~3907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73907 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 }3908 12/13/01 7~3908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73908 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 }3909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 }3909 12/13/01 73909 12/13/01 73910 12/13/01 73911 12/13/01 73912 12/13/01 73913 12113/01 VENDOR NAME 004627 PUBLIC SAFETY TECHBOLOG 004627 PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOG 004627 PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOG 000262 RANCHO CAL1F WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIBT 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIBT 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & BERSN 002412 RICNARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSN 002412 RICNARDS WATSON & GERSN 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERBH 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR 003698 RIVERSIDE CO ECONOMIC 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONT 000268 RIVERSIDE CO HABITAT ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER PORTABLE RADIOS RENTAL:PARADE 10 HEADSETS RENTAL:PARADE SALES TAX NOV 01-99-02003-0 FLOATING MTR NOV 01-08-20110-0 MARGARITA RD DEC 01-08-38009-0 STN 92 NOV 01-02-98000-0 PARKVIEW NOV 01-02-98010-0 F-5 PARKVIEW NOV 02-79-10100-1 DIAZ ROAD NOV 01-06-04860-5 PUJOL VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VENICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VENICLE DETAILING NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES NOV 2001 LEGAL SERVICES 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 001-164-601-5250 210-165-706-5804 001-171-999-5240 001-171-999-5240 001-171-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 280-199-999-5250 001-164-603-5240 001-165-999-5250 190-186-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 190-181-999-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-184-999-5240 190-188-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 340-199-701-5240 190-185-999-5240 001-162-999-5214 001-165-999-5214 001-110-999-5214 001-110-999-5263 001-163-999-5214 001-161-999-5263 001-161-999-5214 001-164-601-5214 190'180-999-5214 001'130-999-5246 165-199~999-5246 300-199'999-5246 280-199-999-5246 261-199-999-5246 001'2643 001-2642 001-2644 210-1990 210-165-736-5801 LAFCO COST ALLOCATION SVCS 001'161-999-5250 MARKETING AGREMHT W/RVSD DEVEL 001-111-999'5264 PAUBA RD STORM DRAIN:SEP CHRGS 210'165'603-5802 NOV 2001 K-RAT PAYMENT 001-2300 ITEM AMOUNT 225.00 30.00 19.13 308.79 42.74 63.27 10.31 129.72 83.19 45.46 302.73 549.37 402.21 5,285.34 113.13 369.47 276.93 87.24 2,520.52 379.93 57.45 42.25 35.00 23.99 44.79 9.00 17.52 7.00 17.00 28.00 55,461.89 413.68 14,431.12 1,156.50 1,058.81 15,476.78 7,677.70 182.00 1,785.00 575.00 5,933.20 37,500.00 169.74 11,825.38 CHECK AMOUNT 274.13 11,025.80 224.55 98,218.48 5,933.20 37,500.00 169.74 11,825.38 VOUCNRE2 12/13/01 11:32 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 7 VOUCHER/ CHECK CBECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 7'3914 12/13/01 003001 ROSS FENCE COMPANY 73915 12/13/01 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 73915 12/13/01 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 7'3916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CAL1F EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 7'3916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CAL1F EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73916 12/13/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 73917 12/13/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 73918 12/13/01 000519 SOUTN COUNTY PEST CONTR 73918 12/13/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 73918 12/13/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 73919 12/13/01 004496 SPARKS EXBIBITB & ENVIR 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73920 12/13/01 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FU 73921 12/13/01 STEGER, EDDIE 73922 12/13/01 000574 SUPERTONER 73922 12/13/01 000574 SUPERTONER 73923 12/13/01 000305 TARGET STORE ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT FENCE CONTRACTOR:HILTON, M 165-199-813-5804 RECREATION SUPPLIES-HIGH HOPES 190-183-999-5373 RECREATION SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5320 NOV 2-17-214-0428 MEADOWS PKWY NOV 2-06-105-0654 VARIOUS MTRS DEC 2-10-331-1353 BTN 84 NOV 2-18-363-1902 PAUBA RD TC1 NOV 2-10-331-2153 PUJOL ST NOV 2-22-057-2226 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-22-057-2234 MARGARITA NOV 2-19-538-2262 VARIOUS MTRS NOV 2-20-798-3248 RANCHO CAL NOV 2-19-683-3255 FRONT ST 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 001-171-999~5240 190-104-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 001-164-603-5319 NOV 2-23-151-4581 VARIOUS MTRS 193-180-999-5240 NOV 2-02-351-5281 RANCHO VISTA 190-182-999-5240 NOV 2-02-351-5281 RANCHO VISTA 190-186-999-5240 NOV 2-23-153-5501 MARGARITA IR 190-180-999-5240 NOV 2-01-202-7330 VARIOUS MTRB 192-180-999-5319 NOV 2-22-964-7466 VIA REINA IR 193-180-999-5240 NOV 2-01-202-7603 ARTERIAL STL 190-180-999-5319 NOV 2-05-791-8807 VARIOUS MTRS 190-180-999-5319 NOV 2-23-051-9399 MARGARITA 190-180-999-5240 095 167 7907 2 FIRE STN 84 001-171-999-5240 PEST CONTROL SRVCS:MUSEUM PEST CONTROL SRVCS: PD CABOOSE PEST CONTROL SRVS:WEDDING CRAP 190-185-999-5250 001-170-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 PRGB PMT FOR CHILDRENS MUSEUM 210-190-165-5804 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 001-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 165-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMp PREMIUM 190-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 192-2370 NOV WORKERS~ COMP PREMIUM 193-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 194-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 280-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 300-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 320-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 330-2370 NOV WORKERS' COMP PREMIUM 340-2370 REIMB:TRAFFIC SAFETY BEM:12/05 001-170~999-5261 HP PRINTER SUPPLIES:INFO SYB 320-199-999-5221 NOV NP PRINTER MNTC CONTRACT 320-199-999-5215 SPECIAL EVENT REC SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5370 1,598.00 129.11 23.01 52.96 2,804.40 955.01 33.38 717.42 114.08 65.52 112.28 33.04 436.39 44.90 3,508.35 1,409.61 14.26 33,863.16 14.23 13,663.01 3,726.26 16.02 159.02 42.00 29.00 32.00 50,430.00 6,053.14 109.37 1,985.11 1.03 164.43 14.65 39.62 9.70 99.12 22.20 278.57 571.55 626.70 587.32 71.33 1,598.00 152.12 61,584.28 159.02 103.00 50,430.00 8,776.94 571.55 1,214.02 VOUCHRE2 12/13/01 11:32 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 8 VOUCHER/ CHECK CRECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 73923 12/13/01 000305 TARGET STORE 73924 12/13/01 73924 12/13/01 003677 TEMEOULA MOTORSPORTS LL 003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL 73925 12/13/01 004541 TEMECULA RADIATOR/AUTO 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPNY COMPANY 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMEOULA TROPHY COMPANY 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 73926 12/13/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 73927 12/13/01 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 73927 12/13/01 004274 TEMEOULA VALLEY SECURIT 73927 12/13/01 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73920 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMEOULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMEOULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMEOULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73928 12/13/01 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 7'3929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73929 12/13/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 73930 12/13/01 UNITED STATES POSTAL SE 73931 12/13/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 73931 12/13/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 73937 12/13/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT RECREATION SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5370 POLICE MOTORCYCLE REPAIRS POLICE MOTORCYCLE REPAIRS 001-170-999-5214 001-170-999-5214 AUTO REPAIR:MEDIC SQUAD STN 84 001-171-999-5214 AWARD TROPHIES:HOLIDAY LIGHTS RIBBONS:ELECTRIC LIGHT PARADE TROPHIES S/F SOFTBALL LEAGUE TROPHIES TURKEY TROT SOFTBALL TROPHIES LABOR DAY SOFTBALL SALES TAX 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-187-999-5313 190-187-999-5313 190-187-999-5313 190-187-999-5313 LOCKSMITH SRVCS:WIN CREEK PARK 190-100-999-5212 LOCKSMITH SRVCS:WIN CREEK PARK 190-180-999-5212 LOCKGMITN SRVCS: VAR PARKS 190-180-999-5212 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 FUEL USAGE FOR AUG & SEP 2001 OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VEHICLE FUEL USAGE OCT VENICLE FUEL USAGE 001-170-999-5262 001-162-999-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-164-601-5263 001-165-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 340-199-701-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-164-601-5263 001-165-999-5263 001-161-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 340-199-701-5263 POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-110-999-5230 001-111-999-5230 001-120-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 001-161-999-5230 001-162-999~5230 001-164-604-5230 001-171-999-5230 190-185-999-5230 190-100-999-5230 280-199-999-5230 1YR RENTAL: BOX 892050 001-170-999-5230 NOV XXX-1289 SAM PRATT NOV XXX-1408 PD SATELLITE STN NOV XXX-2629 MIKE NAGGAR 320-199-999-5200 001-170-999-5229 320-199-999-5208 29.53 1,242.04 184.80 837.52 140.31 573.25 312.50 110.00 110.00 39.94 217.09 236.69 8.49 4.52 318.71 195.46 383.52 34.92 533.66 173.34 54.28 356.62 68.72 7.57 230.25 507.23 145.28 503.32 25.93 238.85 361.53 63.33 1,052.99 34.02 127.42 19.97 305.32 154.48 43.65 300.00 50.18 342.79 57.40 100.86 1,426.84 837.52 1,286.00 462.27 3,014.08 2,930.81 300.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 9 12/13/01 11:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 73931 12/13/01 73931 12/13/01 73931 12/13/01 73932 12/13/01 73932 12/13/01 73933 12/13/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. 002109 WHITE CAP INDUSTRIES IR ITEM DESCRIPTION NOV XXX-2670 911 AUTO DIALER NOV XXX-3539 GENERAL USAGE NOV XXX-5509 GENERAL USAGE NOV ACCESS-CRC OPEN PHONE LINE NOV ACCESS-RVSD CO OPEN LINE MISC. SUPPLIES FOR PUBLIC WRKS ACCOUNT NUMBER 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-164-601-5210 ITEM AMOUNT 28.52 37.65 130.50 342.14 342.14 41.38 CHECK AMOUNT 647.04 684.28 41.38 TOTAL CHECKS 654,000.77 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 16 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 261 CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 471 CFD 98-1 ADMIN EXPENSE FURD AMOUNT 174,653.98 7,526.16 59,942.59 42.95 5,922.37 352.98 416,597.71 2,250.00 14,099.94 1,836.48 15,872.69 18,789.80 3,290.82 1,375.00 TOTAL 722,553.47 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCRER/COECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CRECK NUMBER 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 16257 73934 73935 73936 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/18/01 12/19/01 12/20/01 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS ~MPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 003531 GATEWAY 002185 POSTMASTER - TEMECULA 004016 TEMECULA VALLEY MAILING ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CNECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 28,466.89 000246 PERS RET 165-2390 669.01 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 5,285.31 000246 PER5 RET 192-2390 12.06 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 484.71 000246 PERS RET 194-2390 101.06 000246 PERS RET 280-2390 289.21 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 139.53 000246 PER5 RET 320-2130 26.51 000246 PER8 RET 320-2390 1,126.01 000246 PERS RET 330-2390 220.15 000246 PERB RET 340-2390 596.66 000246 PERS-PRE 001-2130 182.91 000246 SURVIVOR 001-2390 96.03 000246 SURVIVOR 165-2390 1.87 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390 20.46 000246 SURVIVOR 192-2390 .05 000246 SURVIVOR 193-2390 2.29 000246 SURVIVOR 194-2390 .36 000246 SURVIVOR 280~2390 .92 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 .46 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 3.72 000246 SURVIVOR 330-2390 1.39 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 2.65 EE COMPUTER PURCHASE:G.YATES 001-1175 POSTAGE:WTR/SPR 2002 BROCHURE 190-180-999-5230 POSTAGE FOR BUS. LIC. RENEWALS 001-140-999-5230 1,729.00 3,161.71 1,899.16 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 001-2070 28,120.12 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 165-2070 454.61 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 190-2070 6,487.62 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 192-2070 19.24 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 193-2070 580.82 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 194-2070 138.48 651714 12/20/01 000283 [NSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 280-2070 166.85 651714 12/20/01 000283 IRSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 300-2070 91.19 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 320-2070 1,324.02 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 330-2070 220.41 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 340-2070 699.34 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 001-2070 6,863.81 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 165-2070 153.04 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 190-2070 1,601.20 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 192-2070 2.80 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 193-2070 137.93 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 194-2070 22.92 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 280-2070 65.92 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 300-2070 32.50 651714 12/20/01 000283 IRSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 320-2070 306.60 37,730.22 1,729.00 3,161.71 1,899.16 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 330-2070 68.03 651714 12/20/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 340-2070 171.83 651773 12/20/01 000444 [NSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SD1 001-2070 129.22 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 165-2070 4.83 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 190-2070 109.35 651773 12/20/01 000444 INBTATAX (EDG) 000444 SDI 193-2070 2.73 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 280-2070 1.13 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 320-2070 5.22 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 330-2070 5.16 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 340-2070 4.29 651773 12/20/01 000444 INBTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 001-2070 7,583.86 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 165-2070 112.36 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 190-2070 1,564.95 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 192-2070 6.20 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 193-2070 134.56 651773 12/20/01 000444 INBTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 194-2070 43.46 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 2B0-2070 38.44 651773 12/20/01 000444 [NSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 300-2070 22.01 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 320-2070 305.67 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 330-2070 53.39 651773 12/20/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 340-2070 171.46 73939 12/20/01 73939 12/20/01 73940 12/20/01 001515 A S A P TRUCK,TRACTOR/F 001515 A S A P TRUCK,TRACTOR/F 003304 ADAMS ADVERTISING INC WEED ABATEMENT SVC;BARCLAY WEED ABATEMENT SVC:BARCLAY BILLBOARD CHANGE OUTS:OLD TWN 193-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 280-199-999-5362 1,350.00 2,070.00 450.00 47,729.28 10,298.29 3,420.00 450.00 73941 12/20/01 004054 73942 12/20/01 001916 73942 12/20/01 001916 73942 12/20/01 001916 73943 12/20/01 004240 73943 12/20/01 004240 ADKISON ENGINEERS INC ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATE ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATE ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATE AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE SURVEY SVCS:TEMP STN 92 @ VAIL 210-165-739-5802 SALES TAX CONSULTING:CFD 88-12 261-199-999-5248 SALES TAX CONSULTING:CFD 98-1 471-199-999-5248 SALES TAX CONSULTING:CFD 88-12 261-199-999-5248 CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PD/CHP 001-170-999-5328 CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PG/CHP 001-170-999-5328 2,200.00 1,500.00 1,375.00 750.00 63.00 251.00 2,200.00 3,625.00 314.00 73944 12/20/01 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASBOC MEMBERSHIP:O01856 CHINIAEFF 001-161-999-5226 80.00 80.00 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 340-199-701-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIBE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 340-199-702-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 190-181-999-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 190-182-999-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 190-184-999-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV NOV MAT/TOWEL RENTAL 190-185-999-5250 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV PW UNIFORM RENTAL FOR NOV 001-164-601-5243 73945 12/20/01 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV TCSD UNIFORMS RENTAL FOR NOV 190-180-999-5243 95.40 34.20 51.36 84.24 36.96 31.64 122.50 105.09 561.39 73946 12/20/01 AMSDELL CONSTRUCTION IN REFUND:OVRPMT PRMT PA01-0521 001-2650 579.15 579.15 73947 12/20/01 000101 APPLE ONE, 1NC. TEMP HELP W/E 12/01 SENG 001-162-999-5118 539.50 539.50 VOUCNRE2 12/20/01 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 73948 73949 }3949 73950 73951 73952 73953 73954 }3955 73955 73956 73957 73958 73958 73958 }3958 }3959 73959 73960 73961 ~3962 }3962 }3963 73963 73964 73964 73965 73965 }3965 }3965 }3965 73965 73965 16:52 CHECK DATE 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ARRIAGA, KANDYCE 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY 000122 B S N SPORTS 004801 BECKER & BELL INC BELCHER, DANA 004778 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR INC BINGHAM, JANET 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES 003126 BOOMGAARDEN, DENNIS BUNTMAN, KARLA 004580 CALIF COMMERCIAL PC4]LS, 004580 CALIF COMMERCIAL POOLS, 004580 CALIF COMMERCIAL POOLS, 004580 CALIF COMMERCIAL POOLS, 004629 CALIF COMMERICAL POOLS- 004629 CALIF COMMERICAL POOLS- CAMPBELL, TERRY 004093 CARDIO CARE PLUS 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY I 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY I 002534 CATERERS CAFE 002534 CATERERS CAFE 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY GORPORATIO 004786 GRIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORAT]O 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION REFUND: TEEN-NIGHT OF BINGO SHIRTS FOR TCSD COMMISSIONERS SALES TAX TEEN ROOM SUPPLIES:CRC COMPENSATION STUDY CONSULTANT REFUND:SECURITY DEPT MS01-0664 NOV DESIGN SVCS:PAVEMENT MGMT REFUND:MUSEUM EX-GAMBLE ROUSE+ LAB DRUG TESTING:POLICE/CHP LAB DRUG TESTING:POLICE/CHP TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS REFUND: TEEN-NIGHT OF BINGO NOV PRGS:CNAPARRAL POOL RETENTION:CRAPARRAL BIGB POOL CREDIT:CO#3 NOT SEEN APPROVED REVERSE RETENTION:CO#3 CREDIT REL RETENTION TO ESCROW:PWO008 RETENTION TO ESCROW ACCT REIMB:S.A.I.CONF:10/08-10/12 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS CLAIM ADJUSTER SERVICES CLAIM ADJUSTER SERVICES FOOD FOR WINTER WONDERLAND REFRESHMENTS:INTERVIEW PANELS FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES SAFETY VESTS FOR TEM POLICE FREIGHT SALES TAX SAFETY VESTS FOR TEM POLICE FREIGHT SALES TAX SAFETY VESTS FOR TEM POLICE FREIGHT ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-4992 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-183-999-5320 001-150-999-5248 190-2900 001-164-601-5248 190-183-4986 001-170-999-5328 001-170-999-5328 190-183-999-5330 190~183-4992 210-190-170-5804 210-2035 210-190-170-5804 210-2035 210-1035 210-1035 001-170-999-5261 190-183-999-5330 300-199-999-5205 300-199-999-5205 190-183-999-5370 001-150-999-5260 001-110-999-5262 001-170-999-5262 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 ITEM AMOUNT 32.00 290.50 21.79 201.35 1,000.00 100.00 2,326.96 35.00 2,172.80 65.30 319.20 16.00 265,526.32 26,552.65- 1,383.75- 138.38 53,041.21 26,414.27 63.69 156.80 1,004.96 407.30 1,620.00 72.00 18.15 156.05 20.99 5.00 1.57 628.63 14.00 47.15 3}3.78 18.00 PAGE 3 CHECK AMOUNT 32.00 312.29 201.35 1,000.00 100.00 2,326.96 35.00 2,238.10 319.20 16.00 237,728.30 79,455.48 63.69 156.80 1,412.26 1,692.00 174.20 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCBER/ CHECK NUMBER 73966 73966 73966 7]966 7]966 7]3966 73966 73966 7]966 7]966 7]966 73966 7]966 73966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]966 7]967 7~968 7]969 7]969 7]969 7]969 7]969 7]969 7]970 73971 73971 73971 73971 73971 7]972 7]97] 7]97] 7]974 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 004786 CHIEF SUPPLY CORPORATIO BALES TAX 003021 CINGULAR WIRELEBS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (GELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CIHGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 C1NGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CIMGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL COLEMAN, ROBERT 003712 COLTON SURVEYING INSTRU ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-170-999-5243 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-120-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-140-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PNOHE SVC 001-161-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PNONE SVC 001-162-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 190-180-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 280-199-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 320-199-999~5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-163-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVG 001-164-601-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-164-602-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-164-604-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-165-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-100-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-110-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-150-999-5208 11/09-12/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 330"199-999-5208 CREDIT:OVRCHG FOR VOICE MAIL CREDIT:OVRCHG FOR VOICE MAIL CREDIT:OVRCHG FOR VOICE MAIL CREDIT:OVRCHRGED VOICE MAIL CREOIT:OVRCBRGED VOICE MAIL CREDIT:OVRCHRGED VOICE MAIL 190-180-999-5208 001-100-999-5208 001-161-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 001-100-999-5208 001-161-999-5208 REFUND:EX SR-WELKB MUSICAL CHR 190-183-4986 REPAIR/MNTC FOR ENG INSTRUMENT 001-165-999-5215 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHAR1T 004405 CHC 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CNC 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 000447 COMTRONIX OF flEMET 000447 COMTRONIX OF NEMET 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 004123 D L PHARES & ASSOCIATES 001393 DATA TICKET INC 001393 DATA TICKET INC 002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATE 001-2120 190-2120 193-2120 194-2120 330-2120 340-2120 BAL:OLD TWN DICKENS EVENTS 280-199-999-5362 RADIO FOR NEW PW MHTC VEHICLE SALES TAX INSTALL RADIO IN POLICE CAR SALES TAX INSTALL RADAR IN SQUAD CAR 001-164-601-5610 001-164-601-5610 001-170-999-5214 001-170-999-5214 001-170-999-5214 RENTAL PMT:POLICE STOREFRONT 001-170-999-5229 OCTOBER CITATIONS PROCESSING OCT CITATIONS PROCESSING 001-170-999-5250 001-170-999-5250 RETAIN ADVOCACY FIRM:FED FUND 001-110-999-5248 ITEM AMOUNT 28.03 118.14 58.37 471.78 659.72 1,026.48 63.92 268.95 227.18 309.15 108.42 54.21 488.84 363.69 246.45 55.60 64.95 5.39- 5.39- 5.39- 5.39- 5.39- 5.39- 67.00 80.00 123.50 5.60 .60 .20 5.50 .60 1,250.00 1,515.05 83.63 1,020.55 4.54 300.00 1,661.7] 140.00 262.48 2,500.00 CHECK AMOUNT 1,137.15 4,553.51 67.00 80.00 136.00 1,250.00 2,923.77 1,661.7] 402.48 2,500.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODB PAGE 5 VOUCNER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CRECK AMOUNT 73975 12/20/01 004781 DRAEGER SAFETY INC SIMULATOR PARTS:DUI CKS POLICE 001-170-999-5242 536.23 536.23 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP ~/E 11/30 NANSEN 001'161-999-5118 628.22 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP U/E 11/30 HANSEN 001'120-999-5118 930.45 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP ~/E 11/30 HANSEN 190-180-999-5118 92.64 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 NANSEN 001-164'604-5118 849.97 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 11/02 THURSTON 190-186'999'5118 1,465.60 73976 12/20/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP ~/E 11/16 THURSTON 190-186-999-5118 1,465.60 73976 12/20/01 001380 E B I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC CREDIT:OVERPAYMENT FOR NAASEH 001-161-999-5118 29.23- 5,403.25 73977 12/20/01 003223 EDAW INC NOV BIOLOGICAL BVCB:LG CANYON 001'164'601-5275 1,428.55 1,428.55 73978 12/20/01 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC PROJECT MGMT/DONSULTING SVCS 320'1980 1,312.50 1,312.50 73979 12/20/01 004427 EDWARDS, SALLY TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 332.80 332.80 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN REFRESHMENTS:EE RECOGNITION 001-150-999'5265 2,011.86 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN PW MANDATORY STAFF TRAINING 001'163-999-5261 142.62 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN Pg MANDATORY STAFF TRAINING 001-165-999-5261 142.62 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN P~ MANDATORY STAFF TRAINING 001-164-604-5261 142.61 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIM SALES TAX 001-163-999-5261 10.69 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN SALES TAX 001-163-999-5261 10.69 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN SALES TAX 001'164-604'5261 10.71 73980 12/20/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN REFRESHMENTS:COUNCIL SESSION 001-100'999'5260 249.19 2,720.99 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:MARGARITA/RUSTI 193-180-999'5212 208.91 }~981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE GEP LDBCP IMPR:CAMPOB VERDES 193-180-999-5212 129.83 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEP LDSCP IMPR:SADGLEWOOD 193-180-999-5212 119.13 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:CAMPOS VERDES 193-180'999'5212 149.95 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDBCP IMPR:SADDLEWOOD 193-180'999'5212 188.16 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:VAIL MEDIAN 190-180'999'5212 140.94 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:VAIL RANCH 193-180-999-5212 29.62 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:RANCHO CALIF RD 190-180-999-5212 168.26 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:NADA LANE 193-180'999'5212 134.20 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:CITY HALL 190'180-999-5212 100.34 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:PAVILION POINTE 193'180'999-5212 164.34 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:ROTARY PARK 190'180-999-5212 166.51 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:PASEO PARK 190-180-999-5212 107.77 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:R.CAL MEDIANS 190-180-999-5415 228.80 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:OLD T~N STRSCP 001-164-603-5416 123.20 73981 12/20/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSCP IMPR:CITY HALL 340'199-702-5415 264.00 2~423.96 73982 12/20/01 002037 EXPANETS PHONE MNTC & REPAIRS:CITY NALL 320-199'999'5215 188.00 188,00 73983 12/20/01 FACTS REFUND;SECURITY DEPT MS00-2686 190-2900 100.00 100.00 73984 12/20/01 003053 FAGAN, MATTNE~ ENTERTAINMENT:OLD TUN DICKENS 280-199-999-5362 150.00 150.00 73985 12/20/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-171-999-5230 14.68 73985 12/20/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-111-999-5230 12.79 73985 12/20/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 190-180-999-5230 7.10 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 7"3985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73985 73986 73986 73987 73988 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73989 73990 73990 73990 73991 73991 73991 ;3991 73992 73993 73994 73995 73996 73997 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/2D/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IHC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 004310 FEDEX GROUND 004310 FEDEX GROUND INC 002832 FENCE BUILDERS 001511 FIELDMAN ROLAPP & ASSOC 003347 FIRST SANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST 8ANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST 8ANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 004178 FREEDOM SIGNS********** 004178 FREEDOM SIGNS********** 004178 FREEDOM SIGNS********** 004178 FREEDOM SIGNS********** 002659 GOVERNING GRUNAUER, LISA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HEMET/TEMECULA EAC HEMET/TEMECULA EMPLOYER HOLMES & NARVER, INC ITEM DESCRIPTION EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES GROUND EXPRESS PACKAGE SERVICE GROUND EXPRESS PACKAGE SERVICE RES IMPR PRGM: NERTEL,JOBANNA CONSULTING SVCS:CIP FINANCING XX-5875 PRATT:PROF MTGS IN TWN XX-3083 HAGGAR:LEAGUE/SUPPLIES XX-3083 HAGGAR:LEAGUE/SUPPLIES XX-0902 O'GRADY:UCR EXT/MTGS XX-0902 O'GRADY:UCR EXT/MTGS XX-5288 JONES:EARTHLINK/MTGS XX-5288 JONES:EARTHLINK/MTGS XX-5288 JONES:EARTHL[NK/MTGS XX-5288 JONEB:EARTHLINK/MTGS XX-6702 MEYEH:PROF MTGS IN TWN XX-6702 MEYER:PROF MTGS IN TWN DAY TIMER SUPPLIES: PLANNING DAY TIMER SUPPLIES: B&S DAY TIMER SUPPLIES: B&S FAC IMPR PRGM: CIRCLE K FAC IMPR PRGM:FABRIC CONNECTIO CREDIT:CHILD SUPPORT SAN DIEGO CREDIT:CHILD SUPPORT SAN DIEGO SUBSCRIPTION FOR THORNHILL REFUND: TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-140-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 001-111-999-523D 001-111-999-5230 190-180-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-110-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 001-161-999~5230 001-161-610-5250 001-111-999-5230 280-199-999-5230 165-199-813-5804 001-140-999-5248 001-100-999-5260 001-100-999-5260 001-100-999-5220 001-110-999-5260 001-111-999-5258 320-199-999-5211 001-120-999-5262 001-100-999-5260 001-120-999-5260 280-199-999-5260 165-199-999-5260 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 280-199-813-5804 280-199-813-5804 001-2140 001-2140 001-161-999-5228 190-183-4982 REFUND:DEVEL DEPT LD99-227GR 001-2670 LABOR/EMPLOYMENT UPDATE:GY/DL MEMBERSHIP DUES: GRANT YATEB 001-150-999-5261 001-150-999-5226 REFUND:DEVEL DEPT LD96-O23GR 001-2670 ITEM AMOUNT 13.03 12.79 14.68 13.57 12.67 20.10 10.79 12.67 28.83 12.67 81.62 47.24 2,700.00 5,000.00 13.03 1,563.20 39.76 236.59 50.00 861.26 23.35 133.99 15.52 53.00 53.00 98.68 220.03 56.02 3,655.00 2,505.19 25.00- 25.00- 15.00 30.00 995.00 30.00 20.00 1,000.00 CHECK AMOUNT 186.37 128.86 2,700.00 5,000.00 3,042.70 374.73 6,110.19 15.00 30.00 995.00 30.00 20.00 1,000.00 VOUCNRE2 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 73998 12/20/01 73998 12/20/01 73998 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 73999 12/20/01 74000 12/20/01 74001 12/20/01 74001 12/20/01 74001 12/20/01 74001 12/20/01 74002 12/20/01 74003 12/20/01 74004 12/20/01 74004 12/20/01 74005 12/20/01 74006 12/20/01 74007 12/20/01 74008 12/20/01 74009 12/20/01 74010 12/20/01 74011 12/20/01 74012 12/20/01 74013 12/20/01 74014 12/20/01 74015 12/20/01 74015 12/20/01 74015 12/20/01 74016 12/20/01 74016 12/20/01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 003198 NOME DEPOT, THE 003198 NOME DEPOT, THE 003198 NOME DEPOT, TNE CABINETS/SUPPLIES:STN 92 CABINET$/SUPPLIES:STN 92 CABINETS/SUPPLIES:STN 92 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 000863 I P M A INTENSE CYCLES INTENSE CYCLES INTENSE CYCLES INTENSE CYCLES 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL 003266 IRON MOUNTAIN OFFSITE JAN WEILERT RV JAN WEILERT RV 004079 JENKENS & GILCHRIST 002575 JONES, SUSAN 004115 K T U & ASSOCIATES KAMALI~I FOSTER FAMILY MEMBERSHIP DUES:G.YATES 31681 REFUND:PERMIT FEES:PA01-0087 REFUND:PERMIT FEES:PA01-O087 REFUND:PERMIT FEEB:PA01-O087 REFUND:PERMIT FEES:PA01-O087 POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS NOV:OFFSITE RECORDS STORAGE REFUND:DEVEL DEPT LD93'O25GR REFUND:DEVEL DEPST LD97-107GR HR LEGAL SVCS FOR NOV 2001 REIMB:NEW LAW/ELECTION SEM:OEC OCT SVCS:TEM MULTI-USE TRIALS REFUND:SECURITY DEPT MS01-3205 KEETON CONSTRUCTION CO. REFUND:DEVEL DEPT LD99-162GR 000205 KIDS PARTIES ETC 001719 L P A INC LENNAR HOMES OF CALF. I 003286 LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERVI 004174 LIGHT IMPRESSIONS 004087 LOWE'S 004087 LOWE~S 004087 LOWE~S 004537 LUMATECH LLC 004537 LUMATECH LLC PARTY JUMP RENTAL:WNTR WNDRLND REIMBURSABLES:TEM LIBRARY REFUND:DEVEL DEPT LDOO-O04GR NOV SVCS-LIBRARY SYSTEM AGRMT MISC SUPPLIES: MUSEUM MICROWAVE FOR FIRE STN 92 MISC SUPPLIES:FIRE STN 92 CREDIT:RETURN SHELFS MNTC FAC EXIT SIGNS RETROFIT LENS - RED. ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-171-999-5242 210-165-739-5804 210-1990 001-2080 165-2080 190-2080 194-2080 280-2080 300-2080 001-150-999-5226 001-171-4036 001-163-4388 001-163-4119 001-161-4119 190-186-999-5250 001-120-999-5277 001-2670 001-2670 001-130-999-5247 001-120-999-5258 210-190-176-5802 190-2900 001-2670 190-183-999-5370 210-199-129-5802 001-2670 001-101-999-5285 190-185-999-5301 210-165-739-5610 001-171-999-5242 001-171-999-5242 340-199-702-5219 340-199-702-5219 ITEM AMOUNT 368.38 1,421.84 1,598.52 5,477.95 445.86 495.47 16.50 148.61 49.99 299.00 660.00 107.10 977.40 1,907.50 181.90 158.75 1,000.00 995.00 336.00 30.22 2,096.50 100.00 995.00 165.00 48.26 995.00 1,267.72 281.79 246.18 547.84 107.24- 280.00 72.00 PAGE 7 CHECK AMOUNT 3,388.74 6,634.38 299.00 3,652.00 181.90 158.75 1,995.00 336.00 30.22 2,096.50 100.00 995.00 165.00 48.26 995.00 1,267.72 281.79 686.78 VOUCNRE2 12/20/01 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 74016 74017 74018 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74019 74020 74021 74021 74022 74023 74023 74023 ?4024 74024 74025 74025 74026 74027 74028 ?4029 74030 74031 74031 74032 16:52 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/20/01 004537 LUMATEEN LLC 12/20/01 001865 M C I 12/20/01 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX 12/20/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 12/20/01 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV 12/20/01 003669 MARC FAULKENBURY PAINTI 12/20/01 003669 MARC FAULKENBURY PAINTI 12/20/01 002046 MASTER K 9 INC 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 MAY DEPT STORES CO, THE MAY DEPT STORES CO, THE MAY DEPT STORES CO, THE 12/20/01 003800 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING 12/20/01 003800 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING 12/20/01 004574 MCMURRAY STERN 12/20/01 004574 MCMURRAY STERN 12/20/01 MEIER, THOMAS 12/20/01 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS 12/20/01 MEYER, STACY 12/20/01 001526 MICHAELS STORES 12/20/01 004208 MILANOS 12/20/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 12/20/01 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 12/20/01 001892 MOBILE MODULAR CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER SALES TAX DEC XXX-1540 OLD TOWN PARKING NO PARKING/SCHOOL CROSSING SGN CRC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CRC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CITY NALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES T.V. MUSEUM CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TCC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES MAINT FAC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES MAINT FAC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CTR CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TCC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES VAR PARK CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/02 MCCLANA RES IMPRV PRMG: LANATTE FAC IMPRV PRGM DRAW:WELTY BLDG BASIC CANINE HANDLERS COURSE REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:B01-1108 REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:B01-1108 REFUND:BLDG PERMIT:B01-1108 PRGS PMT#2:STN 92:PW01-21 RET.W/H PMT#2:STN 92:PW01-21 SPACE SAVER STORAGE SYSTEM RET.W/H PMT#1:BTORAGE SYSTEM REFUND:SEE.DEPOSIT:MS01-3053 190-2900 HOLIDAY CONSULT SVCS:OLD TOWN REFUND:TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR TCC REFRESHMENTS:SUBCOMM MTG:12/11 3000 CITY ENVELOPES:PLANNING SALES TAX DEC RENT:MODULAR BLDG:STN 92 340-199-702-5219 320-199-999-5208 001-164-601-5244 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 190-185-999-5212 190-184-999-5212 340-199-702-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-702-5212 190-181-999-5212 190-184-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-161-999-5118 165-199-813-5804 280-199-813-5804 001-170-999-5327 001-2280 001-162-4201 001-162-4285 210-165-~9-5804 210-2035 210-190-158-5610 210-2035 280-199-999-5250 190-183-4982 190-184-999-5301 001-161-999-5260 001-161-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 ITEM AMOUNT 26.40 2.50 1,346.44 464.14 52.62 71.65 38.11 38.11 38.11 38.11 175.82 93.08 159.25 159.25 203.91 825.60 1,680.00 935.00 2,500.00 60.91 435.00 580.00 51,576.24 1,505.75- 22,465.00 2,246.50- 100.00 3,385.98 30.00 8.91 63.50 278.55 20.89 776.15 PAGE 8 CHECK AMOUNT 378.40 2.50 1,346.44 1,532.16 825.60 2,615.00 2,500.00 1,075.91 50,070.49 20,218.50 100.00 3,385.98 30.00 8.91 63.50 299.44 776.15 VOUCHRE2 12/20/01 VOUCBER/ CHECK NUMBER 74033 74034 74035 74036 74036 74037 74038 74039 74040 74041 74042 74042 74043 74044 74045 74045 74046 74046 74046 74046 74047 74048 74049 74049 74050 74050 74051 74052 74052 74052 74053 16:52 CHECK CATE 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING 000437 MORELANC & ASSOCIATES 002727 MUNICIPAL MGMT ASSOCIAT 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 002925 MAPA AUTO PARTS ITEM DESCRIPTION REMOVE SILT/DEBRIS-CALLE MEDUS AUDIT SVC:STATE CONTROLLER RPT ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES:A.ADAMS MISC. PW MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES ACCOUNT NUMBER 001'164'601-5401 001-140-999-5248 001'110-999-5226 001-164-601-5215 AUTO PARTS FOR PARAMEDIC SQUAD 001-171-999-5214 NAT'L MULTIPLE SCLEROSI REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MB01-3064 000915 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIA 5 YEAR MEMBERSHIP:S.JONES 004797 NATIONAL REGISTER PUBLI OFFICIAL MUSEUM DIRECTORY 2002 004512 MINYO & MOORE OCT TESTING SVCS:FIRE STN 92 001599 NORTH COUNTY BASKETBALL BASKETBALL ASSIGNMENT FEES 004191 NORTH COUNTY TIMES-PMT RENEW SUBSCRIPTION:12/23-6/22 004191 NORTH COUNTY TIMES-PET RENEW SUBSCRIPTION:Il/22'5/22 NOVAK, NANCY REFUND:COOKING-VEGETARIAN OBJECT RADIANCE INC TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE STN 92 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S OFFICE SUPPLIES/FIRE STN 92 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 002100 003964 003964 002105 002105 002105 002105 004491 001619 001171 001171 003762 P M X MEDICAL 003762 P M X MEDICAL PAISNER, WILLIAM 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA 002652 PAT & OSCARS RESTAURANT 190-290D 001-120-999-5226 190-185-999-5250 210-165-739-5804 190-187-999-5250 001-140-999-5228 190-180-999-5228 190-183-4982 190-183-999-5330 210-165-}~39-5801 210-165~~9-5801 190-180-999-5214 190-180-999-5214 340-199-701-5214 001-164-601-5214 OLD TYME FOLK O.T.HOLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/22 280-199-999-5362 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER RECRUITMENT AD:ENGINEERING ORIENTAL TRADING COMPAN TEEN SUPPLIES ORIENTAL TRADING COMPAN RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR TCC PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-1799 SPECIAL EVENT SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVENT SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVENT SUPPLIES REFRESHMENTS FOR TREE LIGHTING 001-150-999-5254 190-183-999-5320 190-184-999-5301 001-171-999-5311 001-171-999-5311 190-2900 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 ITEM AMOUNT 4,850.00 1,449.40 50.00 143.39 46.15 100.00 154.00 223.13 977.50 132.00 61.00 61.00 25.00 1,178.40 72.62 297.02 36.78 491.49 98.15 754.18 100.00 297.48 194.90 345.88 358.40 209.46 100.00 16.82 59.99 36.75 324.85 PAGE 9 CHECK AMOUNT 4,850.00 1,449.40 50.00 189.54 100.00 154.00 223.13 977.50 132.00 122.00 25.00 1,178.40 369.64 1,380.60 100.00 297.48 540.78 567.86 100.00 113.56 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 10 VOUCHER/ CHECK CNECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 74053 12/20/01 002652 PAT & OSCARS RESTAURANT SALES TAX 190-183-999-5370 74053 12/20/01 002652 PAT & OSCARS RESTAURANT REFRBSSMNTS-PARADE DIGNITARIES 190-183-999-5370 24.36 211.19 560.40 74054 12/20/01 002331 PEP SOYS INC SALES TAX FOR INV# 50620 210-165-739-5610 16.01 16.01 74055 12/20/01 001958 PEPS LONG TERM CARE PRO 001958 PERS L-T 001-2122 83.99 83.99 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMBURSEMENT 190-180-999-5250 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY CASR REIMSURSEMENT 001-161-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-164-601-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-2175 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMSURSEMENT 320-199-999-5242 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASN REiMSURSEMENT 320-199-999-5221 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY GASH REIMSURSEMENT 001-110-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 001-110-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 001-170-999-5604 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 001-100-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 190-183-999-5370 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASR REIMSURSEMENT 001-140-999-5261 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5320 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASR PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 190-183-999-5371 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5371 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMSURSEMENT 001-171-999-5261 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 165-199-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-181-999-5301 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASN PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5370 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 280-199-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-100-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMBURSEMENT 001-100-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASB REIMBURSEMENT 001-120-999-5261 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY CASR REIMBURSEMENT 001-162-999-5220 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASB PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-165-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-180-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMBURSEMENT 190-180-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASB REIMBURSEMENT 190-181-999-5301 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASS REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5373 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASN PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-140-999-5260 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASS PETTY CASH REIMSURSEMENT 001-140-999-5262 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5370 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-150-999-5265 74056 12/20/01 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASB REIMSURSEMENT 001-120-999-5220 40.00 7.10 25.75 20.04 21.49 36.53 19.32 2.13 42.99 50.57 44.94 20.00 36.77 20.64 4.26 15.00 11.59 13.85 14.88 11.59 33.96 18.24 6.00 7.84 19.18 8.99 46.74 15.16 6.44 20.00 36.57 39.69 18.64 22.88 759.~ 74058 12/20/01 000580 PHOTO WORKS OF TEMECULA PHOTO DEVELOPING/TCSD EVENTS 74058 12/20/01 000580 PHOTO WORKS OF TEMECULA PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR MUSEUM 190-180-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 101.09 63.14 164.23 74059 12/20/01 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-120-999-5230 74059 12/20/01 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAl SERVS 001-161-999-5230 44.00 151.90 195.90 74060 12/20/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN OCT PUBLIC NOTICES:CITY CLERK 001~120-999-5256 2,214.00 74060 12/20/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN NOV PUBLIC NOTICES:PLANNING 001-161-999-5256 128.25 2,342.25 VOUCHRE2 12/20/01 VOUCNER/ CHECK NUMBER 74061 74061 74062 74062 74063 74064 74064 74065 74066 74066 74067 74068 74068 74068 74069 74069 74069 74069 74069 74070 74071 74071 74072 74072 74073 74074 74074 74074 74075 74076 74077 74078 74079 16:52 CRECK DATE 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 VENDOR NUMBER 002776 002776 002880 002880 002012 004804 004804 004494 000262 000262 003490 000947 000947 000947 004584 004584 004584 004584 004584 002110 000266 000266 000353 000353 000418 000418 000418 000418 000411 000411 000355 000873 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR NAME PRIME MATRIX INC PRIME MATRIX INC PRO-CRAFT SASH & SUPPLY PRO'CRAFT SASH & SUPPLY R D 0 EQUIPMENT COMPANY RADIANT SYSTEMS RADIANT SYSTEMS RAMONA TIRE iNC RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST ITEM DESCRIPTION NOV CELLULAR SVCS:SR VAN NOV CELLULAR SVCS:CITY VAN RES IMPRV PRGM: CUNNINGHAM RES IMPRV PRGM: GONSALVES BACKHOE PARTS'PW MAINT CRC GYM FLOOR REFILL PAD SALES TAX FIRE VEHICLE REPAIRS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-180-999'5208 190-180'999-5208 165-199-813'5804 165-199-813-5804 001'164-601-5215 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 001-171-999-5214 190'180'999-5240 193'180'999-5240 RANCHO MUSIC ASSOCIATIO O.T.HOLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/08 280'199'999-5362 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS RANCRO REPROGRAPHICS RANCHO REPROGRAPRICS REGENCY LIGHTING REGENCY LIGHTING REGENCY LIGHTING REGENCY LIGHTING REGENCY LIGNTING DUPL.BLUEPRINTS:OVRLND BRIDGE BALES TAX DUPL BLUEPRINTS:PLANNING CRC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES CRC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES CRC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES CREDIT:ITEMS RETURNED CREDIT:ITEMS RETURNED 001-165-999-5250 001-165-999-5250 001-161-999-5222 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT RENTAL EQUIPMENT FOR PW MAINT 001-164-601-5238 RIGHTVAY DEC EQUIP RENTAL - RIVERTON PK 190-180-999-5238 RIGHTWAY DEC EQUIP RENTAL - PASEO PARK 190-180-999-5238 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR OCT PARKING CITATION ASSESSMNT 001-2260 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR OCT PARKING CITATION ASSESSMNT 001-2265 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE NOV APERTURE CARD DUPLICATES 001-163-999-5250 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE NOV 2001 RECORDINGS & COPIES 165-199-999-5250 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE NOV 2001 RECORDINGS & COPIES 001-163-999-5250 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE NOV 2001 RECORDINGS & COPIES 001-120-999-5250 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONT OCT PALA PLAN CK FEES 210-165-603-5802 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONT AUG PLAN CK FEES:VIA MONTEZUMA 001-165-999-5250 001-120-999-5225 001-100-999-5258 190-2900 RIVERSIDE CO REGISTRAR ROBERTS, RONALD H. RYAN, HEATHER E. SIG. COUNT FOR REF. ORD01-08 REIMB:LEAGUE CONF:12/04-09/01 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-3303 ITEM AMOUNT 30.04 27.33 329.00 788. O0 318.13 51.09 3.74 301.40 2,816.95 1,946.83 100.00 326.70 24.50 8.28 176.73 219.54 19.29 265.74- 119.82- 180.61 70.88 60.75 1,440.00 832.00 16.95 14.00 1.00 3.00 2,221.61 289.32 2,502.00 62.29 100.00 PAGE 11 CHECK AMOUNT 65.37 1,117.00 318.13 54.83 301.40 4,763.78 100.00 359.48 30.00 180.61 131.63 2,272.00 16.95 18.00 2,221.61 289.32 2,502.00 62.29 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODB VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 74079 74080 74081 74082 74083 74084 74084 74085 74086 74086 74086 74086 74087 74087 74087 74087 74087 740B7 74087 74087 74088 74088 74088 74088 74088 74088 74089 74090 74091 74092 CBECK DAlE 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME RYAN, HEATBER E. SAN DIEGO CO OF THE DA BAN DIEGO CO. OF THE DA 004620 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF SARNACK, PHYLLIS SCOTT, EDWARD A. SCOTT, EDWARD A. 003766 SMAIL, SANDRA K. 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 000645 SMART & FINAL IBC 000645 SMART & FINAL IBC 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 001212 BO CALIF GAS COMPANY 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTHLAND PAVING, INC. SOUTHWEST LAND CONSULTA 000293 STADIUM PIZZA ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER ADD~L RENTAL HOURS 190'182-4990 CHILD SUPP:661183401610:KEEFER 001-2140 CHILD SUPP:661183401610:KEEFER 001-2140 RESCUE SYS I:AM/RB/SD:10/01/01 REFUND:MUSEUM EX'GAMBLE HOUSE 190-183-4986 REFUND:CIT #45002 PAID TWICE 001-170-4055 REFUND:CIT #45002 PAID TWICE 001-2260 TCBD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS RED SUPPLIES/FAMILY FUN NIGHTS SISTER CITIES REC SUPPLIES SISTER CITIES EEC SUPPLIES RED SUPPLIES/FAMILY FUN NIGHTS DEC 2-22-331-0400 GEN. KEARNY DEC 2-22-575-0934 GEN.KEARNY DEC 2-22-496-3462 GEN. KEARNY DEC 2-00-397-5059 VARIOUS MTRS DEC 2-23-086-5263 MARG RD DEC 2-07-626-6063 RANCBO VISTA NOV 2-20-140-9299 VARIOUS MTRB NOV 2-19-999-9442 VARIOUS MTRS CITY FACILITIES GAS METERS CITY FACILITIES GAB METERS CITY FACILITIES GAS METERS CITY FACILITIES GAS METERS CITY FACILITIES GAS METERS CITY FACILITIES GAS METERS CRC PEST CONTROL SERVICES REFUND:ENG DEPOSIT:LD96-O42GR 001-2670 REFUND:ENG DEPOSIT:LD96-149GR 001-2670 REFRESHMNT:VOLUNTEER MTG:12/13 001-171-999-5261 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5371 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 190-183-999-5371 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 193-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 190-181-999-5240 190-184-999-5240 190-185-999-5240 190-186-999-5240 190-188-999-5240 340-199-702-5240 190-182-999-5250 190-183-999-5370 ITEM MOUNT 20.00- 25.00 25.00 825.00 70.00 20.00 5.00 308.00 16.06 22.96 23.56 107.33 63.75 157.33 131.91 6,063.58 56.72 14.26 359.63 847.68 66.77 60.30 57.71 1,553.31 10.51 109.86 90.00 500.00 995.00 16.13 CHECK AMOUNT 80.00 25.00 25.00 825.00 70.00 25.00 308.00 169.91 7,694.86 1,858.46 90.00 500.00 995.00 16.13 74093 74094 74095 74095 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET C STRICKLAND, CATHERINE 003840 STRONGB PAINTING D03840 STRONGS PAINTING CLEAN CARPET AT CRC FACILITY REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MB01-1729 PAINTING - FIRE STN 92 MATERIAL DEPOSIT:CRC 190-182-999-5212 190-2900 210-165-~9-5804 190-182-999-5416 310.00 100.00 700.00 5,000.00 310.00 100.00 5,700.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 13 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 74096 12/20/01 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL NOV DSGN SVCS:R.C.BRIDGE WIDEN 210-165-710-5802 74097 12/20/01 000305 TARGET STORE SPECIAL EVENT SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5370 74097 12/20/01 000305 TARGET STORE SPECIAL EVENT SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5370 17,228.88 110.89 43.14 17,228.88 154.03 74098 12/20/01 TEMECULA CREEK LLC REFUND:OVERPAID PRMT:PA01-O082 001-2650 74099 12/20/01 TEMECULA PLAY & LEARN S REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-1797 190-2900 74100 12/20/01 004260 TEMECULA STAMP & GRAPBI RUBBER STAMPS FOR PLANCHECKERS 001-171-999-5220 10.00 100.00 82.55 10.00 100.00 82.55 74101 12/20/01 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY TURKEY TROT SOFTBALL AWARDS 74102 12/20/01 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & VAR PARKS MAINT SUPPLIES 190-187-999-5313 190-180-999-5212 43.00 53.15 43.00 53.15 74103 12/20/01 TEMECULA VALLEY POP WAR REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2927 190-2900 74104 12/20/01 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECUR[T CITY HALL LOCKSM[TB SERVICES 340-199-701-5212 100.00 50.00 100.00 50.00 74105 12/20/01 74105 12/20/01 74106 12/20/01 74107 12/20/01 74107 12/20/01 74108 12/20/01 003598 TEMECULA VINTAGE SINGER 003598 TEMECULA VINTAGE SINGER THOMPSON MIDDLE SCHOOL 003862 THYSBENKRUPP ELEVATOR.B REISS #73634:PARADE TRANS COST CITY HALL ELEV.PHONE MONITOR 003862 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR.B MUSEUM ELEV.PHONE MONITOR SVCS 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC PA SYSTEM:TREE LIGBTING:11/29 O.T.ROLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/02 280-199-999-5362 O.T.BOLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/23 280-199-999-5362 190-183-999-5370 340-199-701-5250 190-185-999-5250 190-183-999-5370 175.00 175.00 200.00 15.00 15.00 125.00 350.00 200.00 30.00 125.00 74109 12/20/01 74109 12/20/01 74109 12/20/01 74110 12/20/01 003366 TORAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR REPAINT MISC WOOD STRUCTURES 003366 TORAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR CONVERT BARRELS TO TRASH CANS 003366 TORAN DEVELOP. & CONBTR EMERGENCY LIGHT POLE REPAIR 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE SUPPLIES FOR PW MAINT CREWS 001-164-603-5250 001-164-603-5250 001-164-603-5250 001-164-601-5218 2,715.00 1,930.50 1,910.50 162.06 6,556.00 162.06 74111 12/20/01 74112 12/20/01 74113 12/20/01 74113 12/20/01 74113 12/20/01 74113 12/20/01 74113 12/20/01 74113 12/26/01 74113 12/20/01 74114 12/20/01 000978 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRG 2ND QTR EMERG VOLUNTEER PRGM TRUAX, GARY 001-171-999-5274 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-3342 190-2900 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS G TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TURNBULL, DOROTHY REFUND:PICNIC SHELTER 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-4989 1,620.00 100.00 313.60 313.60 156.80 78.40 274.40 134.40 179.20 25.0D 1,620.00 100.00 1,450.40 25.00 74115 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 001-2080 9,738.53 74115 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 190-2080 1,883.10 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PACE 14 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK RECISTEE FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 74115 74115 74115 74115 74115 74115 74116 74116 74116 74116 74116 74116 74116 74116 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE 12/20/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIE ACCOUNT NUMBER 192-2080 193-2080 194-2080 300-2080 320-2080 340-2080 001-2160 165-2160 190-2160 193-2160 280-2160 320-2160 330-2160 340-2160 ITEM AMOUNT 2.50 118.50 29.50 88.54 1,416.68 145.91 1,126.66 100.24 991.12 22.80 29.44 43.48 43.04 35.70 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 001-2120 127.05 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 165-2120 8.75 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 190-2120 22.60 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 192-2120 .10 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 193-2120 2.20 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 194-2120 .50 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 280-2120 2.50 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 320-2120 5.00 74117 12/20/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 340-2120 .60 12/20/01 003497 VAIL RANCH MIDDLE SCHO0 12/20/01 004794 VALLEY WINDS COMMUNITY 12/20/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 12/20/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 12/20/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 12/20/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 12/20/01 004200 VERIZON WIRELESS LLC 74118 74119 74120 74120 74120 74120 74121 74122 74123 12/20/01 WALTZ, STACEY 12/20/01 WATSON, GABRIELE 74124 12/20/01 WEBB, BERTHA 12/20/01 000339 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY 74125 12/20/01 O.T.HOLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/08 O.T.HOLIDAY ENTERTAINMNT:12/09 DEC XXX-O073 GENERAL USAGE DEC XXX-1603 CITY HALL DEC XXX-1941 PTA CD TTACSD DEC XXX-5072 GENERAL USAGE 12/15-3/14 PAGER SVCS:STONE REFUND:TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG REFUND:CPR & 1ST AID TRAINING REFUND:TEEN-NIGHT OF BINGO CITY HALL LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 74126 WHITAKER, CATRERINE 74127 12/20/01 WOOD, NORMA 001-100-999-5238 190-183-4982 190-183-4982 190-183-4992 001-120-999-5228 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2471 190-2900 REFUND:MUSEUM EXCURSION FLASHLIGHT HOLDER FOR VEST 190-183-4986 001-170-999-5243 12/20/01 004774 WOODCREST UNIFORMS 150.00 150.00 1,756.08 353.52 56.03 6,452.92 37.14 35.00 20.00 8.00 5.38 100.00 35.00 14.00 CHECK AMOUNT 13,423.26 2,392.48 169.30 150.00 150.00 8,618.55 37.14 35.00 20.00 8.00 5.38 100.00 35.00 14.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 15 12/20/01 16:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74129 74130 74130 74130 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 12/20/01 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BIlll 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION RILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION RILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION OILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 003434 Z E P MANUFACTURING COM 003434 Z E P MANUFACTURING COM 003434 Z E P MANUFACTURING COM ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER BEP BASE CNARGE 220 COPIER SEP INTEREST 220 COPIER SEP LEASE 220 COPIER OCT RASE CHARGE 220 COPIER OCT INTEREST 220 COPIER OCT LEASE 220 COPIER SEPT LEASE 240/460 COPIERS SEPT INTEREST 240/460 COPIERS SEPT POOLED MAINTENANCE SEPT LEASE 5800 COPIER SEPT INTEREST 5800 COPIER SEPT LEASE 420 COPIER @ TCC 330-199-999-5217 330-199-999-5391 330-2800 330-199-999-5217 330-199-999-5391 330-2800 330-2800 330-199-999-5391 330-199-999-5217 330-2800 330-199-999-5391 190-184-999-5239 SEPT LEASE 420 COPIER @ STN 84 001-171-999-5239 OCT LEASE 240/460 COPIERS OCT INTEREST 240/460 COPIERS OCT POOLED MAINTENANCE OCT LEASE 5800 COPIER OCT INTEREST 5800 COPIER OCT LEASE 420 COPIER @ TCC OCT LEASE 420 COPIER @ STN 84 330-2800 330-199-999-5391 330-199-999-5217 330-2800 330-199-999-5391 190-184-999-5239 001-171-999-5239 CLEANER FOR PW ASPNALT TRUCK FREIGNT SALES TAX 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 ITEM AMOUNT 77.96 41.20 134.20 77.96 40.30 135.10 1,733.52 994.72 3,690.82 1,861.08 520.39 224.62 223.62 1,748.41 979.83 3~690.82 1,873.49 507.98 224.62 223.62 217.50 14.90 16.31 CHECK AMOUNT 19,004.26 248.71 TOTAL CHECKS 722,553.47 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12/20/01 17:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 310 VEHICLES FUND AMOUNT 1,250,282.33 10,502.75 231,952.41 45,035.28 TOTAL 1,537,772.77 VOUCHRE2 12/20/01 VOUCNER/ CHECK NUMBER 74133 74134 74135 74135 74136 74137 74138 74139 74140 74140 74141 74142 74143 74144 74144 74145 74146 74146 74146 74146 74147 74147 74148 74148 74149 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 17:18 CHECK DATE 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE V 003376 ARTS COUNCIL, TNE 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC'REFRIGER 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC'REFRIGER 003739 COTTON BELAND ASSOCIATE 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED LITN 003286 LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERVI 002046 MASTER K 9 002046 MASTER K 9 004771 MOORE ELECTRICAL CONTRA 004512 NINYO & MOORE 002256 P & D CONSULTANTS 004625 PLANT EQUIPMENT, 004625 PLANT EQUIPMENT, 004029 R J M DESIGN GROUP INC 004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY 004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY 004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY 004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY 004572 R MOODY CONSTRUCTION IN 004572 R MOODY CONSTRUCTION IN 002654 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN MER 002654 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN MER 003591 RENEB COMMERCIAL MANAGE 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION NOV ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES SPECIAL EVENT COMMUNITY GRANT ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-172-999-5255 001-101-999-5286 ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION STN 92 210-165-739-5804 ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION STN 92 210-165-739-5804 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE:MAY-DEC 001-161-999-5248 TEMP HELP W/E 11/30 NA.ASEB 001-161-999-5118 DESIGN/PRINT RECYCLE CALENDAR 194-180-999-5222 NOV SVCS-LIBRARY SYSTEM AGRMT 001-101-999-5285 PURCHASE OF NEW POLICE K-9 SALES TAX 001-170-999-5327 001-170-999-5327 INSTALL WIRELESS DETECTOR SYS 210-165-655-5804 OCT TESTING SVCS:CHAPARRAL H.B 210-190-170-5804 NOV TEMP BLDG INSPECTORS SVCS 001-162-999-5118 PHASE I-MOBILE MAPING 1ST RESP 001-171-999-5606 PHASE I-MOBILE MAPING 1ST RESP 001-171-999-5606 SEP DSGN SVCS:AQUATIC FAC PN 2 210-190-170-5802 PRGS PMT#6:MARG RD:PW99-01 RE.W/H PMT#6:MARG RD:PW99-01 PRGS PMT#7:MARG RD:PW99-01 RET.W/H PMT#7:MARG RD:PW99-01 210-165-706-5804 210-2035 210-165-706-5804 210-2035 PRGS PMT#4:MPSC EXPAN.:PW99-19 210-190-163-5804 RET.W/H PMT#4:MPBC EXPAN:99-19 210-2035 2001 FORD TRCK-CODE ENFORCEMNT 310-1910 2001 FORD TRCK-CODE ENFORCEMNT 310-1910 HERBICIDE SPRAYING:CITY LOTS 001-164-601-5402 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5288 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5299 08/23~09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5295 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5297 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5291 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5281 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5262 08/23-09/19/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5279 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5288 ITEM AMOUNT 7,629.92 12,000.00 1,640.00 15,600.00 16,9~.12 5,963.18 10,502.75 9,865.47 5,500.00 412.50 5,667.33 15,281.12 15,104.90 38,118.00 1,358.10 8,690.79 5,681.65 568.17- 15,701.71 1,570.17- 86,703.01 8~670.30- 22,517.64 22,517.64 10,880.00 335,437.96 83~985.10 9~073.60 16,003.20 12~996.00 35~127.66 24~293.89 9,986.54 332,086.63 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 7,629.92 12,000.00 17,240.00 16,9~.12 5,963.18 10,502.75 9,865.47 5~912.50 5,667.33 15,281.12 15,104.90 39,476.10 8,690.79 19,245.02 78,032.71 45,035.28 10,880.00 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/20/01 17:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCRER/ CHECK NUMBER 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74150 74151 74152 74153 74153 74153 74154 74154 74154 74155 74156 74157 CHECK DATE 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/00/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01108/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 01/08/02 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS O 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS O 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 000357 RIVERSIDE CO TRANSPORTA 004806 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIF 003544 ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL 003544 ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL 003544 ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL 004456 T & M CONSTRUCTION 004456 T & M CONSTRUCTION 004456 T & M CONSTRUCTION 004368 VALI COOPER & ASSOCIATE 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IR 000621 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNC ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5299 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5295 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5297 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5291 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5281 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5262 09/20-10/17/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 001-170-999-5279 FY 01/02 MAINTENANCE SRVS 1QTR 001-164-602-5405 OCT 2001 BOOKING FEES 001-170-999-52~ APPRAISAL RPT:CNERRY/JEFF£RSON 210-165-719-5801 APPRASIAL RPT:CHERRY/JEFFERSON 210-165-719-5801 PROF APPRAISAL SVCS:CRERRY S/B 210-165-719-5801 DEC PRGS PMT#8:MNTC FAC:O0-16 210-190-158-5804 RET.W/H PMT#8:MNTC FAC:PWO0-16 210-2035 STOP NTC:MNTC FAC:ROOFTEK ROOF 210-2038 OCT TEMP INSPECTION SVC:LARSON 001-163-999-5118 CITYWIDE TREE TRIMMING MAINT 001-164-601-5402 CITY'S SHARE WRCOG TUMF FEES 001-100'999'5250 ~,044.90 9,073.60 16,003.20 13,338.00 36,622.64 23,943.66 9,870.76 23,979.00 12,364.80 9,700.00 1,200.00 6,400.00 81,836.60 8,183.66- 3,157.50- 14,924.00 17,278.00 6,044.00 1,051,887.34 23,979.00 12,364.80 17,300.00 70,495.44 14,924.00 17,278.00 6,044.00 TOTAL CHECKS 1,537,772.77 ITEM 4 APPROVAL DIRECTOR OF CITY MANAGER ~'~-- TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance January 8, 2002 City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2001 PREPARED BY: Karen Jester, Assistant Finance Direct(~c=.~ Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant ,~ RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2001. DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio, receipts, and disbursements are required by Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. Attached is the City Treasurer's Report which provides this information. The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635 as of November 30, 2001. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: 1. City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2001 City of Temecuia City TreasureCs Report As of November 30, 2001 Cash Activity for the Month of November: Cash and investments as of November 1, 2001 $ 59,307,656 Cash Receipts 3,234,796 Cash Disbursements (3,244,430) Cash and Investments as of November 30, 2001 $ 59,298,022 Cash and Investments Portfolio: Maturity/ Termination Par/Book Type of Investment Institution Yield Date Balance Petty Cash City Hall n/a $ 1,500 General Checking Union Bank n/a (617,934) (1) Sweep Account Un[on Rank 1.430 % 629,724 (Money Market Account) (Highmark U.S. Treasury) Benefit Demand Deposits Union Bank n/a 8,596 (1) Local Agency Investment Fund State Treasurer 3.526 % 53,369,612 (2) Certificate of Deposit Community Bank 2.300 % 280,582 (Retention Escrow) Various U.S. Bank Various 402,769 (Retention Escrow) Checking Account Union Bank n/a 6,776 (Parking Citations) Trust Accounts- CFD 88~12 U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.160 % 311,899 (Money Market Account) Reserve Account- CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2017 1,531,469 (Investment Agreement) Delinq. Main. Reserve Account - CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Corp 5.422 % 9/1/2017 500,000 (Investment Agreement) Trust Accounts- CFD 98-1 U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.160 % 667 (Money Market Account) Reserve Account- CFD 98-1 State Treasurer 3.526 % 920,545 (Local Agency Investment Fund) Trust Accounts-TCSD COPs U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.160 % 102 (Money Market Account) Reserve Account-TCSD COPs Bayerische Landesbank 6.870 % 10/1/2012 502,690 (investment Agreement) Trust Accounts-RDA Bonds U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.160 % 105 (Money Market Account) ReserveAccount-RDA Bonds BayerJsche Landesbank 7.400 % 2/1/2013 1,448,920 (investment Agreement) $ 59,298,022 (1)-This amount is net of outstanding checks. (2)-At November 30, 2001 total market value (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency investment Fund (LAIF) was $49,308,939,741 The City's proportionate sham of that value is $53,620,756. All investments are liquid and currently available. The City of Temecula's portfolio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds will be available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures of the City of Temecula for the next six months. ITEM 5 APPROVAL .... CITYATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC~._..~_ II CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council ~'Y~,'l~/illiam Hughes, Public Works/City Engineer G. Director of January 8, 2002 Parcel Map No. 29974 located at the northwest corner of Winchester Road and Roripaugh Road in the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Mayra L. De La Torre, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve 1) Parcel Map No. 29974 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval and 2) Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Certificate of Deposit as security for the agreement. BACKGROUND: Parcel Map No. 29974 is a division of Parcels 1 and 3 of Parcel Map No. 29309. Parcel Map No. 29974 is a three (3) parcel commercial subdivision of 2.925 net acres. The Parcel Map shows restricted access along Winchester Road and Roripaugh Road with the exception of one (1) access opening along Roripaugh Road via a 40' access easement. There are easements in favor of Eastern Municipal Water District, Rancho California Water District and Southern California Edison that are within the map boundary. These agencies have provided the City with Non-Interference Letters (NIL), which state that they do not object to the recordation of the parcel map. The placement of monuments is required with this pamel map. All improvements on Winchester Road and Roripaugh Road are complete and all onsite improvements are also complete including the buildings. Therefore, a Subdivision Monument Bond and Agreement are required, but no Faithful Performance nor Labor and Material Bonds and Agreements are required. The Developer, WM15 Partnership LP, a California Limited Partnership, has met all of the Conditions of Approval. This parcel map is in conformance with the approved tentative map. The approval of a final subdivision map, which substantially complies with the previously approved tentative map, is a mandatory ministerial act under State law. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Fees & Securities Report 2. Project Vicinity Map 3. Parcel Map No. 29974 r:~agdrpt~2002\0108'tpm29974.map CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT CASE NO. PM 29974 PARCEL MAP NO. 29974 DATE: January 8, 2002 IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR SECURITY SECURITY Street and Drainage $ 0 $ 0 Water $ 0 $ 0 Sewer $ 0 $ 0 TOTAL $ 0 $ 0 Monument $1,700 Note - Placement of monuments is required with this parcel map. All offsite and onsite improvements have been completed. Therefore, monument bond and agreements are required, but no faithful performance nor labor and material bonds and agreements are required. In lieu of the Monument Bond and Agreement, the Developer has submitted a "Certificate of Deposit Agreement for Monumentation" and a Certificate of Deposit in the amount of $1,700. DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Stdping Costs RCFCD (ADP) Fee Development Impact Fee Quimby Fee $ N/A $ (Previously Paid) $ (Previously Paid) $ No Fees Required SERVICE FEES Planning Fee Comprehensive Transportation Plan Plan Check Fee Monument Inspection Fee Fees Paid to Date Balance of Fees Due $ 57.00 $ 4.00 $ 810.00 $. 250.00 $ 1,121.00 $ o.oo r:',agdrpt~2002\0108~pm29974.map VICINITY MAP PARCEL MAP NB, 29974 SIT TO SAN DI ROAD NDT ID SCALE ITEM 6 APPROVAL . c mY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC~II CITY MANAGER .~__~J TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council ~(~l/I William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 Parcel Map No. 30060 located at the northeast corner of Margarita Road and Winchester Road in the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Mayra L. De La Torre, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve 1) Parcel Map No. 30060 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval and 2) Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Certificate of Deposit as security for the agreement. BACKGROUND: Parcel Map No. 30060 is a division of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 28697 and a portion of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 28939. Parcel Map No. 30060 is a three (3) parcel commercial subdivision of 6.278 net acres. The Parcel Map shows restricted access along Winchester Road and Margarita Road with the exception of one (1) access opening on Margarita Road. There are easements in favor of Eastern Municipal Water District, Rancho California Water District and Southern California Edison that are within the map boundary. All agencies have provided the City with Non-Interference Letters (NIL), which state that they do not object to the recordation of the parcel map. Placement of monuments is required with this parcel map. All improvements on Winchester Road and Margarita Road are complete and all onsite improvements are also complete including the buildings. Therefore, a Subdivision Monument Bond and Agreement are required, but no Faithful Performance nor Labor and Material Bonds and Agreements are required. The Developer, WM15 Partnership LP, a California Limited Partnership, has met all of the Conditions of Approval. This parcel map is in conformance with the approved tentative map. The approval of a final subdivision map, which substantially complies with the previously approved tentative map, is a mandatory ministerial act under State law. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Fees & Securities Report 2. Project Vicinity Map 3. Parcel Map No. 30060 r:~agdrpf~2002\0108~pm30060.map CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT CASE NO. PM 30060 PARCEL MAP NO. 30060 DATE: January 8, 2002 IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR SECURITY SECURITY Street and Drainage $ 0 $ 0 Water $ 0 $ 0 Sewer $ 0 $ 0 TOTAL $ 0 $ 0 Monument $ 2,100 Note - Placement of monuments is required with this parcel map. All offsite and onsite improvements have been completed. Therefore, monument bond and agreements are required, but no faithful performance nor labor and material bonds and agreements are required. In lieu of the Monument Bond and Agreement, the Developer has submitted a "Certificate of Deposit Agreement for Monumentation" and a Certificate of Deposit (CD) in the amount of $2,100. DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFCD (ADP) Fee Development Impact Fee Quimby Fee $ N/A $ (Previously Paid) $ (Previously Paid) $ No Fees Required SERVICE FEES Planning Fee Comprehensive Transportation Plan Plan Check Fee Monument Inspection Fee Fees Paid to Date Balance of Fees Due 57.00 4.00 810.00 250.O0 1,121.00 o.oo r:~agdrpt~2002\0108~pm30060.map VICINITY MAP PARCEL MAP Nh, 30060 SITE ROAD SANTIAGo TO SAN DI NOT TO SCALE / / I / / / I / // / / // ~ / / / I iI / / / / ~ / / / ITEM 7 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: January 8, 2002 SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for Margarita Road Interim Widening - Phase II, Project No. PW99-01 oettr Attar, Senior Engineer Harvey, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Margarita Road Interim Widening - Phase II, Project No. PW99-01. BACKGROUND: Now, that the first phase of Margarita Road widening is complete, there is only one stretch of Margarita Road that doesn't meet the City's Circulation Plan as a 4 lane Arterial. This proposed interim project will widen the westside of Margarita Road from 570' south of Pauba Road to 400' south of Santiago Road and allow for two lanes in each direction. The interim improvements will include pavement widening, pavement rehabilitation, constructing of asphalt curb, grading, irrigation, landscaping, signing, striping, and relocating three traffic signal poles at the intersection of Santiago Road. The ultimate phase II widening of Margarita Road is scheduled in the Capital Improvement Program for the fiscal year of 2003-04. The Specifications and Contract Documents have been completed and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids. The Specifications are available for review in the City Engineer's office. The Engineer's Construction Estimate for this project is $125,000. There are sufficient funds remaining in the Margarita Road Widening, Phase I project for the administration and construction of this project. When bids are received and the contract is to be awarded, staff will recommend using these remaining funds for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: Margarita Road Interim Improvements, Phase II, will be funded from the remaining balance of the Margarita Road Widening, Phase I Project. Adequate funds are available in Account No. 210-165-706-5804. At the time of the award of a construction contract, the funds will be transferred to this phase of the project. 1 r:~agdrpt~002\~pw99-01 .bid ITEM 8 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA~ CITY MANAGER /,.J~ 4,x)~~ William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for Citywide P.C.C. Repairs FY2001-2002 Project No. PW01-30 PREPARED BY: (2'~/~Bradley A. Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Citywide P.C.C. Repairs FY2001-2002 - Project No. PW01-30. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has two procedures for effectuating street maintenance. The first procedure addresses immediate repairs through a weekly sealed bid/work order system for work under $25,000. The second procedure involves compiling a list of concrete repairs that do not require immediate attention over a period of six (6) months. This work includes concrete sidewalk repairs, removal and replacement of curb and gutter; removal and replacement of concrete cross gutters, removal and replacement of catch basin lids, and repair of under sidewalk drains. This list has been "grouped" together to form a cost effective project. The Specifications and Contract Documents have been completed and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids. The Specifications are available for review in the City Engineer's office. All plans and specifications used in the construction of this project are City of Temecula Standard Drawings approved by the City Council in November 1991 and revised by resolution in October 1998. The estimated total cost for the project is $190,000.00. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Public Works Department, Routine Street Maintenance Account No. 001-164-601-5402. 1 r:~agdrpt~002\\pwO1-30 PCC bid ITEM 9 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.~I~___ CiTY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 Pala Road Phase I Improvements, Project No. PW99-11 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer- Capital Projects Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer- Capital Project RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve the Negative Declaration and Environmental Report for the Pala Road Phase I Improvements, Project No. PW99-11. Approve the Plans and Specifications for the construction of Pala Road Phase I Improvement, Project No. PW99-11 and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids. BACKGROUND: Currently, there is only one lane in each direction along portions of Pala Road, from south of Pala Bridge to the Pechanga Casino. The Pechangas' have contracted with the Police Department to control traffic through the Wolf Valley and Loma Linda intersections at certain times of the day to help improve traffic flow. The expansion of the Pechanga Casino and the new hotel is expected to be completed the Summer of 2002. The ultimate General Plan improvements consist of widening Pala Road to six lanes from State Route 79 South to Via Gilberto, to four lanes from Via Gilberto to Wolf Valley Road, and the construction of sound walls on Pala Road from Clubhouse Drive to Via Eduardo. The ultimate Pala Road Improvements are described in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The Environmental Impact Report and Development Agreement have been approved by the City Council. Staff is currently working with the design consultant to complete the design. At this time, the design is 70% complete. Environmental and dght of way clearances remain. To help ease traffic congestions on a more immediate basis, City staff and the Pechangas' are proposing a Phase I widening project. The proposed improvements consists of: (1) modification of the traffic signals at the intersections of Pala Road with Loma Linda Road and Pala Road with Wolf Valley Road; and (2) widening Pala Road from two lanes to four lanes from Clubhouse Drive to the Pechanga Casino with left turn lanes at each intersection. The widening of Pala Road will occur within the existing right of way. The amount of new pavement widening to Pala Road varies between 10 and 20 feet and will occur along the northeastern side of the existing roadway. I R:~AGENDA REPORTS~002~010802~PW99-11 Phase 1 Pala Rd. OOC A sound study was just completed for Pala Road, from Pala Bridge to Muirfield and for the west side of Pala Road, from Clubhouse Drive to the Pechanga Casino. The study included recommendations of sound walls and their heights. Staff has issued Request for Proposals (RFP's) for the design of the sound walls. The design of the walls will run concurrent with the process for constructing the Phase I improvements. The implementation of these wails will occur as soon as the design is complete and a contractor is hired to do the work. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City Community Development Depadment prepared an Initial Environmental Study on the Phase I widening of Pala Road from two lanes to four lanes, the related traffic signals, and the proposed sound mitigation wall to mitigate existing traffic and noise problems along Pala Road. These Phase I improvements have not been designed to accommodate new development in the area and will not provide sufficient additional capacity to mitigate the impacts of new development in the area. Except that the westside sound wall improvements are intended to also meet future needs since the partial construction of the sound mitigation wall is infeasible. These Phase I improvements are consistent with the City's General Plan but do not represent the ultimate build-out condition of Pala Road under the General Plan. The Initial Study reviewed a great deal of information about the problems in the area and the impact of the traffic signals and Phase I widening of Pala Road from two lanes to four lanes. Staff reviewed the City's General Plan, the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the draft Sound Wall Analysis Report, and the information in the Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The Initial Study concluded that the proposed project will not adversely affect traffic in the area and will not generate additional vehicle trips. The project is expected to improve vehicular circulation and emergency access to the area by adding an additional lane to match lane configurations at the northern edge of the project. In addition, the Initial Study concluded that except for limited construction-related noise, no significant noise impacts would occur from the project and that the sound mitigation wall will substantially mitigate the current noise conditions. The only potential environmental issue associated with this project, is the potential for adverse visual impacts from the sound wall. To ensure that the proposed sound wall will not create an adverse visual impact, a mitigation measure is being recommended to have the Planning Department review the proposed materials and community entries and transitions during the design process. The proposed mitigation measure will ensure that the sound wall meets community aesthetic needs and that the review process is carefully integrated into the final Plans and Specifications. With this measure in place, the Initial Study concluded that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT: Pechanga Development Corporation and the City are drafting an MOU to fund the Pala Road Phase I Improvements, Project No. PW99-11 Phase I to accommodate two lanes of traffic in each direction and modify the traffic signals at Loma Linda Road and Wolf Valley Road. The City anticipates that this project will be funded by the Pechangas as part of the $4.4 Million they have committed to the ultimate project, and that this MOU will be considered by the City and the Pechangas prior to award of the construction contract for this project. A'FrACHMENTS: Initial Study of Environmental Impact 2 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~00LA01080LAPW99-11 Phase 1 Pala Rd,DOC City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Environmental Assessment No. EA-89 (Interim Widening of Pala Road and associated sound walls) Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Project Location Pala Road south of Highway 79 (South) between Murfield Drive and the entrance to the Pechanga Casino in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California. Project Sponsor's Name and Address City of Temecula General Plan Designation Urban Arterial (6-lane divided) and Arterial (4-lane divided) Zoning Not Applicable Description of Project Widen the current paved surface of Pala Road between Murfield Drive and the entrance to the Pechanga Casino from two to four lanes and the construction of a sound wall along the west side of Pala Road to address existing noise conditions. The project includes both the replacement of pavement and the installation of new asphalt along the northeast side of the existing roadway. Specifically, the project would add between 10 and 20 feet of new pavement along the northeast side of Pala Road for a distance of about one mile. The project includes the installation of traffic signals at the intersections Pala and Loma Linda Roads and at Pala Road and : Wolf Valley Road/Via Eduardo. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The majority of the land adjacent to the northeast side of Pala Road is currently vacant. This area has been historically used for agricultural purposes. Across Pala Road (on the west side), most of the area is currently occupied by single family residences. The Pechanga Casino complex is also on the southwest side of Pala Road opposite the very southerly portion of the proposed road improvements. Previous Analysis Many of the cumulative and areawide impacts identified in this Initial Environmental Study were also addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that was prepared for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, this Mitigated Negative Declaration has been developed using information contained in those documents. Other public agencies whose approval No outside agency permits are required. ~s required R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning Hazards Population and Housing Noise Geologic Problems Public Services Water Utilities and Service Systems Air Quality Aesthetics Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources Biological Resources Recreation Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance ," None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ," I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects ia) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Senior Planner David Hoqan Printed name R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.dcc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Potenfia~ly Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Sign[ficant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting] Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ,/ b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or ,/ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ,/ natural community conservation plan? Comments: The proposed interim road widening and sound wall will not physically divide an established community, conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation, and does not conflict with any applicable habitat plans. Pala Road currently separates an area of single family homes from a vacant area that will be developed pursuant to the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The proposed roadway improvements are consistent with the City's General Plan but do not represent the ultimate buildout condition of Pala Road. As a result, no significant impacts are expected to occur. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potenfia[ly Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ,/ directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ,/ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: The proposed interim road widening and sound wall will not displace any housing units or local residents. The widening is also not expected to induce substantial population growth in the area. The interim expansion is intended to meet current infrastructure needs. This existing need is created by the existing homes along the southwest side of Pala Road, county area developments in the Redhawk and Vail Ranch areas (that did not mitigate the traffic impacts to Pala Road), the Pechanga tribal casino, as well as from rural areas farther to the south. The existing need has been created by the County of Riverside through a sustained pattern of non-mitigation of development approvals that began in this area in the 1980's. The ultimate build-out of Pala Road to General Plan standards are currently required by, and will be constructed with the development of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan that is adjacent to most of the northeast side of Pala Road adjacent to the project. The ultimate improvements to Pala Road, to meet the General Plan standards, will be addressed once the design of project is finalized. As a result, no significant impacts are expected to occur. R:\EA~ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 3 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on ,/ the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ,/ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ,,' that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B ,,' of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of ,,' septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Comments: The proposed interim road widening and sound wall will not expose people or property to any significant impacts or effects caused by geology or soils. As a result, no significant impact effects are expected to occur. 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ,,' substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in t substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? R:\EA\ea89~-A-89 Initial Study,doc 4 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Inco~orated Impact Impact d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a l O0-year flood hazard area as v mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or/Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ,/ injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Comments: The proposed road widening and sound wall are adjacent to an existing bypass channel along Pala Road. However the project will not effect the capacity of this channel but may result in a small incremental increase in runoff volumes because of the increased paved surface. The proposed interim road widening is not expected to effect hydrology or water quality standards beyond current roadway runoff levels. The project will not change the direction of surface or ground water flows. The widening will not expose people or property to any new significant impacts or effects caused by flooding. As a result, no significant impact effects are expected to occur. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Inco~orated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc Comments: The proposed interim mad widening and sound wall will not impact or adversely effect air quality. Limited localized air quality impacts may occur during construction. Some limited local improvement in air quality may result from increased two-way traffic flow and reduced congestion along Paia Road are also anticipated. As a result, no significant impact effects are expected to occur. 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportin~ Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact ~mpact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ,,' relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ,,' an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? v' f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ,,' g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ,/ supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Comments: The proposed interim road widening and sound wall will not impact or adversely effect area circulation. The area being paved and repaved generally varies between 10 and 20 feet in width and will occur along the northeastern side of the current Pala Road. The two new traffic signals will also occur within this area. All the improvements will occur within the existing right-of-way. The project is expected to improve vehicular circulation and emergency access by adding an additional lane through this area to matching lane configurations farther to the north. The new traffic signals are also expected to improve traffic and pedestrian safety though this area by providing safer turning and crossing movements at the important intersections with Loma Linda Road and Wolf Valley Road/Via Eduardo. The purpose of these interim improvements is to meet current cimulation needs in this area. These interim improvements are not expected to attract additional vehicle trips to this area. The proposed improvements are also consistent with the City General Plan, but do not represent the ultimate build-out condition of Pala Road under the General Plan. Local build-out conditions were addressed as part of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and Environmental impact Report. The citywide impacts of the widening of Pala Road to ultimate build-out were also considered in the EIR for the General Plan. As a result, no significant impact effects are expected to occur. R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 6 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ,/ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ,,' resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nurser~ sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ,,' biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments:. The proposed interim improvements and sound wall will not significantly effect important biologic resources. A visual inspection of the area indicated that the west side of Pala Road consisted of streetside landscaping maintained by either a Homeowners Association or individual property owners. The improvements to the east side of Pala Road will take place on the roadway shoulder and an adjacent area that is largely covered with common roadside plants, trash, and debris. The area is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area but the project is exempt from payment of the regional impact mitigation fee. No significant impacts are anticipated. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ,--' resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important ,,' mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? R:\EA\ea89'tEA-89 Initial Study.dcc Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall entail the use of a small increment of commonly used construction materials. In addition, this interim widening will not reduce locally important mineral resources. As a result, no effects are expected from this project. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Signiticant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportin~ Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ,/ environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the ,/ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ,,' acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ,,' where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ,/ the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, ~njury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: The interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall will not expose area residents to any hazardous or materials not already transported through this area of found in the adjacent neighborhoods. The widening is expected to result in some incremental reduction in the potential hazards by improving the flow and safety of traffic through this area. The project site is not located within the safety area for any public or private airports. As a result, no impacts are expected from this project. R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 8 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant MifigatJon Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ~d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ,/ where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ,/ the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: Some additional construction-related noise is expected to occur while the project is being constructed. However, these impacts will be of relatively short duration and will largely be confined to daylight hours when most residents are less likely to bothered or effected. While construction of the roadway and sound wall improvements will result in some potential increase in the amount of noise and vibration, no significant impacts are anticipated. Future (ultimate) build-out noise levels were addressed in the Noise Element of the adopted General Plan and the Final EIR for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. According to the adopted Noise Element, the existing Community Noise Level 100 feet from the centerline of Pala Road ranged from 61.9 to 62.6 CNEL. The equivalent values at build out are projected to be 53.9 to 68.5 CNEL. Finally, daytime noise measurements taken in 1992 along Pala Road between Loma Linda and Via Eduardo/Wolf Valley Road measured decibel levels of 71.5 decibels at 3:15 p.m. This measurement indicates the existing residents were already exposed to moderate traffic noise levels adjacent to Pala Road. As a result, the environmental analysis in the General Plan addressed the impacts on the current residents of this area. Finally, traffic volumes (and associated noise levels) on Pala Road have increased over time as previously approved projects have been constructed and occupied. The use of Pala Road by residents and visitors will continue increase future road noise levels even without these improvements. Analysis in the Final EIR for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan also identified this issue. This means that some incremental increase in vehicle noise will continue occur even without these Improvements. To address the existing and future noise conditions, a sound wall will be added to the project. Preliminary studies for the sound wall have been completed. One option considered locating the sound wall at the edge of the right of way line, the other, at the existing fence locations. In all cases, locating the fence at the existing fence location lowered the height of the required sound wall and provided for additional landscaping between the sidewalk and the wall. R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study,doc 9 To mitigate the existing and future noise conditions, the wall in either location is expected to be effective. The heights of the wall in this location will vary from 6 to 10 feet. The project will reduce current and future noise levels for residents along the west side of Pala Road. The project does not include an airport component and could not expose people to increased aircraft noise. As a result, no significant long term impacts are expected. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: Potentially PotentiallySignificant Unless Less Than SigniticantMitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical ,/ impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other pedormance objectives for any of the public services? b. Fire protection? c. Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? f. i Other public facilities? Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and associated sound wall will not effect the demand for, or adversely effect, public services. This project may result in a small incremental increase in road maintenance and landscape maintenance costs. However, part of this project represents current City road maintenance functions. The interim widening is also expected to provide some incremental improvement in the provision of police, fire and ambulance services by improving traffic flow and reducing potential response times. As a result, no effects are expected from this project. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Untess Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ,,' applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water ,-' drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 10 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Pctentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No issues and Supportin~ Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment / , provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to v~ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and v~ regulations related to solid waste? Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall will not effect public utilities or service systems. The project is expected to tie into and to use the existing storm runoff system serving this area. As a result, no effects are expected from this project. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ~ssues and Suppor~in~ Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall project has the potential to affect the views from two vantage points. The first is the view from the roadway itself, mostly of the sound wall, and the second is the view from the homes along the west side of Pala Road. Both views are being considered in this Initial Environmental Study. The sound wall has been added to the Interim Improvements project at the request of the local residents who are being impacted by the traffic noise from Pala Road. Pala Road has not been designated as a scenic roadway. According to the sound wall study, the closer to the street the wall is located, the higher the sound wall must be. Putting the sound wall at the right-of-way line will mean a wall height ranging from 12 to 16 feet. Putting the wall at the location of the existing backyard fences will mean a sound wall ranging from 6 to 10 feet in height. While both options are effective at reducing backyard noise levels, these two options do not have the same potential for adverse visual impacts. Generally speaking, the higher a sound wall, the greater its potential visual impact. As a result, putting the sound wall where the existing fences are located will better mitigate the potentially significant visual impacts. R:\EA~ea89'~.A-89 Initial Study.doc 11 Installing either sound wall option will change the easterly view from the back yards of these residences. The present view of the vacant site for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and the Red Hawk subdivision on the distance ridge, will be substantially changed by the sound wall. Because the sound wall must be constructed to a certain height, both sound wall options will reduce the current view. The view will change from the current view (Pala Road, other homes and landscaping) to the view of the back side of the sound wall. This represents a change in the viewshed, but not a significant impact on the environment. However, putting the sound wall at the location of the existing backyard fences will also eliminate the potential for an un-maintained "no mans land" between the sound wall and the backyard fences. These un-maintained areas can become filled with trash and weeds which can result in negative visual and public safety impacts. The sound wall is also expected to increase the privacy and security of the back yards adjacent to Pala Road. To mitigate the potential visual impacts of the proposed sound wall, the wall will needs to located as far from the street as practical to minimize its height and maximize the amount of landscaping in front of the wall. Furthermore, the new sections of the sound wall will be designed to include appropriate transitions around corners and in the front yards of adjacent residences. As needed, the current landscaping will be replaced. These factors together are expected to reduce the visual impacts of the sound wall to a level of insignificance. As are result, no significant impacts are anticipated. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ,,' a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ,/ an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57 c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ,,' resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: The roadway and shoulder areas on the west side consist of contemporary Southern California landscaping. The roadway and shoulder areas on the east side have extensively graded and modified over the years and the discovery of cultural resoumes is not expected occur in such highly disturbed soil conditions. As a result, no impacts are anticipated. 15, RECREATION. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting] Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing ,/ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require ~ the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? R:\EA\ea89\EA-89 Initial Study,doc 12 Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall will not effect the demand for, or adversely effect, recreational facilities. As a result, no effects are expected from this project. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportin~ Information Sources impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality v' of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually v' limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c. Does the project have environmental effects which will ¢' cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: The proposed interim widening of Pala Road and sound wall will meet current traffic and circulation needs along the Pala Road corridor. This existing need was created by the existing homes along the southwest side of Pala Road, county area developments in the Redhawk and Vail Ranch areas (that did not mitigate the traffic impacts to Pala Road), and the Pechanga tribal casino. The existing need was created by the County of Riverside through a sustained pattern of non-mitigation of development approvals that began in this area in the 1980's. The purpose of these interim improvements is to address this previously unmitigated need. Finally, the cumulative impacts of the ultimate build-out of Pala Road (to General Plan standards) were addressed in the City General Plan and Final EIR that were adopted in November of 1993 and the FEIR .for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan also addressed local development issues and impacts along the Pala Road corridor. R:\EA\ea89'tEA-89 Initial Study.doc 13 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 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. 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. 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. The Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan and the Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan are available for review at the public counter for the Planning Department located at 43200 Business Park Drive in Temecula. 2. 3. 4. SOURCES City of Temecula General Plan (November 9, 1993) City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (November 9, 1993) Wolf Creek Specific Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report (January 23, 2001) Draft Sound Wall Analysis Report for Pala Road, Phase II Improvements (July 25, 2001) R:~EA~ea89\EA-89 Initial Study.doc 14 PROJECT MAP ocation of Work Pechanga Tribal Casino ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 8~ /" Proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program Planning Application No. EA-089 (Pala Road Interim Improvements and Sound Mitigation Wall) AESTHETICS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Degrade the existing visual impact or quality of the surrounding area. Ensure the design and materials proposed for the sound mitigation wall and related improvements maintain the quality of design previously established for sound walls along the Pala Road corridor. Submit detailed, dimensioned elevations and site plan for the sound mitigation wall to the Planning Department for review and approval at all stages of the plan review process to ensure that the material/design issues are finalized prior to the issuance of the contract. Prior to the approval of the final plans and specifications for the sound wall, the proposed elevations, colors and materials, and the character and location of the wall transitions will be approved by the Director of Planning. Planning Department. R:\EA'Wlitigation Monitoring Program.doc ITEM 10 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANC~ CITY MANAGER ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council .,~J~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 Joint Funding Agreement with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for Detailed Design for the Murrieta Creek Improvement Project - Project No. PW01-25 PREPARED BY: Beryl Yasinosky, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a Joint Funding Agreement in the amount of $125,000.00 with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for detailed engineering design costs associated with future flood control and recreational facilities within Murdeta Creek. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the Energy and Water Appropriations Act of 2001, the Federal government approved the Locally Preferred Plan of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project at a total cost of $90,866,000. It is estimated that the Federal government will contribute $59,063,000 towards design and construction of the project, with the remaining $31,803,100 to be funded by local efforts. The project includes the design and construction of channel improvements from the gaging station in Temecula upstream to Tenaja Road, a 250-acre detention basin with a 50-acre park, and multi-purpose trails. The project is necessary to improve flood protection to properties within the Murrieta Creek flood plain and will significantly enhance recreational uses and trail opportunities in the area. Detailed engineering design work for the Murrieta Creek improvements will take place over the next two years. As the project's Local Sponsor, the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ("District") is obliged to contribute 25% of each year's total design costs. For Federal FY 2001, the Army Corp of Engineers has estimated that the local share of the design cost is $400,000. The Cities of Temecula and Murrieta have pledged to assist the District in funding the local match by contributing $125,000 toward the design effort for FY 2001. The Flood Control District is pledging to contribute the remaining $150,000. The District will continue to serve as the lead agency for the project and will coordinate local efforts with the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta to secure federal and non-federal funding necessary to carry out future construction. The District will maintain an accurate accounting of all local costs and contributions, and they will serve as the conduit for transmitting the local share of project costs to the Army Corp of Engineers. 1 R:\agdrpt~002\010802\MurrietaCreekFu ndingAgr, RC FC FISCAL IMPACT: The Murrieta Creek Improvement Project is funded through Capital Project Reserves and identified within the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 2002-2006. The total "local share" design cost for FY 2001 is $400,000.00. The City's contribution towards this cost is $125,000.00. Adequate funds are available in the current CIP Budget Account No. 210-165-735-5802. ATFACHMENTS: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description 3. Agreement 2 R:\agdrpt~002\010802\MurrietaCreekFundingAgr. RCFC AGREEMENT JOINT FUNDING OF DETAILED DESIGN FOR MURRIETA CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT - FY 2001 The RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, hereinafter called DISTRICT, and the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called CITY, hereby agree as follows: RECITALS A. In January 1993, the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta experienced approximately $11,000,000 worth of flood damage to public and private property as a result of flooding along Murrieta Creek; and B. On October 7, 2000, President Clinton signed the Energy and Water Appropriations Act of 2001 (Public Law 106-377); and C. Public Law 106-377 includes House Report 5483 which authorized the Locally Preferred Plan (LLP) of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project (Project) at a total cost of $90,866,000, with an estimated Federal contribution of $59,063,900 and an estimated non-federal cost of $31,803,100; and D. The LLP will provide significantly improved flood protection to properties located within and the Murrieta Creek flood plain and significantly enhance recreational opportunities in the area; and E. USACOE anticipates accomplishing Project construction in four phases with Phase One, starting at First Street continuing downstream to the USGS gaging station, scheduled to commence construction in FY 2003. F. The DISTRICT, along with the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta are currently working together to identify potential funding sources to cover the estimated $32,000,000 "local" share of the Project cost including funding 25% of the estimated $4,400,000 engineering design effort. Detailed engineering design for the Project is expected to take place over the next two years; and G. For Federal FY 2001, USACOE has received an initial appropriation of $1,000,000 to begin detailed Project design. As Project's Local Sponsor, the DISTRICT is obliged to contribute twenty-five percent (25%) of each year's design cost; and H. The Cities of Temecula and Murrieta have each pledged to assist the DISTRICT in funding the twenty-five percent (25%) local match for Federal FY 2001 by contributing $125,000 toward the FY 2001 design effort; and R:\yasinobk~,greements~MurdetaCreekJointFundingAgr. RCFC 1 The estimated "local" share of Project design costs for FY2001 is $400,000. The Cities of Temecula and Murrieta have each pledged to contribute $125,000 toward the FY 2001 design effort. The DISTRICT is pledging to contribute the remaining $150,000; and It is in the community interest to proceed with design and construction of the Project in an expeditious manner. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows: SECTION I DISTRICT shall: 1. Continue to act as Project's Local Sponsor and work closely with Cities of Temecula and Murrieta and USACOE to design and construct Project. 2. Continue to actively seek out and coordinate local efforts to secure both federal and non-federal funding needed to carry out Project construction. 3. Serve as a conduit for transmitting local share of Project costs to USACOE. 4. Keep an accurate accounting of all local costs and contributions toward Project. SECTION II CITY shall: 1. Within forty-five days following the execution of this agreement, deposit with DISTRICT the sum of one hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($125,000) as City's contribution toward FY 2001 Project design costs. SECTION III IT IS FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREED: 1. Each party, as to any and all loss, damage, claim for damage, liability, expense or cost, including attorneys' fees, which arises out of such party's (including its employees, contractors, subcontractors or agents) act or omission regarding any work to be performed by or authority delegated to such party under this Agreement, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party and its officers and employees, except as to sole negligence or willful misconduct of the other party. 2. Any notices sent or required to be sent to either party shall be mailed to the following addresses: R:\yasinobk~Agreements\MurrietaCreekJointFundingAgr. RCFC 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995 Market Street Riverside, CA 92501 CITY OF TEIVlECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 3. This Agreement is to be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 4. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be declared severable and shall be given full rome and effect to the extent possible. 5. Any action at law or in equity brought by any of the parties hereto for the purpose of enforcing a right or fights provided for by the Agreement shall be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Riverside, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for change of venue in such proceedings to any other county. 6. This Agreement is the result of negotiations between the parties hereto and with the advice and assistance of their respective counsel. No provision contained herein shall be construed against DISTRICT solely because, as a matter of convenience, it prepared this Agreement in final form. 7. Any waiver by DISTRICT or CITY of any breach by the other of any one or more of the terms of this 'Agreement shall not be construed to be a waiver of any subsequent or other breach of the same or of any other term hereof. Failure on the part of DISTRICT or CITY to require from the other exact, full and complete compliance with any terms of the Agreement shall not be construed as in any manner changing the terms hereof, or estopping DISTRICT or CITY from enforcement hereof. 8. This Agreement is intended by the parties hereto as their final expression with respect to the matters herein, and is a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof. This Agreement shall not be changed or modified except by the written consent of both parties hereto. // // R:\yasinobk~Agreements~MurfietaCreekJointFundingAgr, RCFC 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on (to be filled in by Clerk of the Board) RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By. DAVID P. ZAPPE General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT By. JAMES A. VENABLE, Chairman Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Disthct Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN County Counsel By LEE A. VINOCOUR Deputy County Counsel Dated ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board By. (SEAL) CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By WILLIAM G. HUGHES Director of Public Works/City Engineer By RON ROBERTS, Mayor City of Temecula APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: PETER M. THORSON City Attomey SUSAN W. JONES, CMC City Clerk (SE t ) R:\yasinobk~,greements\MurrfetaCreekJointFundingAgr. RCFC 4 ITEM 11 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOROF FINAN~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Q/~/~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 Amendment to Professional Services Agreement Land Development Construction Inspection Services PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment Number 1 to the Professional Construction Inspection Services Agreement with Vail Cooper and Associates, Inc. for an amount equal to $54,284.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. BACKGROUND: On August 30, 2001 the City Manager approved a professional services agreement with Vail Cooper and Associates, Inc. to provide Land Development Construction Inspection Services to cover construction activity for Adelphia Cable Communication expansion. The scope of the project is much larger than originally anticipated and the construction time schedule has been extended. The purpose of this amendment is to provide adequate inspection services to complete the project. Adelphia Cable has paid adequate Encroachment Permit fees to cover the cost of this service. FISCAL IMPACT: The requested amount of $54,284.00 and the original contract amount of $24,727.00 represents a total contract amount of $78,556.00. Adequate funds are available in the Land Development Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Operating Budget Account, No. 001-163-999-5118. ATTACHMENT: Amendment No. 1 1 R:~agdrpt~002\010802\LD Vail Cooper Amend1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BE'FWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND VALI COOPER & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 8, 2002 byand between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Vail Cooper & Associates, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration ofthe mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On August 30, 2001 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). C. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 and Section 5 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on August 30, 2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 5. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payments rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit Al, Payments Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit A1 other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Seventy Eight Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Six Dollars and No Cents ($78,556.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 3. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 R:bIGREEMEN~7~LDAGM~IVJIJ COOPER .4MEND/.DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above wdtten. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorsen, City Attomey CONSULTANT Vali Cooper & Associates, Inc. 41 Washington Ave. Pt. Ric~,hard, CA 94801 (57}/215-0264 /,~ lark,Executive Vice President (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) Consultant Services Agreement - Amendment 1 Construction Inspection Support- Public Works Land Devlopment Vail Cooper & Assoc,, Inc. EXHIBIT A1 PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE Scope of Services: Provide construction inspection services for Public Works Land Development Payment Rates: Classification Inspector Veh c e Hourly Rate $77.00 $ 5.00 Total Estimate Cost: Classification Total Hours I Hourly Rate I Total Ori~linal Contract: Inspector 296 $77.00 $22,792.00 Veh c e 296 $ 5.00 $ 1,480.00 Amendment No. 1: Original Total $24,272.00 Inspector 662 $77.00 $50,974.00 Veh ce 662 $ 5.00 $ 3,310.00 Original Total 54,284.00 Revised Contract Total 78,556.00 ITEM 12 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCI~a~_ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~,//(William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 8, 2002 All-Way Stop Sign Installation- Butterfield Stage Road at De Portola Road PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - Traffic RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING AN ALL-WAY STOP AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUTFERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD BACKGROUND: The City received a correspondence from citizens requesting installation of Ali-Way Stop Signs at the intersections of Butterfield Stage Road and Jerez Lane, and Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road; reduction of the current 55 and 50 MPH speed limits to 45 MPH; and establishment of a 2-ton weight limit on Butterfleld Stage Road. Staff has also received separate requests for installation of Ail-Way Stop Signs at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road. At their meeting of December 13, 2001, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission considered the four requested items and unanimously (3-0) approved the staff recommendation to deny the requests for installation of Ali-Way Stop Sings at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and Jerez Lane; reduction of the existing posted speed limit on Butterfield Stage Road from 55 and 50 MPH to 45 MPH; and establishment of a 2-ton weight limit on Butterfield Stage Road. However, the Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing an Ali-Way Stop control at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road since this intersection satisfied the minimum warrant requirements for installation of an Ali-Way Stop Control. The reasons for denial of the other requests are detailed in the Public/Traffic Safety Commission agenda repod of December 13, 2001 (Exhibit "B"). FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in Public Works Signing and Striping Account. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2002- Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Public/Traffic Safety Commission Agenda Report - December 13, 2001 I r:~Agenda Report'~OO2\O10802~stopbuttedielddeporto[a.reso RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ESTABLISHING AN ALL-WAY STOP AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the facts justifying the need for the stop signs proposed for the location described in this resolution. The City Council hereby finds and determines that installation of the stop signs pursuant to this resolution will enhance the public health and safety and general welfare at this location and the proposed stop signs will not create any adverse conditions in the area. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 10.12.100, of the Temecula Municipal Code, the following Ali-Way Stop intersection is hereby established in the City of Temecula. Butterfield Stage Road at De Portola Road SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of January, 2002. A'I-rEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 2 r:~Agenda Repod~2002~010802\stopbutterlielddepor~ola.reso [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of January, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 3 r:~Agenda Report~2002\010802~stopbutten3eiddeportola.reso ~-~,,~ '"~ '~ ~, ~_ ; J / / X N IE, IT' "15 ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA REPORT Publicfrraffic Safety Commission - .-'7'~Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic December 13, 2001 Item 4 Request for Traffic Control Modifications - Butterfield Stage Road RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission: 1. Deny the request to install Multi-Way Stop Signs at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and Jerez Lane; and 2. Recommend to the City Council the installation of Multi-Way Stop Signs at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road; and 3. Deny the request to lower the existing speed limit from 55 MPH and 50 MPH to 45 MPH on Butterfield Stage Road; and 4. Deny the request to establish a two-ton weight limit restriction on Butterfield Stage Road. BACKGROUND: Staffreceived a letter from Citizens Against Neighborhood Expressways (CANE) requesting the installation of Multi-Way Stop Controls at the intersections of Butterfield Stage Road with Jerez Lane and De Ponola Road, reduction of the current 55 and 50 mile per hour speed limits to 45 miles per hour and establishment of a 2-ton weight limit on Butterfield Stage Road. Staffhas also received several separate requests for installation of multi-way stop signs at the Bunerfield Stage Road and De Portola Road intersection. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process. Butterfield Stage Road is classified on the City's General Plan Circulation Element as an 86 foot wide Arterial Highway with restricted access. An Arterial Highway provides for four (4) travel lanes and a 14 foot wide raised median. Butterfield Stage Road carries an approximate volume of 5,200 Average Daily Traffic (Al)T) south of Pauba Road, 3,900 ADT north of De Portola Road and 4,800 ADT south of De Portola Road. The speed limit is posted at 55 MPH between Pauba Road and De Portola Road and 50 MPH between De Portola Road and State Route 79 (South). Butterfield Stage Road at Jerez Lane In 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors first approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map 23143 creating the Crowne Hill subdivision. The map identified two (2) points of access to the subdivision along Butterfield Stage Road at Crowne Hill Drive and Royal Crest Place. On Pauba Road one access point was 1 identified at Crowne Hill Drive. The developer was conditioned to provide traffic signals at all the locations as well as at the intersection of Burterfield Stage Road and Pauba Road. In July 1999, the City approved Tract Map 23143-3 in the Crowne Hill subdivision. The developer was conditioned by the Fire Department to provide a secondary emergency access to the subdivision. In order to meet the requirement, a temporary access driveway was provided to Fox Drive from Butterfield Stage Road at the Jerez Lane intersection. Ultimately, when the subdivision's street system is developed and a secondary access is provided that fulfills the Fire Deparlanent's requirements, the existing temporary, access driveway at Jerez Lane will be removed and the area will become a storm water retention basin for the subdivision. In addition to the closure of the temporary access driveway Butterfield Stage Road will ultimately have a raised median at this location lirrdting access to "fight-in/fight-out" only at Jerez Lane. Since a controlled intersection is proposed south of this location at Crown ltill Drive, and this location is a temporary intersection, staff is not recommending the installation of multi-way stop signs or crosswalks at Butterfield Stage Road and Jerez Lane. Butterfield Stage Road at De Portola Road An evaluation of traffic conditions was performed at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road to determine if the minimum warrant criteria for the installation of Multi-Way Stop Signs are satisfied. The evaluation includes a review of 24-hour vehicular volume data and accident history at the intersection. The Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that the Multi-Way Stop installation may be useful at locations where the volumes of traffic on intersecting roads are approximately equal and/or where a combination of high speed, restricted sight distance and an accident history indicates that assignment of right-of-way is necessary. There are three (3) criteria that Caltrans has established for the evaluation of Multi-Way Stop signs. These criteria are as follows: Where signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multi-way stop may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installations. An accident problem, as indicated by five (5) or more reported accidents within a twelve (12) month per/ed of a type susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents include right and left-mm collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Minimum Traffic Volumes The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any eight (8) hours of an average day, and The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same eight (8) hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but When the 85-percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. The Multi-Way Stop warrant analysis performed indicates that although the vehicular volume warrant criteria is only 70% satisfied, Multi-Way Stop signs are justified due to the 55 MPH speed limit along Butterfield Stage Road and the visibility restrictions at the intersection. Therefore, staff is recommending the installation of Multi-Way Stop signs at Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road. Speed Limit Reduction on Butterfield Stage Road In 2000, a Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey was performed to reaffirm and establish Prima Facie speed limits on city streets. Butterfield Stage Road between Pauba Road and State Route 79 (South) was included in the survey. In July 2000, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing the posted speed limit on Butterfield Stage Road between Pauba Road and De Portola Road at 55 MPH and between De Portola Road and State Route 79 (South) at 50 MPH. Although it is within the City's authority to set a posted speed limit below the findings of the Engineering and Traffic Survey, the speed limit posted must be reasonable, prudent and more importantly, enforceable. The Engineering and Traffic Survey performed indicates that the 85~ percentile speed on Butterfield Stage Road between Pauba Road and De Portola Road is 62 MIaH and bep, veen De Portola Road and State Route 79 (South) the 85th percentile speed is 52 MPH. In this case, the posted speed limit of 55 MPH and 50 MPH, respectively, are considered to be enforceable and appropriate for conditions on Butterfield Stage Road. Therefore, based on the requirements of the California Vehicle Code, staff is not recommending lower speed limits on Butterfield Stage Road. Establishment of Weight Limit Restriction on Butterfield Stage Road As previously mentioned Butterfield Stage Road between Murrieta Hot Springs Road and State Route 79 (South) is classified as an Arterial Highway with restricted access on the City's General Plan Circulation Element. In the County, north of Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Butterfield Stage Road is also classified as an Arterial Highway with restricted access. Butterfield Stage Road south of State Route 79 (South) is classified as a Major Highway, which roms into a Secondary Highway south of Nighthawk Pass in the Vail Ranch area. Because Butterfield Stage Road appears on both the City and County's Circulation Element, it is considered an integral part of a countywide roadway system and provides regional access to numerous commercial and residential developments. Moreover, the roadway has been designed to carry multiple modes of transportation including trucks, buses and service vehicles. However, it is not likely that Butterfield Stage Road will carry the same percentage of track traffic that Interstate 15 or Winchester Road are expected to carry because of the lack of direct access to Interstate 15. It is also important to recognize that Butterfield Stage Road is only one of the four, north/south arterial streets that provide regional access to the City. Ynez Road, Margarita Road, Meadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road all share the common characteristic of having large developments with residential units "backing" onto the roadway. Any type of commercial vehicle restriction on any portion of these streets will only divert the truck traffic onto the unrestricted north/south arterials. For example, a restriction on Butterfield Stage Road will likely divert truck traffic onto adjacent Meadows Parkway. Because Meadows Parkway also has residential units that "back" onto the roadway, it is likely that shortly after implementation oft,he restriction on Butterfield Stage Road, those residents would be requesting a similar restriction on Meadows Parkway. It is staff' s opinion that the current unreslxicted access to all four roadways provides multiple navel routes for track traffic and uniformly distributes the truck traffic on all north/south routes as well as the east/west connecting routes. The California Vehicle Code (CVC) defines the criteria to be used in establishing weight restrictions on streets within the jurisdiction of the local authorities. The CVC also authorizes any city or county to prohibit, by ordinance, the use of a street by any commemial vehicle or by any vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit within a residence district. Since the area along Butterfield Stage Road does not fit the definitim ora residence district as defined in CVC Section 515, the City does not have the authority to prohibit commercial 3 vehicular traffic exceeding a maximum gross weight limit on Butterfield Stage Road. Moreover, the CVC requires that on roadways, such as Butterfield Stage Road, which connect with or is a continuation of a roadway of an adjoining jurisdiction, that jurisdiction must approve a similar ordinance prohibiting commercial vehicular traffic on their portion of the roadway. The adoption of any weight restriction does not guarantee the elimination of truck traffic on the restricted route. The CVC authorizes trucks to use a restricted route when coming from an unrestricted roadway having ingress and egress by direct route to and from the restricted roadway when necessary for the purpose of making pickups or deliveries of goods, services or merchandise fi.om or to any building or structure located on the restricted roadway or for the purpose of delivering materials to be used in the actual bona fide repair, alteration, remodeling or construction of any building or structure upon the restricted roadway. For these reasons, staff is not recommending the establishment of a weight restriction on Butterfield Stage Road. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available for signing and pavement markings in the Public Works Routine Street Maintenance Account. Attachment: 1. Exhibit "A" - Location Map 2. Exhibit "B" - Letter from Citizens Against Neighborhood Expressways (CANE) 3. Exhibit "C'- Crowne Hill Subdiv/sion Site Plan 4. Exhibit "D' - Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis r:\traffic~commissn~agendaX2001Xl213~Butterfield S~age Roadlajp TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DECEMBER 11,200'1 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:26 P.M., in the City Council Chambers of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Director Naggar presiding. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, and Roberts ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Stone Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes from November 27, 2001. 2 Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001. MOTION: Director Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1, and 2. The motion was seconded by Director Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Director Stone who was absent. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT Community Services Director Parker invited the community to the Winter Wonderland Event, which would be held on Saturday, December 15, 2001, beginning at 8:00 A.M., at the Community Recreation Center, relaying that the activities would include 18 tons of snow, food and craft vendors, and refreshments. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. Minutes.csd\121101 1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:27 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\121101 2 ITEM 2 APPR,Oy~//~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTO~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: January 8, 2002 SUBJECT: Status of the Chaparral Pool Construction PREPARED BY: Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and file a report on the status of the Chaparral Pool construction. BACKGROUND: On July 10, 2001, the Board of Directors awarded a construction contract to California Commercial Pools, Inc. for the Chaparral High School Swimming Pool, Project No. PW00-08CSD in the amount of $2,370,147.71 with a contingency of $237,014.77. Construction began on August 13, 2001. The project includes a 25 yard, eight lane, equal depth competition pool; a separate four lane warm up pool with a diving board; a zero-depth water play area; spectator seating; locker rooms; office space; mechanical room and storage. The City and the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) have entered into a joint use agreement for this aquatic facility. Currently the project is approximately 70% complete. The majority of the underground work has been completed including utilities (electrical, water, sewer and telephone), plumbing and drainage. The shotcrete and tile have been completed on both pools. The block work on the buildings is almost complete. The concrete work for the decking has begun and the landscaping is scheduled to begin the week of January 7th. In early November, the General Manager approved a change order for $92,250 for the pumhase and installation of the competition lighting. This amount is well within the available contingency for the project. The addition of the lighting system will allow for more flexible programming and greater use of the facility. Without any unforeseen delays, construction should be completed before the end of March. A "Grand Opening" celebration will be scheduled as the completion of the facility becomes closer. FISCAL IMPACT: Construction expenses are in accordance with appropriations. R:'~lcCarthC~Agenda Reports\Chaparral Pool Construction Update.doc REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 11, 2001 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:27 P.M., in the City Council Chambers of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Chairman Roberts presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBER: Pratt Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of November 27, 2001. 2 Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001. MOTION: Agency Member Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1, and 2. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Stone who was absent. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. R:\Minutes.rda\121101 ADJOURNMENT At 7:28 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 8, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Ron Roberts, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:~Minutes.rda\121101 ITEM 13 Supplemental Material with regard to Agenda Item No. 13 Received January 4, 2002 0]-04-02^10:49 RCVD HEWITT & O'NEIL THIA M. COCHRAN DEAN DUNN-RANKIN SANDRA A. GALLE WILLIAM E. HALLE ANDREW K. HARTZELL HUGH HEWITT LAWRENCE J. HILTON ATYORNEYS AT LAW 19900 M^cARTHUR BOULEVARD, SUITE 1050 [RVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 (949) 798-0500 · (949) 798-0511 (FAX) EMA[L: counsel(~hewiRoneiLcom WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: (949) 798-0734 EMAIL: doneil (~hewi Roneil,com January 3, 2002 VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL Hon. Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 JOHN D. HUDSON STEVEN }~. [MHOOF DENNIS D. O'NEIL JAY F. PALCHIKOFF PAUL A. ROWE WILLIAM L. TWOMEY JOHN P. YEAGER Re: Planning Application No. PA01-0109 (General Plan Amendment), Planning Application No. PA01-0102 (Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8), Planning Application No. PA01~0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 4) Dear Mayor Roberts and Members of the City Council: This law firm represents Newland Communities ("Newland"), the developers of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 (now known as Paseo del Sol) master planned community. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219/EIR 235 and Development Agreement was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in September of 1988. This was prior to incorporation of the City of Temecula and inclusion of the Paloma del Sol property within the new Temecula municipal boundaries. Since the formation of the City of Temecula, the City Council approved an Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement for Paloma del Sol on January 8, 1993 (the "Development Agreement"). Newland has processed a number of Specific Plan No. 219 amendments and tract maps and addenda to EIR 235 consistent with the terms of the Development Agreement. Newland has now pending before the City Council the above- referenced Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and related Planning Applications and request for certification of Addendum No. 4 to EIR 235. Newland is in receipt of copies of the letters to the Temecula Planning Commission dated November 7, 2001 and November 28, 2001 signed by Darren W. Stroud, an attorney with the law firm of Jackson, DeMarco & Peckenpaugh, representing James and Mary Corona and the Corona family objecting to Newland's pending Planning Applications. I have been given copies to read and asked by Newland to respond to the Coronas' assertions as spelled out in attorney Stroud's letters. Newland also wants me to make a request that the "hold" on the 508 unit multi-family tract in Paloma del Sol, as explained later in this letter, be released. January 3,2002 10019-00002 S:\152\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 2 The Coronas' Objections and Newland's Response The Coronas object to the approval of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and pending land use Planning Applications on a number of grounds and request the City to: 1. Enforce the conditions of Specific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. 1 requiring construction of flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits; and 2. Enforce the mitigation measures required by EIR 235. In the absence of such enforcement, the Coronas state that a subsequent EIR should be prepared prior to consideration of the pending Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and Planning Applications. The Coronas want the hydrology and drainage for the area evaluated in order to mitigate the alleged increase flood hazards to the Coronas' land resulting from development of the Paloma del Sol project and construction of Butterfield Stage Road. The Coronas object to Newland's Planning Applications because, they claim, development of Paloma del Sol creates a drainage issue for their property. However, all of the hydrology studies for Newland's property tell a different story. The facts are that the drainage on Newland's property runs from the northeast to the southwest and is directed into the Temecula Creek Channel through approved and AD 159 constmcted storm drain facilities. Newland's property does not divert any drainage onto the Coronas property, which is located upstream of Paloma del Sol to the southeast. Rather the drainage affecting the Coronas comes from the north and east of their property. The drainage pattern is also affected by Assessment Disthct 159's constmction of Butterfield Stage Road. AD 159 understood these factors and provided for the Butterfield Interceptor Channel to direct the flow across the Coronas' property at the easterly boundary of AD 159. AD 159 built the downstream facilities, but unfortunately did not build the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. So, the Coronas complain of a drainage problem that arises from water flowing from east and not from Newland's property, which is located to the northwest. It is this failure on the part of AD 159 to construct the Butterfield Interceptor Channel that constitutes the basis for the Coronas' storm water drainage problems on their property and really has nothing to do with the development of Paloma del Sol. The Coronas' Contentions and Newland's Response Admittedly, there is some evidence that during heavy storms the surface waters which have historically sheet flowed from the northeast to the southwest comer of the Corona property accumulate and cause a "ponding" condition to exist on an area at the southwest comer of the Corona property. This is the area where the Butterfield Stage Road intersects State Highway 79. The Coronas contend that the constmction of the Paloma del Sol project has effectively blocked drainage across their property, creating significantly increased flood hazards to their and to upstream properties. They argue, a planned upstream storm water interceptor facility (the Butterfield Interceptor Channel) to mitigate this flooding on their property has not January3,2002 10019-00002 S:\I52\CORR\OI120003.LTR.do¢ City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 3 yet been constructed. The Coronas claim Newland is responsible for solving this problem and the City should not approve discretionary land use entitlements for Newland until the Butterfield Interceptor Channel is built. The Coronas continue to refer to an April 6, 1988 letter from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, a May 16, 1988 letter from the developers' engineers (Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates) responding to the Flood Control April 6, 1988 and a letter from the Senior Civil Engineer at the County Flood Control District dated May 26, 1988. These letters were prepared at the time the developer of the Specific Plan No. 219 planned community was seeking the original entitlement permit approvals from the County of Riverside. The April 6, 1988 letter from Riverside County Flood Control raises issues regarding the potential for diversion of storm water from its natural tributary drainage course. The developers' engineers' response letter dated May 16, 1988 acknowledges the need for construction of flood control facilities to intercept the storm waters tributary to this area. The May 26, 1988 letter from the senior civil engineer at the Riverside County Flood Control District to the Riverside County Planning Department states the problems raised in the April 6, 1988 letter have been largely corrected by the applicant. Further, the May 26, 1988 letter points out the need for a permanent flood control facility onsite or offsite before development downstream occurs. It is this May 26, 1988 Flood Control District "comment letter" the Coronas have been relying on to support their position. However, the Assessment District 159 EIR described the Butterfield Interceptor Channel as the mitigation measure needed to resolve any flooding caused by the construction of Butterfield Stage Road. The Butterfield Interceptor Channel is the "offsite" solution to handling the storm water on the Coronas' property. An interim detention basin has been constructed on approximately 20 acres of the southeast portion of Paloma del Sol. Pursuant to Condition 40 of Tentative Tract 24182, this "onsite" detention basin must remain in place until such time that the Butterfield Interceptor Channel or some other adequate facility is built to convey offsite storm flows to the Temecula Creek. The 1999 Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 Some members of the City Council will recall this is not the first time the Council, the City Attorney and the City staff have reviewed these issues raised by the Coronas. In fact, the City has considered a number of applications for modifications to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and tract maps over the years as chronologically listed in the staff report. As they have in the past, the Coronas, through their legal counsel, resubmit the same documents and arguments each time Newland's applications for Paloma del Sol are submitted to the Temecula Planning Commission and City Council for consideration. The Coronas continue to assert that it is illegal for the Planning Commission and City Council to approve the modifications to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and tract maps without enforcing the purported conditions of approval requiring the construction of flood control facilities to protect their land. Nevertheless, the Planning Commission and the City Council have in every case approved Newland's January3,2002 10019-00002 S:\I52\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 4 applications to amend the Specific Plan 219 and modify tract maps for Paloma del Sol because it has been determined that the Coronas' arguments are without merit. Most recently, in October 1999, the Coronas appealed the Planning Commission's approval of four planning applications submitted by Newland for Paloma del Sol. They based their appeal entirely on their claim that Newland should be required to build the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. The staff determined that the EIR for Assessment District 159 had addressed the issue by requiring the Butterfield Interceptor Channel as a mitigation measure to intercept the tributary drainage flows and provide flood protection to Butterfield Stage Road, State Route 79 South, and downstream properties. The staff further determined there was no nexus between the Butterfield Intemeptor Channel and Newland's four planning applications. The staff was clear that the Butterfield Intemeptor Channel was to be built by Assessment District 159, and Newland had "no control over the timing of that process." Accordingly, the staff recommended denial of the Coronas' appeal. On November 9, 1999, the City Council concurred with the staff's analysis and denied the Coronas' appeal. The Pending Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 On November 28, 2001, consistent with their prior actions involving revised entitlement permits for Paloma del Sol, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Specific Plan 219 Amendment No. 8, the related Planning Applications and certification of Addendum No. 4 to the final EIR. The Planning Commission accepted the staff's answer to attorney Stroud's letters as stated in their November 28, 2001 report to the Planning Commission as follows: "Public Works Department staff believes the issue of timing and construction of the flood control facilities has already been addressed. Moreover, staff believes the current planning actions being proposed have no affect on the timing and construction of the flood control improvements." The Coronas cannot point to any other significant difference or to any change in circumstances that would require the City to reach a different result. Newland's valuable development vested rights set forth in the Development Agreement are being challenged because Assessment District 159 cannot, without the cooperation of the Coronas, construct the Butterfield Interceptor Channel which is its responsibility to do. Because the City has already rejected the Coronas' objection to four nearly identical planning applications and the Coronas did not challenge the City's decision in court in timely manner, the Coronas are now estopped from making their objections anew before the City Council. Newland submits this matter and the issues raised by the Coronas have been thoroughly researched, analyzed and reviewed by the City Attorney and staff. The objections the Coronas raise to Newland's current Specific Plan Amendments and Planning Applications are almost identical to their objections to the four planning applications approved by the City Council in November of 1999. Full environmental analysis in compliance with the California January3,2002 10019-00002 S:\152\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 5 Environmental Quality Act has occurred. Notice, public heatings and due process has been satisfied. There is no evidence in fact or in law to support the Coronas' contentions. Assessment District No. 159 Assessment District No. 159 ("AD 159") was formed in 1988 to fund certain regional public improvements and other infrastructure systems within the AD 159 boundaries. In 1991, a supplemental district was approved to increase funds available for the cost of the original AD 159 improvements and to add new district improvements, including the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. The Butterfield Intemeptor Channel was planned to be constructed on the Corona property east of Butterfield Stage Road at the easterly boundary of AD 159. The Butterfield Intemeptor Channel is to be built to the east and upstream from the Paloma del Sol community and its purpose is to collect waters flowing from these undeveloped areas and divert them into Temecula Creek. Butterfield Stage Road was constructed above grade in 1994-1995 as an Assessment District 159 project. Contrary to the Coronas' contention, Butterfield Stage Road was not built by Newland. Butterfield Stage Road and the Butterfield Interceptor Channel facility are improvements under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside and Assessment District No. 159, not Newland Communities or the City of Temecula. Many of the other AD 159 improvements, including the construction of Butterfield Stage Road, the widening of SR 79, the modifications to Temecula Creek and the installation and sizing of the associated drainage facilities, were dependent on the Butterfield Interceptor Channel being built. In hindsight, the Butterfield Interceptor Channel probably should have been built before Butterfield Stage Road. For reasons not known to Newland and surely not under the control of Newland, this did not happen. As a matter of fact, once Butterfield Stage Road was built by AD 159, the ponding the Coronas complain about would occur after a heavy rainfall. This condition would exist on the Corona property regardless of whether or not any development ever happened on the Paloma del Sol land. As originally contemplated, the improvements AD 159 were to build cost about $108 million. The Paloma del Sol, Specific Plan No. 219, property has been taxed to pay its fair share of the improvements. To date, the Paloma del Sol property has been assessed approximately $27 million for the improvements. This payment included construction of the portion of the Temecula Creek Channel that is designed to accept flow from the Butterfield Intemeptor Channel. Newland recognizes its obligation as one of the major landowners in AD 159 to participate in the completion of the Butterfield Intemeptor Channel. Newland has remained willing to cooperate in any good faith effort to resolve outstanding design and funding issues associated with getting the Channel built. To date, the Coronas refuse to accept their fair share of this obligation. Butterfield Interceptor Channel All of the interested parties, including the Coronas, agree that AD 159 was, and is, responsible for building the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. The Coronas play a key role in the January 3, 2002 100194)0002 S :\152\CO RR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 6 construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel because they must agree on its location and make the land available for this improvement at a reasonable price. To this end, Newland has been working diligently with the Coronas and the County of Riverside for over five years in an attempt to facilitate and accelerate the construction of the Butterfield Intemeptor Channel. The County has analyzed various alignments for the Channel and has examined additional alternatives at the request of the Coronas. The original design was an open trapezoidal channel across the Savala and Corona properties at the east end of the AD 159 boundaries. The Butterfield Intemeptor Channel would then continue under SR 79 and extend south to Temecula Creek. The cost was estimated at $3.5 million. The Coronas have objected to and resist the original design because the facility, they say, would adversely impact their current farming operations. In an attempt to provide a system that would not interfere with the Coronas' agricultural uses, a subsurface covered box culvert was studied but this was determined to be infeasible. The County Flood Control District looked at another design alternative suggested by the Coronas' engineers consisting of two channels. This dual channel system would include an open channel located along the easterly boundary of the Corona property to intercept the majority of the drainage from the east along with a smaller underground facility at the eastern boundary of AD 159. The dual channel system is estimated to cost $8.7 million and would benefit all of the remaining 160 acres of the Corona property not originally included in the AD 159 boundaries. The Coronas have stated their preference for the dual channel alternative, but maintain their current farming operations could not support this level of funding. Methods of providing deferred assessments have been offered and suggestions that the Coronas dedicate the necessary right of way for the dual channel system to reduce costs have been rejected. The goal sought to be achieved in the meetings with the County and the Coronas of finding a method to fund the Butterfield Interceptor Channel and then be able to apportion the costs of the improvements on an equitable basis has so far failed. This is due, in large part, to the Coronas' desire that they receive all of the benefits of a storm water protection system for all of their property without being willing to accept any of the costs of constructing these facilities. Supplemental EIR The attorney Stroud for the Coronas argues that a supplemental EIR must be prepared to address increased flood hazards. In general, the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") limits later environmental review for subsequent land use approvals to issues or impacts which were not addressed in prior environmental documentation. The intent of CEQA is to allow public agencies to rely on prior environmental documentation, unless the project itself or other circumstances have changed significantly since its adoption and these changes have a negative impact on the environment which cannot be mitigated. Under Public Resources Code Section January 3,2002 10019-00002 S:\I52\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 7 21166 (CEQA Section 21166) and Cal. Code of Regs. 15162 (CEQA Guideline Section 15162), a supplemental EIR is not necessary unless major revisions are required to the original EIR as a result of: (a) substantial changes in the project which have an increased negative impact on the environment; (b) substantial changes in the circumstances of the project which have an increased negative impact on the environment; or (c) new information which was not available when the original EIR was prepared which indicates that the project has a substantial adverse impact which cannot be mitigated. The CEQA statutes and guidelines are very clear on what the test is for requiring a supplemental EIR. Once an EIR has been prepared for a project, no further environmental review may be required unless one of these specified triggering events occur. A public agency's discretion to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR is very limited once an EIR has been prepared for a project. The statute is phrased in prohibitory language. An agency shall not require a supplemental EIR unless one of the statutory exceptions exist. The policy behind the statute is to avoid repeating the CEQA process when environmental review has been completed and the time for challenging that process has expired (Fund for Environmental Defense v. County of Orange (1988) 204 Cal. App. 3d 1538, Long Beach Savings and Loan Association v. Long Beach Redevelopment Agency (1986) 188 Cal. App. 3d 249, Bowman v. City of Petaluma (1986) 185 Cal. App. 3d 1065). CEQA Section 21166 is designed to provide a degree of certainty and finality once environmental review has been completed for a project. Even a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact does not require the preparation of a subsequent EIR if mitigation measures are adopted which reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (Laurel Heights Improvement Association of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of the University of California ("Laurel Heights I/") (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112.) Court cases uphold the presumption against the preparation of subsequent EIR if impacts resulting from changes to the project do not differ significantly from those described in the project EIR, a further EIR is not required (Bowman). A city may not, therefore, require a supplemental or focused EIR unless it finds, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one of the three exceptions to the rule against requiring a further EIR exists. In this case as it was in November of 1999, there is no evidence to support such findings. All reasonable doubt should be decided in favor of the city (Laurel Heights). A city may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. CEQA Guideline Section 15164(b)(e). This Guideline reflects case law approving use of an EIR addendum to determine whether a subsequent or supplemental EIR might be required. In the Bowman case, the court upheld the City's use of an EIR addendum to evaluate changes to the project. The court held that using an addendum as a January3,2002 10019-00002 S:\152\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 8 mechanism for determining whether a further EIR should be required was an appropriate way to fill in a procedural gap in CEQA and the Guidelines. Nothing in CEQA or the Guidelines requires that the city conduct an investigation to ferret out changes in circumstances or new information. CEQA and the Guidelines do not mandate any specific procedure for cities to follow in determining whether a supplemental E1R is required. The Guidelines simply provide that a brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a supplemental EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15162 should be included in an: (i) addendum to an EIR, (ii) the city's required findings on the project or (iii) elsewhere in the record. On this point the planning staff report and position adopted by the Planning Commission states: "With regard to enviromnental analysis, Planning staff does not believe that the planning actions as proposed have any significant environmental affect on flood hazard issues. Moreover, staff believes the proposed Addendum to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR adequately addresses potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, staff does not believe that additional environmental analysis is necessary." Even assuming the Coronas' contentions are correct, they have no bearing on compliance with prior land use entitlement conditions or whether a supplemental EIR should be prepared in connection with the pending Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment and related Planning Applications. This is because Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and the Planning Applications under review will have no impact on upstream properties or their exposure to flood control hazards. The existing Paloma del Sol approximately 20-acre detention basin in Tract 24182 will protect downstream properties from any storm water drainage entering from the east. This follows from the fact that no storm water from the Paloma del Sol project is directed upstream. The approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and related Planning Applications will have no physical consequences at all on the property owned by the Coronas and there are absolutely no new significant adverse environmental effects to analyze in a subsequent EIR. Simply stated, there is no nexus or relationship to the pending Paloma del Sol Planning Applications and drainage issues on the Corona property. Interim Detention Basin and Hold on 508 Multi-family Units On February 2, 1998, the City Council, in approving Paloma del Sol Planning Application No. PA 96-0258 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182), added Condition No. 40 dealing with an interim detention basin located on approximately 20 acres at the southeastern portion of Tentative Tract 24182. The condition required Newland to set aside and maintain this area entitled for 188 residential lots as a storm water detention basin until such time that upstream drainage facilities are constructed to convey offsite storm flows to an adequate outlet. This condition constitutes Newland's "onsite" mitigation to protect properties to the west of Butterfield Stage Road in the event of an extreme storm episode when storm waters could breech Butterfield Stage Board. January3,2002 10019-00002 S:\152\CORR\01120003.LTR,doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 9 In an attempt to address the concems of the Coronas and provide further incentives for Newland to continue in its efforts to resolve the Butterfield Interceptor Channel matter, the City Council on November 16, 1999 placed a "hold" on Planning Areas 6A and 6B of Parcel Map 29431, Parcels 6 and 7, consisting of 508 multi-family units in the Paloma del Sol project. Even though Newland was advised by counsel and the staff acknowledged there was no legal requirement to accept this limitation, Newland recognized the need to show its good faith willingness to continue the efforts to work towards a resolution of the storm water drainage problem in this area. Newland accepted this restriction and offered the collateral of 508 multi- family units as an "equity holding." It was clearly the intent of the City and Newland as reflected in the City Council meeting minutes that this would be an interim condition. Newland must now respectfully request the City Council release the hold on the 508 multi-family units in Planning Area 6A and 6B of Parcel Map 29431. Newland has negotiated in good faith with the County and the Coronas on numerous occasions since the City Council imposed this development restriction on their property in Novemberof 1999. As pointed out earlier in this letter, the Coronas have failed to agree on the various design alternatives and funding options for building the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. Newland remains willing to work with the County and the Coronas to resolve the issue of building the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. However, it would no longer be appropriate and constitute a denial of Newland's property rights protected by the Paloma del Sol Development Agreement to further interfere with Newland's opportunity to develop Planning Areas 6A and 6B. Conclusion The Coronas have offered no evidence of noncompliance with the conditions of the Paloma del Sol project approvals, any significant changed circumstances, or new information which was not considered in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 and EIR 235 as further reviewed in prior and in the current Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, related Planning Applications and Addendum No. 4 to EIR235. The AD 159 Butterfield Stage Road construction, and not Paloma del Sol, has caused the storm drain ponding to exist on the Corona property. The Coronas have a remedy by taking action against the County or they can cooperate in allowing the Butterfield Interceptor Channel to be constructed by AD 159. Nevertheless, the Coronas continue to pursue groundless efforts to manipulate the City's land use discretionary powers to their advantage while threatening the property rights of Newland. There is absolutely no counection between the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 and Planning Applications currently pending before the City Council and storm drain issues raised by the Coronas. Any issues the Coronas have regarding flood concerns should be directed to Assessment District No. 159 and the County of Riverside, not the City and Newland. This has consistently been the position of Newland. Newland has been willing and continues to be willing to work with the Coronas and the County on a solution to the storm water drainage issues impacting the area, but the Coronas need to demonstrate a greater willingness to cooperate in the process. Newland has acted in good faith in the negotiations and under the circumstances must request the City Council release the hold on the 508 multi-family units imposed on Newland over two years ago. January 3, 2002 10019-00002 S :\ 152\CO RR\01120003, LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 10 While the issues of the design, funding and construction of the AD 159 Butterfield Interceptor Channel seem to be languishing, Newland is incurring significant costs of maintaining an interim detention basin that protects their and other properties westerly of Butterfield Stage Road. This interim detention basin also prevents Newland from developing 188 lots already entitled under the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. It is this major restriction on Newland's development rights and not the hold on developing the 508 multi-family units which will continue to provide the incentive for Newland to work towards a solution for constructing the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. In summary: Newland has vested property and development rights under the terms of the Paloma del Sol Development Agreement which is binding on the City. Any flooding that might occur on the Coronas' property is caused by the construction of Butterfield Stage Road by AD 159 and can be resolved by the construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel by AD 159. The Coronas' remedy lies with the County and AD 159. There is no causal relationship or "nexus" between Specific plan No. 219 Amendment No. 8 and related Planning Applications and storm drainage issues raised by the Coronas on their land. There are no substantial changes in the Paloma del Sol project, changed circumstances or new information having an adverse impact on the environment requiring a supplemental EIR. Newland has met with the County and the Coronas to work on solutions for construction the Butterfield Interceptor Channel, but the Coronas are unwilling to accept their fair share of the costs. Newland respectfully requests the City to release the hold on the 508 multi-family dwelling units in Planning Areas 6A and 6B. Continuing the hold would provide no public purpose and is legally unsupportable. Newland has satisfied its obligation to protect its and other properties westerly of Butterfield Stage Road by maintaining the interim detention basin or equivalent facility which must remain in place until such time as upstream drainage facilities are constructed. January 3,2002 10019-00002 S:\I52\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc City of Temecula January 3, 2002 Page 11 On behalf of Newland, I therefore submit there is no need to consider adding new conditions or to require further environmental documentation and respectfully request the City Council accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve Specific Plan 219 Amendment No. 8, the related Planning Applications and certify Addendum No. 4 to EIR 235. Further, Newland no longer consents to the hold on developing the 508 multi-family units in Planning Areas 6A and 6B of Pamel Map 29431 and requests to be released from this hold. Very truly yours, Dennis D. O'Neil DDO/clt cc: James M. Delhamer Dean Meyer Sam Alhadeff Peter M. Thorson January 3, 2002 10019-00002 S:\152\CORR\01120003.LTR.doc TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APP R. O.V:~.,./~ CITY ATTORNEY '---~/-"~z~' .-~,- DIRECTOR OF FIN~,NC~ CITY MANAGER ~ ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager January 8, 2002 Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Prepared by: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SP-4 AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF BU'YrERFIELD STAGE ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD. (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019) ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0102 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, WEST OF BUTFERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION. R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc 1 3. READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 4. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 293 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CENTER LOT, 1 PARK SITE LOT AND 16 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS AND PARK SITES OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955 030-032 BACKGROUND Specific Plan No. 4 (Paloma del Sol) was approved bythe Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988 as County SP-219. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Council approved various amendments to the Specific Plan, in the period of time from 1994 through 1999. A formal submittal for these new amendments was received on February 28, 2001. Staff held a Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant on April 5, 2001. From June to the present, staff has conducted additional meetings with the applicant on various revisions to the text and figures in the Specific Plan Amendment and the vesting tentative tract map. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 The 15 acres associated with existing Planning Area 27 will be merged into proposed Planning 28 and designated for Medium Density single-family residential uses. The commercial uses are being located to the southwestern corner of the project site. A new Planning Area 27 has been re-located to the south and will be established as 9 acres of open space. The reconfigured Planning Area 28 has been expanded from 25.0 acres to 49.4 acres. Based on a density of 2-5 density units per acre, the number of dwelling units will increase from 113 to 190 units. The Temecula Valley Unified School District has determined the 10.0 acre elementary school site planned for Planning Area 29B will instead be located in the Crown Hill development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, the area has been eliminated and incorporated into Planning Areas 27, 28, and 29. R:\S P A\200I\0I-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 2 The 2.9 acre Park and Recreation area designated for existing Planning Area 24 will be incorporated into the existing Greenbelt/Pasco system. A new Planning Area 24 will be designated as a 1.0 acre private Park/Recreation area adjacent to Planning Area 27. · Planning Area 29 remains as a 5.0 acre Park/Recreation area. but, will be relocated north of the open space area adjacent to Planning Area 27. · The commercial uses from Planning Area 27 will replace the Medium High residential uses in Planning Area 38. The residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been lowered from Medium High (5-8 DU/AC) to Medium (2-5 DU/AC). These changes will result in a reduction of 3 residential units in Planning Area 5 and a reduction of 107 residential units in Planning Area 23. Amendment of General Plan Land Use Map · The City's General Plan Land Use Map must be amended to reflect the changed land use designations affected by the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment. Vestin,q Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 modifies the previously approved Amendment No 3 by creating 293 single-family residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park site lot and 16 open space lots within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29. ANALYSIS Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes to relocate the existing Neighborhood Commercial area from the southwest corner of Pauba and Buttedield Stage Roads to the southwest corner of De Portola Road and Campanula Way. With regard to residential uses, the amendment would result in an overall 2%-3% reduction in residential dwelling units within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan boundary. The previously planned elementary school facility proposed for Planning Area 29B has been eliminated and public and private parks will be reconfigured and relocated. Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 The applicant is requesting to relocate the 15 acre Neighborhood Commercial area at the southwest corner of Pauba Road and Butterfield Stage Road (existing Planning Area 27) to the 8 acre Planning Area 38 located within the village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road. The reason given by the applicant for the proposed relocation includes concern over land use compatibility issues and their doubts about being able to attract a major commercial tenant. The Commission concurs that a high potential exists for land use conflicts between the currently allowed commercial development and the existing and proposed residential development that surround the area. Moreover, Commission believes it is appropriate to concentrate commercial development within the existing village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road. The applicant is proposing to amend the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance to provide for Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial uses and development standards for Planning Area 38. The Commission believes it is important to establish both vehicular and pedestrian access points between Planning Area 38 and adjacent Planning Areas. To ensure that these connections are achieved, the Commission recommends that a vehicular access point be established between R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc 3 Planning Area 38 and Planning Area 36 and be identified on Figures 15A and 15KK. This has been made a recommended condition of approval of the Specific Plan Amendment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed uses and development standards within Planning Area 38 and believes they are consistent with the Specific Plan and the long term vision in the General Plan. In addition, the Commission believes the expanded commercial area will enhance the village center and be compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses. The existing Planning Area 29B, which was located within the boundary of tract 24188, was intended to accommodate a 10-acre elementary school facility. However, the Temecula Valley Unified School District has since indicated that the school will actually be located in the Crown Hill development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, Planning Area 29B will be eliminated and the 10 acres will be re-allocated for parks, open space, and some medium density residential development. Two neighborhood park/recreation areas will be provided within Tract 24188. Planning Area 29, which has been reconfigumd and relocated slightly, will accommodate a 5.0 acre public park/recreation area. In addition, Planning Area 24 will accommodate a private 1.0 acre park/recreation area. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 reduces the total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan from the currently allowed 5,246 units to a maximum of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units. This dwelling unit decrease represents a 2% to 3% reduction in residential dwelling units. The gross project density also decreases similarly from 3.8 density units per acre to 3.6 density units per acre. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted in the original Specific Plan, the total decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at 5,137 density units) to 10% (at 5,072 density units). General Plan Map Amendment The General Plan Land Use Map Amendment is necessary to conform to the current General Plan land uses and development criteria set forth in the proposed Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8. The Planning Commission has determined that the map amendments are consistent with the City's General Plan and both the amended and un-amended portions of the Specific Plan. The proposed General Plan Land Use Map is located in Exhibit B of Attachment No. 1. Vestinq Tentative Parcel Map Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 is located within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29 of Specific Plan No. 4. The amendment serves to modify Amendment No. 3 by reducing the number of single-family residential lots from 351 to 293. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is included as Exhibit A of Attachment 4. Pedestrian Connections The previously approved map for 24188 had various pedestrian connections incorporated into the design so as to enhance a pedestrian's ability to access adjacent streets and areas. The Planning Commission is recommending that three separate connections be incorporated into the latest map amendment to maintain these connections. One connection would occur between Street "D" and Butterfield Stage Road. A second access would connect Street"O" with Butterfield Stage Road. And a third connection, located within the interior of the tract, will provide pedestrian access between Streets "G" and "K" see Attachment 9 for pedestrian connection locations. R:\S P A~2001\01~)102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 4 The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachment 10) indicating that they agree with the "G" Street/"K" Street connection. However, they do not believe that the "D" Street and "O" Street connections are appropriate. The applicant has expressed a concern regarding security of residences and the potential for young children to wander unattended through the connections out onto Butterfield Stage Road. The Commission debated these concerns, and concluded that pedestrian connection points have been utilized safely in other locations in the City. Therefore, the Commission determined that the concerns did not warrant deleting these connections. It should also be noted that various exhibits within the amended Specific Plan denote that pedestrian connections be provided to Butterfield Stage Road in the vicinity of both "D" and "O" Streets. Should the Council determine that these connections are not appropriate, the Specific Plan document would also require a future modification prior to its approval. Adiacent Property Owner Correspondence On November 7, 2001 staff received correspondence from Darren Stroud, attorney with the Law Firm of Jackson DeMarco & Peckenpaugh (see Attachment 11 ). Mr. Streud represents James & Mary Corona. The Coronas own land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Butter[ield Stage Road and Highway 79 South. Their correspondence contends that the project applicants have failed to construct necessary flood control facilities in accordance with a previously required condition of approval and mitigation measures associated with the original approval of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The correspondence indicates that the failure to construct these facilities has resulted in a flood hazard on the Corona's property. Mr. Stroud is requesting that the City enfome the previously required drainage related condition of approval and associated mitigation measures by requiring construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits. Moreover, in the absence of such a condition, Mr. Stroud is requesting that a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report be prepared to evaluate current hydrology of the area and to mitigated increased flood hazards to the Corona's property. On November 20, 2001 correspondence was received from the applicant's attorney, Sam Alhadeff of Alhadeff & Solar, LLP responding to Mr. Stroud's November 7~h letter (See Attachment 12). Mr. AIhadeff contends that the four planning actions being proposed at this time by the applicant within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan have no affect on or relationship to the flood control facilities. Moreover, Mr. Alhadeff believes the timing and construction of these facilities is dictated by an existing Assessment District 159 and thus believes the Council should take no action regarding the flood control facilities. Mr. Alhadeff has also requested that the variety of previous correspondence be incorporated into the record. On November 29, 2001 Mr. Stroud provided a second letter (see Attachment 13) in which Mr. Stroud reiterates the positions previously outlined in his November 7th letter. In addition, he contends that the City failed to properly notice his clients, the Coronas, 10 days prior to the P[anning Commission public hearing in violation of both the Government Code and City Development Code. On November 29, 2001 a second letter was also received from Mr. Alhadeff requesting that a variety of previous correspondence, which has a bearing on this issue, be incorporated into the record. All this correspondence has been attached to this staff report as requested. With regard to the issue of noticing the Coronas about the Planning Commission Public Hearing, the applicants provided mailing labels which were certified by a Title Company. The labels represented all property owners on the latest tax assessment role owning property within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan boundary as well as a 600-foot radius outside the boundary. Upon staff research and discussion, the Commission determined that notice was indeed mailed to the owners of the Corona's property as identified on the latest County assessment role over 10 days prior to the R:\S P A~2001\014)102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 5 Planning Commission public hearing. It should also be noted that the Coronas and their attorney were both provided a copy of the Planning Commission staff report prior to the hearing and were both in attendance at the hearing. Following the Commission meeting, staff has provided an additional notice to the Coronas about the scheduled Council meeting. Upon considering all testimony, the Planning Commission concluded that the issue of timing and construction of the flood control facilities cannot be addressed as part of the currently proposed planning actions but instead can only be resolved in association with Assessment District 159 actions. Moreover, the Commission believes the current planning actions being proposed have no physical affect on or relationship to drainage/flooding issues in the southeast corner of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Boundary. Furthermore, the Commission believes the existing interim flood control facilities that were already required in the vicinity are adequate to address potential flood impacts until such time that permanent facilities are constructed. Subsequently, the Commission concluded that the prohibition on additional building permit activity within the Paloma de Sol Specific Plan boundary should not be required as requested by Mr. Stroud and the Coronas. With regard to environmental analysis, the Commission does not believe that the planning actions as proposed have any significant environmental affect on flood hazard issues. Moreover, the Commission believes the proposed Addendum to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR adequately addresses potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, it is recommending that additional environmental analysis not be undertaken in association with the proposed planning actions. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temeeula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City in conjunction with an overall reduction of dwelling units and realignment of Campanula Way. Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1 Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. The Commission acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Moreover, the Commission concluded that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed and is recommending that the City Council certify the Addendum. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council Certify Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the General Plan Amendment and Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. R:kS P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-0I.doc 6 FISCAL IMPACT None. Attachments: City Council Resolution No. 01-__ Certifying Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental impact Report for SP-4 and Approving a General Plan Amendment (Planning Application No. 01-0109) - Page 8 Exhibit A - Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR for SP-4 Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Designation Map City Council Resolution No. 01 Approving Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (Planning Application 01-0102)--Page 9 Exhibit A - Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan (SP-4) Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan Amendment City Council Ordinance No. 01 - Approving Amended Zoning Standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment Ne. 8--Page 12 Exhibit A - Amended Zoning Standards City Council Resolution No. 01 - Approving Vesting Tentative Tract Amendment No. 4 (Planning Application 01-0117) --Page 13 Exhibit A - Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval for VTTM 24188 (Amendment No. 4) 5. Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 28, 2001- Page 16 PC Resolution recommending certification of Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approval of General Plan Land Use Map and Specific Plan Amendment - Page 17 PC Resolution recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Map No. 24188 Amendment No. 4 - Page 18 8. Reduced Specific Plan Land Use Map Change - Page 19 9. Pedestrian Connections Location Map - Page 20 10. T& B Planning Consultants Pedestrian Connection letter dated November 1,2001 - Page 21 11. Darrel Stroud Letter dated November 7, 2001 - Page 22 12. Sam Alhadeff Letter dated November 20, 2001 - Page 23 13. Darrel Stroud Letter dated November 28, 2001 - Page 24 14. Sam Alhadeff Letter dated November 29, 2001 - Page 25 R:\S P A~2001~01 *0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 7 ATrACHMENT NO 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FEIR AND APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT R:\S P A~2~OI\01-0102 Pa/oma De/Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-! 1-01.doc 8 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SP-4 AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD. (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019) WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0109 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on November 7, 2001 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on ,2001, at a duiy noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, and made all required findings and determinations relative thereto after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby certifies Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, as contained in Exhibit A, and makes all required findings and determinations relative thereto and finds that the Addendum was prepared consistent with the applicable CEQA provisions and that the Addendum was considered in association with the approval of the Specific Plan Amendment. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 1 Section 3. General Plan Amendment. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Application changing the General Plan Land Use Designations on property located east of Margarita Road, west of Buttedield Stage Road, north of Highway 79 South and south of Pauba Road as contained in Exhibit B to this Resolution. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of January, 2002. Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 8th day of January, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 2 EXHIBIT A ADDENDUM NO 4 TO THE FINAL I=IR FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~cc gpa res..doc 3 PALOMA DEL SOL ADDENDUM N0.4 TO EIR 235 Prepared: October 24, 2001 PALOMA DEL SOL TABLE OF CONTENTS A. B. C. INTRODUCTION .......... ~ .................................................................................................. 2 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 2 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................. 3 SUMMARY ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 7 II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 9 A. SEISMIC SnVE~ ................................................................................................................. 9 B. S~O~'ES ~ EROSIOn ...................................................................................................... 10 C. W.IND EROSION AND BLOWSAND ..................................................................................... 10 D. I~OODING ......................................................................................................................... 11 E. NOISE ................................................................................................................................ 11 F. CLIMATE AND .MR QVALrrY ............................................................................................ 11 G.' WATER AND SEWER ....~ .................................................................................................... 11 H. TOXIC SUBSTANCES .......................................................................................................... 13 I. AGmCULTURE .................................................................................................................. 13 J. OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ................................................................................... 14 g. WILDLIFE/VEGETATION .................................................................................................. 14 L. M~-~.L RESO~CES ...................................................................................................... 17 M. ENERGY RESOt~RCES .......... ~ ............................................................................................. 17 N. SCENIC HIGHWAYS ........................................................................................................... 18 O. CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES ........................................................................ ! 9 P. CIRCULATION AND TRAmC ............................................................................................ 19 P. WATER AND SEWER ......................................................................................................... 23 R. FIRE SERVICES ................................................................................................................. 25 S. Sm~lLr~ SERVICES ....................................... : ................................................................... 26 T. SCHOOLS ........................................................................................................................... 27 U. PARKS AND RECREATION ................................................................................................. 28 V.' UTILITIES .......................................................................................................................... 30 W. SOLID WASTE ................................................................................................................... 34 X. LIBRAmES ......................................................................................................................... 34 Y. HEALTH SERVICES ........................................................................................................... 35 Z. AIRPORTS ......................................................................... :. ............................................... 36 AA. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS ................................................................................................ 36 III. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 36 ADnENn M NO. 4 TO EIR 235 I. INTRODUCTION A. BACKGROUND The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and ce~fied by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Addendum No. 1 was prepared in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Temecula City Council in 1992. Addendum No. 1 added a Development Agreement which did not change the physical impacts identified in the EIR since it only dealt with collection of fees, improvements to parks and dedication of parks to the City for maintenance. When Amendments No. 5 and 6 were approved in January of 1997 and January of 1998 respectively, the City Council determined that the project was consistent with a project for which an FJR had already been prepared. Therefore, the Council concluded that no further environmental analysis was required for these amendments. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula. Addendum No. 2 evaluated institutions such as facilities for the aged, congregate care residential facilities, information center and nursery schools and found that no additional environmental impact evaluation would be required. Addendum No. 3 evaluated the potential impacts resulting from Specific Plan Amendment No. 7, which is referred to herein as the "Approved Project.". This Addendum (Addendum No. 4) evaluates the current project, which is discussed .in full in Specific Plan Amendment No. 219 and is referred to herein as the "Proposed Project." The original Paloma del Sol EIR No. 235 and Addendum Numbers 1, 2 and 3 are hereby incorporated by reference into this document. Copies of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and subsequent Amendments, as well as the original Paloma del Sol EIR No. 235 and all four addendums (i.e., Addendums Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4), are available at the City of Temecula Planning Department, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplement environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occur: (1) substantial changes are proposed in the project that will require major revisions of the EIR; (2) substantial changes occur with respect to cimumstances under which the project is being undertaken that require major revisions in the EIR; or O) new information which was not known at the time that the EIR was certified and completed becomes available. None of the situations have occurred as a result of Amendment No. 8. By statute, the environmental analysis need not examine those significant effects of the subsequent projects that: (1) have already have been mitigated or avoided as part of the prior project approval, as evidenced in the findings adopted for the prior project, or (2) that were "examined at a sufficient level of detail" in the prior EIR that they can "be mitigated or avoided by site specific revisions, the impositions of conditions, or by other means in connection with the approval of the latter project." (Public Resources Code §21094, subd. (a).) Thus, this Addendum {Addendum No. 4) only addresses those project-related effects that have changed since the original EIR and subsequent Addendums PALOMA DEL SOL Page 2 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 (Addendum No. 3 in particular) were certified and which might feasibly result in potentially significant impacts. When the current project (Amendment No. 8 to Paloma del Sol Specific Plan 219) is compared to the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 project, there is a decrease of 474 dwelling units and 8.5 acres of commercial uses. This document constitutes Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235, which was certified on September 6, 1988 (SCH#8707003). EIR No. 235 analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the approved Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an addendum to an existing EIR is appropriate where, in order to comply with CEQA, the EIR requires only "minor technical changes or additions" that do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environmenff (CEQA Guidelines § 15164). A variety of land use changes were incorporated into Amendments No. 4 through No. 7 of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219. For the purposes of this Addendum a comparison will be made between the original approved Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the proposed land use changes for Paloma del Sol Amendment No. 8. Approved land uses changes for Amendments No. 4 through No. 7 and the proposed land use changes for Amendment No. 8 are described below: Amendments 1, 2, and 3 were prepared under County jurisdiction and there are no records to be referenced for them. The following Amendments were prepared under City of Temecula jurisdiction and are described below: Amendment No. 4 added 6.5 acres of Very High density residential to Planning Area 6. It also added 1.5 acres of park to Planning Area 37, reduced community/neighborhood commercial area in Planning Area 1 by 4.9 acres, and reduced major roads by 3.1 acres. Amendment No. 5 resulted in several Land Use Plan modifications, including: An increase in the number of Medium density dwelling units from 2,338 to 2,487; A reduction in the number of Medium-High density dwelling units from 2,356 to 2,251; A reduction in the number of multi-family dwelling units from 910 to 590; A 4.0-acre park/recreation area site; An increase in the community/neighborhood commercial acreage from 31.5 acres to 32.3 acres; and A reduction in the roadway landscape requirements adjacent to commercial uses. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 3 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADnENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Amendment No. 6 encompassed several minor changes to the Specific Plan, including plan revisions in Planning Areas 2, 28 and 29A. The park in Planning Area 29A was increased from 4.0 acres to 5.0 acres. Planning Area 28 was reduced in size by one acre, resulting in a reduction of dwelling units from l17to 113. The dwelling units were mmsferred to Planning Area 2, bringing the total number of units in Planning Area 2 up to 120. Roadway cross- sections and standards were updated to conform to the City's General Plan. Access points and neighborhood entries on certain planning areas were relocated to conform to the approved Tentative Tract Maps. Streets "G" and "IF' were renamed as Campanula Way. The phasing plan was revised to reflect current expectations. Overall, Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 did not result in any total acreage or dwelling unit changes. Amendment No. 7 involved land use changes in Planning Areas 1, 6, and 8 and the alteration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway. Planning Area 8, designated in Amendment No. 6 as Medium Density Residential, was revised to allow a Medium Density Senior Community. The size and number of dwelling units remained the same. Planning Area 6, already designated as Very High density residential, was reconfigured to include both High and Very High density residential and reduced in size to accommodate the expansion of Planning Area 1. Due to this density division and size reduction, Planning Area 6 was divided into Planning Area 6A (High Residential) and Planning Area 6B (Very High Residential). Combined, Planning Areas 6A and 6B were proposed to contain 508 dwelling units; which was a reduction of 82 dwelling units from the approved number of dwelling units (590 dwelling units). Planning Area 1 was increased in' size from 32.3 to 35.0 acres. As pan of the proposed changes to Planning Area 1 an application was submitted to the City of Temecula to process Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan in conjunction with a Development Plan and a Development Agreement, both pertaining only to a portion of Planning Area 1. The Development Plan permits the construction of a 276,243 square foot community commercial center of focused retail villages on 24 acres. In addition, Campanula Way was realigned and reconfigured between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway from a 100-foot right-of-way to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles and a four-way stop or signalized intersection. The proposed Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan involves a reduction of the total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan from the currently entitled 5,246 dwelling units to no more than 5,137 units and as few as 5,072 units. This represents a reduction of residential dwelling units between 2.1% and 3.3%. The High and Very High Residential categories remain unchanged. The decrease in overall net residential density from 5.1 du/ac to 4.9 du/ac results in the allocation of more land to each single-family detached residential unit. Similarly, the gross project density has decreased from 3.8 du/ac to 3.6 du/ac. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted PALOMA DEL SOL Page 4 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDDM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 in the original Specific Plan, the total decrease in residential units lies between 8.3% (at 5,137 du) and 9.5% (at 5,072 du). The commemial uses planned for Planning Area 27 at the comer of Pauba and Buttedield Stage Roads have been relocated to Planning Area 38, adjacent to the south side of De Portola Road. The deletion of the commemial center in Planning Area 27 resulted in land use changes for Planning Areas 24, 28, and 29 as well. Planning Area 27 in Amendment No. 8 has been designated as a 9.0-acre natural open space area designed to preserve some existing on-site wetland vegetation. Planning Area 28 has expanded from 25.0 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 7 to 49.4 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 8. The number of dwellings proposed in Planning 28 increased from 113 to 190 units as a result of removal of the commercial development. However, there was a corresponding decrease in the amount of residential development as a result of P.A. 38 convening from Medium-High Residential to Commercial. Planning Area 29 remains as a Park/Recreation Area, but the location and configuration of the parcel are somewhat altered. However, the acreage of this Park/Recreation Area remains unchanged at 5.0 acres. In addition, the elementary school proposed for Planning Area 29B in previous Amendments has been deleted since the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) has indicated that the site is no longer needed. Another change involves the creation of a new Park/Recreation Area in Planning Area 24, which is located adjacent to the Planning Area 27 Open Space. The former Planning Area 24 (formerly designated in Amendment No. 7 as a Park/Recreation Area situated between Planning Areas 13 and 23) has been merged into the greenbelt system and is no longer identified as a Park/Recreation Area or a separate planning area. Due to remaining high demand for commercial uses in the village center area near the supermarket and the Home Depot, Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes that the residential uses allocated for Planning Area 38 be converted to Community/Neighborhood Commercial. Planning Area 38 will incorporate the same develop-ment standards that now apply to Planning Area 1. Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes several minor residential dwelling unit adjustments to reflect the approved and constructed implementing tracts. Acreage and dwelling unit comparisons between the original Specific Plan for Paloma del Sol and Amendment No. 8 are illustrated below in Table 1, Summ~ry of Land Use Changes: PALOMA DEL SOL Page 5 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Table I Summary of Land Use Changes SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219 SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219 SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219 (original) Amendment No. 7 Amendment No. 8 Land Use Acres D.Us Land Use Acres D.Us Land Use Acres D.Us 536.0 2,366 Medium 491.0 2,083 Medium 610.7 2,551 Medium Medium (Senior) 89.0 400 Medium (Senior) 89.0 335 (400)* Medium High 437.5 2,406 Medium High 416.5 2,255 Medium High 303.8 1,678 High 22.3 268 High 22.3 268 Very High 56 840 Vc'xy High 12.0 240 Very High 12.0 240 Comm~ufity/ 39.0 Community/ 35.0 Community/ 43.0 Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Commt~rcial Commercial Commm~ial Neighborhood 15.0 Neighborhood 17.5 Neighborhood 2.5 Commercial Commercial Commexcial Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0 Junior High 20.0 Junior High 20.0 Junior High 20.0 School School School Elcm~nta,'y 41.0 Elementary 41.0 Elcmenm'y 31.0 School School School Parks or 15.4 Parks or 32,5 Parks or 30.6 Recreation Recrcalion Areas Recreation Areas Areas C,n-~nbelt 28.0 Greenbelt Pesoos 28.0 Greenbelt Paseos 31.9 Roadway 87.6 Roadway Paseos 82.0 Roadway Paseos 81.5 Paseos ...... , ....... : .... ~-, ~" ::. ~,'~.-~ ~ . ~::".~*~'c'~?..~. ~. ~ ~"~"~ Open Space 9.0 Major Slreets 114.0 Major S~reets 103.4 Major Streets 102.2 PRO~C'T 1,391.5 5,611 PROJ~'r Torn~. 1,391.5 5,246 P~omc'r Torn~ 1,391.5 5,072 TOTAL (5,137)* Implementation of thc adult retirement option for PJan.l-g Area 8 increase~ the t~tal dwelling unit allocation for planning Area 8 to 400 du, raises the total medium density dwelling unit allocation to 2,951 du, and would raise the total dwelling units allowed in the Specific Plan t~ 5,137. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 6 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 C. SUMMARYANALYS~ Section II contains a brief summary of the environmental impacts resulting from the approved Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 as analyzed in EIR No. 235. After each summary is a brief statement describing the changes in project impacts that are anticipated to result with implementation of Amendment No. 8. As shown on Table 2, Comparative Analysis oflmpacts and Mitigation Measures, the impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 are substantially the same or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified F_JR. Therefore, no new mitigation measures are required. Table 2 Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures . Additional Environmental Issue Changes in Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Seismic Safety Unchanged No Slopes and Erosion Unchanged No Wind Erosion & Blowsand Unchanged No Flooding Unchanged No Noise Decreased No Climate and Air Quality Decreased No Water Quality Unchanged No Toxic Substances Unchanged No Agriculture Unchanged No Open Space and Conservation Decreased No Wildlife/Vegetation Decreased No Energy Resources Electricity - Unchanged NO Natural Gas - Decreased Scenic Highways Unchanged No Cultural and Scientific Resources Unchanged No Circulation and Traffic Approximately Unchanged No (Somewhat Decreased) Public Facilities and Services Decreased No Light and Glare Unchanged No Disaster Preparedness Unchanged No PALOMA DEL SOL Page 7 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Table 3, below, provides an overview off all public utilities and serves and compares the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7) with the Proposed Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8): Table 3 Public Utilities and Services Comparison Approved Project I Proposed Project Public (Amendment No. 7)I (Amendment No, 8) Utilities and Service Estimated Usage/ Impact after Estimated Usage/ Impact after Service Level Mitigation Service Level Mitigation Water~ 4,026,400 gallons Insignificant 3,765,000 gallons Insignificant Sewer2 1,845,300 gallons Insignificant 1,453,771 gallons Insignificant Decrease of 1,342 Fire 15,879 residents Significant residents Significant 8.4 deputies (original SP) Sheriff3 10.6 deputies (adjusted) Significant 9.7 deputies Significant Schools4 4,264 students Significant 3,855 students Significant Parks/Recreation 131.0 acres Insignificant 144.0 acres Insignificant 39,133,910 cubic feet/month (35,574,829 Insignificant 35,749,212 cubic Insignificant Natural Gas5 based on new usage feet/month rates) 42,030,975 kWh per year 37,958,936 kWh per Electricity6 (63,388,761 based on Insignificant Insignificant new usage rates) year Solid Waste? 57 tons per day Insignificant 57.4 tons per day Insignificant Decrease of 1,342 Insignificant Health Services8 15,879 residents Insignificant residents 600 gallons/day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial, 3,800 gallons/acre/day for parks 300 gallons per day per residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial 1 deputy/i,500 people .55 K-8 students per du, and .21 high school students per du 80 kcf/du/yr for single family residential, 0.0348 kcffsf/yr for retail commercial 5,621 kWh/du/yr for residential, and 13.54 kWh/sf/yr for commercial 7.9 pounds per person per day Demands for health services are based on population, but are not quantified in this EIR. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 8 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 H. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS For the purposes of this environmental analysis, the existing or "baseline" condition is assumed to be the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219. A. SEISMIC SAFETY Previously Identified ImPacts Several geotechnical investigations! were conducted on the project site, which concluded that the site does not have any active faults within its boundaries. The site is expected to experience ground motion from earthquakes on regional and/or local causative faults. The dominant seismic feature in the project vicinity is the northwest striking Elsinore Fault Zone. The site is subject to liquefaction in the southwestern portion of the site where the flat alluviated flood plain of Temecula Creek is located. When mitigation measures are implemented, the impacts regarding seismic hazards are considered non-significant. Mitigation measures contained in the EIR include: (1) Conformance with the latest Uniform Building Code and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactOrily mitigate the effect of seismic groundshaking; (2) Mitigation of the liquefaction potential within the southern portion of the site will occur as a result of project development, which will lower artificially high ground water levels by removal of recharge ponds, as well as increased overburden as a result of site grading; (3) During site development, additional geological evaluation should be continued in order to verify the extent and relative age of fault activity, according to Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. Analysis of Changed Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes 5,072 dwelling units without a senior community option and 5,137 units if the senior community option and the dwelling unit option for the proposed office designation are implemented. For the purposes of this Addendum, the EIR has assumed a worst case scenario and evaluated the impacts associated with a 5,137 unit project. As such, the current project proposes 474 units fewer than proposed in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, which proposed 5,611 units. The 474 dwelling unit reduction would result in 1,342 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula General Plan's generation factor of 2.83 persons per dwelling uni0. Consequently, fewer residents will be exposed to seismic safety hazards, including ground shaking. The extent of project impacts upon existing seismic conditions will be the same since no increase 1 Geotechnical Retxm for En~ironmemal Impact Purposes, Butterfie/d Hills, Rancho California, Couray of Riverside, CA. (May 1987), F auk Study, 1400-acre The Meadows at Rancho California Project, Rancho California (August 1987), and Evaluation of Liquefaction Por~r,6al, pomon of Va//Meadows (September 1987). PALOMA DEL SOL Page 9 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADnENDt M NO. 4 TO EIR 235 in the overall developable area is proposed. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed. SLOPES AND EROSION Previously Identified Impacts According to the original Geotechnical Report2, there are no severely limiting or unamenable geotechnical constraints associated with the project. However, some of the existing landforms will be altered by grading, moderate to severe erosion may exist if graded slopes are unprotected, and three potential landslide areas may be present on-site. Mitigation measures required to alleviate impacts from the Paloma del Sol project are as follows: 1) alluvial and colluvial soils removal should be developed during Tentative Map studies and be incorporated into grading; 2) tempormy ground cover will be provided to prevent erosion during the construction phase; 3) grading shall be done in stages to lessen erosion; and 4) final Slopes will be contour-graded and will blend with existing natural contours. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan will require the same physical alteration of the property resulting in similar impacts to slopes and erosion. Amendment No. 8 maintains the same amount of area being disrupted by grading. The proposed grading plan identifies approximately the same quantities of earthwork. Impacts to slopes on-site will be similar and the potential for erosion will remain high. These impacts, however, can be reduced to an insignificant level through implementation of the mitigation measures contained in EIR No. 235. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed. WIND EROSION AND BLOWSAND Previously Identified Impacts: The project is not located within the wind/erosion or blowsand area designated within the City of Temecula's General Plan and is not considered an area of concern. This issue was not addressed in the adopted EIR. AnaLysis of Change in Project Impacts This issue was not addressed in the adopted FIR, and does not need to be discussed in this addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8). 2 Geotechnical Report [or En~irorrrnemal Impact Purpose. s, Buttzrfield Hill~, Rancho California, County Riverside, CA. (May 1987), Fauk Stud:y, 1400oacre The Meadows at Rancho California Project, Rancho Calffornm (August 1987), and Evaluation o.f Liquefaction Potential, pomon of Vail Meadows (September 1987). PALOMA DEL SOL Page 10 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 D. FLOODING Previously Identified Impacts The hydrology report prepared for the project concluded that implementation of the Paloma del Sol Land Use Plan would result in the alteration of existing on-site drainage patterns. The project would result in the creation of impermeable surfaces on-site resulting in an increase to the existing 100-year storm runoff. The project site also lies within the Dam Inundation Area for a 100-year event for Vail Lake dam. The Assessment District 159 has been created to mitigate potential flooding impacts to Temecula Creek. All standards of the Riverside County Flood Control District will be met, and erosion control devices will be installed in development areas to mitigate the effect of increased runoff at points of discharge. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, which reconfigures land uses and roadways described in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, would not effect existing or proposed flooding conditions any differently than previously approved Specific Plan Amendments. Also, the proposed project would not significantly increase or reduce the amount of land to be graded in excess of the grading already approved by the City. The amended land use plan would still result in short term downstream impacts related to erosion and sedimentation during grading and the creation of impermeable surfaces. Since the proposed project would not result in any new flood-related impacts that have not already been evaluated and approved for previous Specific Plan Amendments, then no new mitigation measures would be required. The mitigation measures identified in EIR No. 235 and previous Addenda will adequately ensure that the degree of existing mitigation measures is sufficient and that no additional mitigation measures will be required. E. NOISE Previously Identified Impacts In the adopted EIR No. 235, noise-related impacts would be generated from both short-term and long-term sources. The short-term sources are construction-related activities at the time of project implementation; the long-term sources are vehicular traffic produced by the project. There is minor existing noise associated with traffic on Highway 79 South, which is mitigated by expanded setbacks that reduce traffic noise levels to below a level of significance. This amendment does not change the situation in any way, so new mitigation measures are not required. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan results in approximately the same amount of grading as previously identified, therefore, short-term noise impacts related to grading activities are expected to remain unchanged. The reduction of 474 residences from PALOMA DEL SOL Page 11 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 the residential component of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan will also shorten the duration of short-term noise impacts associated with home building activities. Amendment No. 8 proposes fewer dwelling units and fewer acres of commercial development than the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan; therefore, no additional or revised mitigation measures are necessarY. F. CLIMATE A~D AIR QUALITY Previously Identified Impacts Air quality impacts associated with Paloma del Sol include both shoat-term and long-term impacts. Short-term impacts (at the time of the original EIR) result from project grading and long-term impacts are associated with project build out. Short-term air quality impacts will result from pollutant emissions from construction equipment and the dust generated during grading and site preparation. Short-term impacts resulting from construction activities are considered insignificant because they do not reach significant impact thresholds established by Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Consuuction-related significance thresholds, according to SCAQMD, are based on exceeding any of the following: 550 pounds per day of Carbon Monoxide, 75 pounds per day of Reactive Organic .Gases, 100 pounds per day of Oxides of Nitrogen, 150 pounds per day of Oxides of Sulphur, or 150 pounds per day of Particulate Matter. The primary source of long-term impacts to air quality is automobile emissions. Other emissions will be generated from residential and commercial natural gas and electricity consumption. Long-term air quality impacts are considered significant with respect to carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, particulates, and reactive organic gas emissions. Mitigation at the grading and construction phase of the project included watering graded surfaces and planting ground cover to reduce short-term impacts to a level of insignificance. The project will integrate design elements such as uansit facilities, energy efficient buildings, and solar access orientation of structures to reduce long- term impacts. Despite these measures, long-term impacts to air quality represent a significant adverse impact which required a statement of overriding considerations. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any additional grading of the property outside of the area, which was previously evaluated in EIR No. 235. The proposed land use plan decreases dwelling unit density on-site and does not increase the overall .amount of developable area. Additionally, Paloma del Sol currently will not exceed SCAQMD significant impact thresholds because the site only requires minimal grading since mass grading has already occurred in conjunction with adjacent residential and commercial projects. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed in conjunction with Amendment No. 8. EIR No. 235 concluded that air quality impacts would remain a significant adverse impact, which required a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Amendment No. 8 will not substantially change the conclusions reached previously. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 12 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Ge O WATER QUALITY Previously Identffied Impacts Construction of the Paloma del Sol project will alter the composition of surface runoff. Build out of Paloma del Sol will result in impervious surfaces and irrigated landscaped areas. Runoff entering the storm drain system will contain urban pollutants such as pesticides, fertilizers, and automobile related residues which will contribute to the incremental degradation of water downstream in Temecula and Marrieta creeks. Erosion control techniques will be implemented to reduce the amounts of sedimentation entering both Creeks. Additionally, the project will comply with requirements of the California State Water Quality Control Board with respect to urban runoff control. By implementing the following mitigation measures, the level of impacts related to water quality are not considered significant. In order to mitigate for water quality impacts, the project will comply with the Riverside County Flood Control District requirements regarding erosion control devices during grading (e.g., ben'ns, culverts, sand-bagging and desiring basins), and the employment ofthe"Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants" program published by the U.S.- Environmental Protection Agency. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any development outside of the area that was previously evaluated in EIR No. 235. The proposed land use plan reduces the number of dwelling units and slightly increases acreage of commercial land use; however, it does not increase the overall developable area. Mitigation measures contained in EIR No. 235 would be implemented to ensure that water quality impacts remain at a level of insignificance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed. TOXIC SUBSTANCES Previously Identified Impacts/Mitigation The project is not anticipated to produce toxic substances. This issue was not addressed in the adopted EIR; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts This issue was not addressed in the adopted I:JR, and does not need to be discussed in this addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8). AGRICULTURE Previously Identified Impacts The Paloma del Sol project site was used for dryland farming and grazing by sheep and cattle, however, it was not designated as prime, statewide important, unique or locally PALOMA DEL SOL Page 13 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 important farmland within the Environmental Hazards and Resources Element of the Comprehensive General Plan (Riverside County). In addition, the site has minor Class I and Class II agricultural soils. Due to these two factors, the discontinuation of farming on this site is not considered significant and, therefore, does not require mitigation. A portion of the site has already been mass graded as well. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Although Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan reconfigures land uses and slightly alters roadways, it does not substantially increase/reduce the amount of land being graded. The same amount of impacts to agriculture will occur with the proposed changes in Amendment No. 8 as with the adopted Specific Plan No. 219 and EIR No. 235. As such, no mitigation is required. J. OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION Previously Identified Impacts Amendment No. 7 includes 32.5 acres of parks/recreation areas, 28.0 acres of greenbelts, and 82.0 acres of roadway paseos for a park and recreation total acreage of combined 142.5 acres.. The approved Development Agreement allows for parks, greenbelts, and roadway paseos to count toward park and recreation credit. The land use changes included in the adopted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (i.e., Amendment No. 7) did not involve any increase in project open space and conservation impacts; therefore, no additional or revised mitigation was required. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan No. 219 includes land use changes that include the new provision of 9.0 acres of Open Space (i.e., Planning Area 27) for drainage and wetland vegetation preservation purposes. This Open Space category did not exist in the original Specific Plan No. 219 or in the adopted Specific Plan No. 219 (i.e., Amendment No. 7). The land use changes associated with the Proposed Project (i.e., Amendment No. 8) would not involve any increase in project Open Space and Conservation impacts. Therefore, no additional or revised mitigation are warranted. K. WILDLIFE/VEGETATION Previously Identified Impacts A Biological Assessment3 for Paloma del Sol was prepared in 1987 to determine project impacts to existing biological resources on-site, and the following represent the findings at that time. When this assessment was completed, introduced grassland covered the majority of the site, which was due, at least partly, to past agricultural and grazing practices on the 3 Biological Assessment for Vail Meadows (May 1987) PALOMA DEL SOL Page 14 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 site. In the extreme southern, western, central, and eastern portions of the site, coastal sage scrub was found. The site potentially provided habitat for the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat and several "Blue-line" avian species and was considered an important raptor wintering area. At that time, direct impacts would have resulted from construction-related activities including cut, fill and other grading activities necessary for roads, building pads, utilities, fuel modification and flood control. There may be some indirect impacts such as noise, light and glare and the introduction of domesticated animals (dogs and cats). Three uPdates to the original biological assessment have been prepared as follows: A Quino Checkerspot butteffiy (QCB) Survey4 completed in 1999, a Final Paloma del Sol Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Update Survey on May 30, 1996 (done by Biodiversity Associates), and a Focused Survey for California gnatcatcher completed on December 28, 1995 (done by Pacific Southwest Biological Services). These studies found that virtually no native vegetation now exists on the site as a result of: · Diking associated with past dry farming, weed abatement and cattle grazing; Grading associated with construction of the roadways (De Portola .Road, Meadows Parkway, Margarita Road, Pio Pico Road, Montelegro Way, and Leena Way), and a haul road used to transport dirt used for construction of the supermarket/shopping center and sports park northeast of the intersection of State Highway 79 South and Margarita Road; and · Grading for construction of the future extension of Meadows Parkway along the eastern tract boundary between Leena Way and De Portola Road. No Qulno Checkerspot butterfly adults were observed during any flight surveys and no potentially suitable habitat components occur within the site. Although two small areas of dwarf plantain (the primary host plan0 were encountered, they represent too small of an area to provide an adequate amount of host plant or nectary plants to support QCB. Also, there were no observations made of California gnatcatchers on the site. Because there are no existing sensitive species on site, there will be no impacts by construction. Although the site is located within a potential habitat area for Stephens' Kangaroo Rat, it is also within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan. The Paloma del Sol project has complied with all applicable requirement of this program. Therefore, no further mitigation is required. Results of Adult ~ Checkerspot Butterfly Flight Season Sur~qs (1999) PALOMA' DEL SOL Page 15 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 At the time of the original analysis, the site contained four blueline streams as depicted on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps. The jurisdictional boundaries for these streams were mapped in December 1995 and January 1996 by Glenn Lukos Associates, a biological resources firm, using the most up-to-date regulations and written policies in conjunction with guidance fi.om the regulatory agencies. Three of the four jurisdictional areas were graded and removed in conformance with permits issued by the ACOE. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan would result in approximately the same amount of area disrupted by grading activity as the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the Adopted Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7). It should be noted that mass grading on the site has already occurred. Three of the four jurisdictional areas on-site would be permanently impacted by the proposed project, except for the jurisdictional area and wetland that would be preserved within permanent natural open space in Planning Area 27. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has jurisdiction over approximately 7.13 acres of the project site, of which 1.32 acres consists ofjurisdictionai .wetlands. 'The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 project would avoid impacts to an existing drainage area (2.18 acres that is under the ACOE jurisdiction, including 0.84-acre, which has been identified as an ACOE jurisdictional wetland) by preserving the area within a 7.1-acre natural open space area (Planning Area 27). As mentioned above, the ACOE, in addition to the CDFG, also has jurisdiction over this same area. With incorporation of the open space feature (Planning Area 27), any potential impacts to this jurisdictional wetlands would be mitigated to below a level of significance. It should be noted, that the portions of the project have already been constructed or are in the process of being constructed. Mitigation of the impacts associated with on-site biological resources has already been approved by the City and is currently underway. Preservation of Planning Area 27 for drainage corridor purposes, responds to previous mitigation measures. All other mitigation for the other jurisdictional areas on-site will remain the same as that identified in the original EIR and previous Addendums. In summary, the direct impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan would be similar to or less than the impacts associated with the original Specific Plan. Because a significant loss of native plants is not expected, and sensitive wildlife species are not expected to be significantly impacted, no additional mitigation is required by Amendment No. 8 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 16 of 36 October 26. 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Me ~NERAL RESOURCES Previously Identified Impacts/Mitigation The State Division of Mines and Geology has prepared mineral resoume mpol~s designating mineral deposits of statewide or regional significance. The State Geologist has classified areas into Mineral Resources Zones (MRZ) and Scientific Resource Zones (SZ). The zones identify the statewide or regional significance of mineral deposits based on the economic value of the deposits and accessibility. As discussed in the Open Space/Conservation Element of the City of Temecula General Plan, the zoning classification of M1LZ-3a has been applied to the City and its Sphere of Influence by the State. "The MRZ-3 areas contain sedimentary deposits which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crashed stone for aggregate, however, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significance economic value based on the available data? Therefore, potential impacts to mineral resources resulting from implementation of the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7) would be below a level of significance, and as such, no mitigation is required. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The area and extent of impact for the Proposed Project (£ e., Amendment No. 8) would be the same as the area and extent of impact for the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7). Therefore, there would be no change in the level of anticipated impacts to mineral resources, and no mitigation measures would be required: ENERGY RESOURCES Previously Identified Impacts Development within Paloma del Sol will increase energy consumption for motor vehicle movement, space and water heating, lighting, home appliance use, and construction equipment manufacturing and operation. Natural gas demand for the approved Paloma del Sol Specific Plan was calculated at 39,133,910 cubic feet per month. On-site electricity demand was estimated to be 42,030,975 kilowatts per year. In order to reduce impacts to a level below significance, the following measures shall be employed: (1) Passive solar heating techniques such as double-pane windows, adequate roof overhangs and proper building insulation; (2) Space and water heating should be provided via gas instead of electricity; and (3) compliance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. 5 City of Temecula General Plan, Open Space/Conservation Element, page 5-20. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 17 of 36 October 26. 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIB 235 Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling units and 54 acres of commercial land uses. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units (assumes senior housing option) and 45.5 acres of commercial land uses, resulting in a reduction of 474 dwelling units and a decrease of 8.5 acres of commercial uses. Project impacts to energy resources will therefore decrease energy consumption by 2,882,394 kwh/unit/year for residential dwellings andby 1,189,645 kwh per square foot per year for commercial uses (assumes an average floor area ratio of 0.21 for commercial uses). The net result is a decrease in electricity demand of approximately 4,072,039 kwh/unit/year (a 9.7% overall reduction in energy usage) when compared with the estimated electricity demand in the original Paloma del Sol EIR. Therefore, potential impacts to electricity would decrease slightly. In comparison to the project impacts for the original Specific Plan, Amendment No 8 impacts to natural gas conserves would result in a decrease in natural consumption by 3,159,210 kwh/unit/year for residential dwellings and by 225,488 kwh per square foot per year for commercial uses (assumes an average floor area ratio of 0.21). This would result in an overall net decrease in natural gas demand of approximately 8.6% when compared with the estimated natural gas consumption for the original Specific Plan as assessed in the original Paloma del Sol EIR. N. SCENIC HIGHWAYS Previously Identified Impacts The project site is directly bordered by a designated scenic highway (H/ghway 79 South). Mitigation measures to protect this area along the project frontage will include special setback and landscaping concepts to buffer the site from traffic and enhance the project's visual image for drivers and persons viewing the site from adjoining properties. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any significant changes to the design guidelines of the Specific Plan. Therefore, impacts to the County- designated eligible scenic highway (Highway 79 South) will continue to be mitigated to below a level of significance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 18 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 O. CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES Previously Identified Impacts The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan was surveyed for cultural resources in 1979 and was incorporated into a report6. Cultural resources are classified as both archaeological and paleontological resources. One prehistoric and one historic resource were identified on-site. The historic site no longer exists on-site. The prehistoric site consisted of two unifacial manos and a 40m X 20m area of sporadic occupation. In order to mitigate this prehistoric site, it is recommended that the ground cover be reduced by removal of vegetation and trash to provide better surface visibility and all artifacts and features mapped and collected. Subsurface testing shall be conducted consisting minimally of two lm x lm excavation units. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts A report, Cultural Resource Management Investigations of the Paloma del SolDevelopment Temecula, California, was completed September 24, 1996 by Chris E. Drover, Ph.D. The report indicated that none of the cultural resource sites to be impacted are likely to yield any further significant information and that grading could proceed, but should be monitored in the vicinity of the cultural deposits. Since preparation of that report, mass grading of the project site has occurred. Native American representatives from the Pechanga Band of the Luisefio tribe were present during all test excavations, and a qualified monitor has been present during project grading operations for archaeological monitoring purposes. No additional mitigation measures will be needed. P. CmCULAT~ON AND TRAFlqC Previously Identified Impacts The Riverside County Master Plan of Highways was used in preparing the original I~TR. The Paloma del Sol project site has since been incorporated as a part of the City of Temecula and is subject to the criteria and standards set forth in the City's Circulation Element. The Vail Meadows Development, Traffic Impact Study was prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates for the Vail Meadows project (now the "Paloma del Sol" project) in November 1987. In September 1999, Wilbur Smith Associates prepared an update to the traffic report entitled, Traffic Impact Study for Plaza Del Sol Commercial Center (now called the "Villages at Pasco Del Sol"). This update related specifically to Planning Areas l(a) and l(b), which border the north side of Highway 79 South. Wilbur Smith Associates prepared a partial traffic update in February 2001, which evaluated the traffic generation impacts associated eCulmral Resource Inventory and Irnpac~ Assessment for the KACOR/Rancho California Property (July 30 and August 10, 1979). PALOMA DEL SOL Page 19 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDESDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 with the land use changes proposed in Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. A multi-step methodology was used to estimate the projected traffic forecasts in these studies. The first step was to determine project trip generation, which estimates the total amving and departing traffic at the project site on a peak hour and daily basis. The second step of the forecasting process was project traffic distribution, which involves the development of a geographic trip distribution pattern that identifies the origins/destinations of project traffic. The third step was project traffic assignment, by which project-gnnemted trips are allocated to the street system. Project generated traffic was calculated at approximately 42,055 vehicle trips per day based on the land use mix proposed in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 as analyzed in the certified F_JR No. 235. Based upon project generated traffic and associated impacts to roadway segment and intersections within the project vicinity, mitigation measures were identified consisting of roadway and intersection improvements. Recommended long range roadway improvement needs in the project vicinity (which resulted from the specific plan build-out and cumulative area development traffic impact analysis) were identified as follows: (1) extension of Meadows Parkway from De Portola Road, south to State Route 79, (2) signalization at State Route 79 and Margarita Road Intersection, State Route 79 and Meadows Parkway Intersection, and at Margarita Road and designated "gateway" street (south of Pauba Road), (3) provision of 4-lanes on: Meadows Parkway between State Route 79 and De Portola Road, designated secondary road connecting Meadows Parkway to De Portola Road, which provides access to the proposed community shopping center; and, designated "gateway" streets, (4) inclusion of separate left and right turn lanes at certain intersections, and (5) the widening and signalization of various off-site roads and intersections. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The following conclusions arc based on the findings of the original 1987 Wilbur-Smith Associates (WSA) traffic impact study, the subsequent Traffic Impact Study for Plaza Del Sol Commercial Center (now referred to as the "Villages at Pasco Del Sol") update, and the most recent traffic update letter, which was prepared in February 2001 for Specific Plan Amendment No. 8: Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 would result in a combined net reduction in residential units, commercial acreage, and school acreage. Residential units would be reduced by either 109 (Adult Retirement Option) or 174 dwellings (Proposed Land Use Plan), depending on the development option implemented for Planning Area 8. Within the community and neighborhood commercial land use categories, the proposed changes would result in an overall net reduction of seven (7) commercial acres. In addition, the proposed land use plan changes would result in the elimination of ten (I0) acres from the elementary school category. For the purposes of Wilbur Smith's latest traffic PALOMA DEL SOL Page 20 of 36 October 26, 2001 , IJ)DENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 analysis, one elementaxy school has been eliminated from the land use plan. A typical attendance of 700 students per school was used for the remaining elementary schools. Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes minor changes in greenbelt paseos, roadway paseos and major streets. However, these changes would not result in significant differences in the vehicle trip generation for the Specific Plan. Traffic signals have been installed at the Margarita Road/De Portola Road, Highway 79 South/Meadows Parkway, and Highway 79/Butteffield Stage Road intersections and on Campanula Way at the rear of the Home Depot to ensure that the intersections operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS D or better). Installation of these four traffic signals has mitigated the potential traffic impacts at these intersections to below a level of significance. In summary, the proposed changes in Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 will result in a total reduction of 7,963 daily vehicle trips from the number of daily vehicle trips associated with Amendment No. 7 (see Table 4, Land Use and Trip Generation Comparison, for detail). This reduction is determined as follows: PALOMA DEL SOL Page 21 of 36 October 26, 2001 .< 0 .< ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 The trip reduction (as shown in Table 4, Land Use and Trip Generation Comparison) is determined as follows: Amendment No. 8 results in a decrease of 174 medium density residential dwelling units from the number of units proposed in Amendment No.7. This change results in a reduction of 1,163 daily vehicle trips. Amendment No. 8 also proposes changes to commercial property densities. Community commercial uses will be increased by eight acres, resulting in an addition of 4,400 daily trips. However, neighborhood commemial uses will be reduced by 15 acres, resulting in a net reduction of 10,500 daily trips. Taken together, trips associated with all types of commercial uses will be reduced by 6,100. Dally trips associated with the elementary schools will be reduced by 700, and changes to greenbelt paseos, roadway paseos and major streets were found to be negligible. The proposed land use changes (from Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7 to Amendment No. 8) would result in an overall reduction traffic impacts associated with the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7). While substantial, this reduction would not be great enough to eliminate the need for the traffic improvements identified elsewhere in this section. The developer will continue to be responsible for payment of development impact fees in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City. However, with the reduction in traffic volumes associated with Amendment No. 8, the developer's fair share contribution of development impact fees shall be concomitantly reduced. WATER AND SEWER Previously Identified Impacts A preliminary water and sewer report6 was prepared for the Paloma del Sol project in 1987. The site lies within the Rancho Villages Assessment District (providing for major infrastructure improvements), Rancho California Water District (water service), and Eastern Municipal Water District (sewer services). The site lies within the 1305, 1380, and 1485 pressure zone systems, with the majority of the site lying within 1380 pressure zone system. Sewage from Paloma del Sol would be treated at the EMWD's Rancho California Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The EMWD site is (was) proposed to expand its capacity in time to adequately serve the needs of Paloma del Sol residents. ~Preliminary Investigation on Water and Sewer Service for Vail Meadows (August 1987) PALOMA DEL SOL Page 23 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Approximately four million gallons of water reservoir storage would be required for the previously approved Paloma del Sol project. This storage would be provided by existing reservoirs in the local area. It is unknown whether additional reservoir storage would be constructed for future use. In addition, approximately 100 gallons of sewage per person per day (the Eastern Municipal Waste District's sewage generation factor) would be generated by the project, which is approximately 1,453,771 million gallons per day for the Paloma del Sol project. The proposed infrastructure wastewater collection facilities to ultimately serve the project was based on EMWD's overall system master planhing for the Rancho Villages Assessment District. See V.D.2 for further discussion and exhibits. In order to mitigate for potential impacts associated with the original Paloma del Sol Specific plan, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) Health and Safety Code Section 17921.3 requires low-flush toilets and urinals in all buildings; 2) Tire 20, California Administrative Code Section 1606 (b) establishes efficiency standards that set the maximum flow rate of all new showerheads, lavatory faucets, etc.; 3) Title 20 of the CAD Sections prohibits the sale of fixtures that do not comply with regulations; 4) Tire 24 CAD 2-5307 (b) prohibits the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the CEC compliance with flow rate standards; 5) Tire 24 CAD Sections 2-5352 (i) and (j) address pipe insulation requirements, which can reduce water used before hot water reaches equipment or fixtures; 6) Health and Safety Code Section 4047 prohibits installation of residential water softening or conditioning appliances unless certain conditions are satisfied; 7) Government Code Section 7800 specifies that lavatories in all public facilities be equipped with self-closing faucets that limit the flow of hot water. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposed 5,611 dwellihg units and 54 acres of commercial development. In December 1995, the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) adopted an Urban Water Management Plan using Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 as the basis for the project. The Urban Water Management Plan assumes a total of 5,604 dwelling units in Paloma del Sol at project build out, in addition to 51 acres of commercial uses, 63 acres of public uses, and 129 acres of park. These uses were factored into the long term non-potable water needs of the EMWD. The current proposal (Amendment No. 8) would provide a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units, 45.5 acres of commercial development, 53 acres of public uses (including the schools and the day care center), and 145.9 acres of park/recreation areas, greenbelt paseos and roadway paseos. Although demand for non-potable water for use in the park/recreation areas, greenbelt paseos and roadway paseos within the proposed project would increase somewhat from that anticipated in the Urban Water Management Plan. Non-potable water usage for all of the other uses would incrementally decrease when compared with the assumptions made in the original Paloma del Sol EIR and EMWD's adopted Urban Water Management Plan. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 24 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Therefore, the net change in non-potable water usage would be insignificant. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units and 45.5 acres of commercial land uses, a reduction of 474 dwelling units and a decrease of 8.5 acres of commercial uses from the original Specific Plan. Consequently, the decrease in residential development would result in a reduction in water usage of approximately 284,400 gallons per day for residential uses (assumes 600 gpd/du) and a reduction of 17,000 gpd for the 8.5 acres of commemial uses. The addition of the 20.0-acre junior high school (not included in the original Specific Plan) would increase water usage by another 40,000 gallons per day (assumes 2,000 gpd/ac). Furthermore, if it is assumed that the water requirements for the elementary schools and the open space and park/recreation areas remain essentially unchanged, then the new project would result in a reduction in water demand of 261,400 gallons per day when compared with the original Specific Plan. Table 5, below, identifies the estimated usage and impacts after mitigation for both the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7) and the Proposed Project (i.e., Amendment No. 8). Table 5 Public Utilities and Services Approved Project I Proposed Project Public (Amendment No. 7)I (Amendment No. 8) Utilities and Impact after Impact after Service Estimated Usage Mitigation Estimated Usage Mitigation I Water7 4,026,400 gallons Insignificant 3,765,000 gallons 1 Insignificant Sewers 1,845,300 gallons Insignificant 1,453,771 gallons Insignificant gallons/day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial, 3,800 gallons/acre/day for parks s 300 gallons per day per residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial The Proposed Project would result in reduced impacts to water and sewer when compared to the Approved Project. Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation measures specified in Section V.D of the certified EIR for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. 1L Frae SERVICES Previously Identified Impacts The project site is presently provided with fire protection services by the Riverside County Fire Department in cooperation under contract with the City of Temecula. The Pauba Fire Station on Pauba Road services the site. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 25 of 36 October 26, 2001 AnnEsnuM No. 4 TO EIR 235 Se The original EIR found that the existing fire station, which is located within three miles of the project site, would only provide Category 11I level of protection. However, that station was determined not to be adequate to serve the project site. Consequently, the original Paloma del Sol Specific plan would be subject to Development Impact Fees to offset the cost of providing a new fire station within a five-minute response time to the project site. This would mitigate the project's impacts to fire-related services to a level below significance. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling units and 54 acres of commercial land uses. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units and 45.5 acres of commercial land uses, a reduction of 474 dwelling units and a decrease of 8.5 acres of commercial uses. The change in land uses between Amendments No. 7 and 8 is even smaller: When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The acreage of proposed commercial development in Amendment No. 8 remains the same as the commercial acreage associated with Amendment No. 7. The net effect of these land use changes would not significantly change the response times from the existing fire station to the project site. Accordingly, the significant impacts associated with the previous assessment for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, would require similar mitigation to reduce the impacts to a level below significant. SHERIFF SERVICES Previously Identified Impacts Police services are provided to the site by Riverside County Sheriff's Department, which operates from the Lake Elsinore Sheriff's Station. The County and City recognize the need for additional sheriff services with the increase in population. The EIR states that the --- SheriWs department attempts to maintain a ratio of one deputy for every 4,000 persons, while a letter from the SheriWs Department reflects the need for one deputy per 1,500 people. According to the City of Temecula' s General Plan, one deputy per 1,000 people is the desired ratio. In order to mitigate the project's impacts associated with police services, the applicant of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would be required to coordinate with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department to assure that proper protection facilities and personnel would be available. To ensure safety to the residents of the original Paloma del Sol project, safety measures would be incorporated in the design of the project's circulation components (for pedestrians, vehicles, and police), street lighting, residential door and window visibility from street and buildings, and fencing. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 26 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIB 235' Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling units, which would equate to a population of 15,879 persons, assuming a generation factor of 2.83 persons per unit as indicated in the City of Temecula General Plan. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units, which represents a reduction of 474 dwelling units or 1,342 project residents from that proposed in the original Specific Plan. Assuming a County standard of one deputy per 1,500 persons, then Specific Plan Amendment No 8 would generate a need for 9.7 deputies. This is a reduction from the 10.6 deputies required under the original Specific Plan (as recalculated using the Sheriff Department's current ratio of one deputy per 1,500 persons). It should be noted that the original EIR was prepared using a different deputy/population ratio. Updating the original EIR to use the current Sheriff's Department em'rem deputy/population ratio, would increase the deputies need to adequately serve the original Specific Plan from 8.4 to 10.6 deputies. Impacts to sheriff services would be reduced by 0.9 deputy. When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in a slight reduction in impacts to sheriff services of 0.4 deputy for the Proposed Land Use Plan and 0.2 deputy for the Adult Retirement Option. Consequently, impacts to milities would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required. SCHOOLS Previously Identified Impacts The Paloma del Sol project lies within the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) for grades K-12. The entire project will be served by three existing elementary. schools: .................... ,4bby Reinke Elementary School (K-5), 43799 Sunny Meadows Drive, Temecula (Planning Area 11 on-site); Paloma Elementary School (K-5), 42940 Via Rami, Temecula (located off-site); and ,loan F. Sparkman Elementary School (K-5), 32225 Pio Pico Road, Temecula (Planning Area 7 on-site). Abby Reinke Elementary School is partially built and is being built in phases, although it is presently serving students. Estimated completion date for the school is approximately 2002. Although the Specific Plan designates an additional site for another elementary school within the project (Planning Area 32 in the Approved Project), the TVUSD has indicated that this site is no longer needed (see dated February 4, 1999 letter in the Appendix), since most of the PALOMA DEL SOL Page 27 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO l~,IR 235 o dwelling units within the Paloma Del Sol project have already been built and are not generating as many students as originally predicted. Planning Area 32 will develop with Medium density (2-5 du/ac) residential uses instead of an elementary school. The project includes a middle school in Planning Area 30, adjacent to Meadows Parkway. This school (Temecula Middle School) is open and serves students in grades 6-8. Temecula Middle School is located at 42075 Meadows Parkway. Existing high school students in Paloma Del Sol attend (and new students will also attend) Temecula Valley High School, which serves grades 9-12. The high school is located at 31555 Rancho Vista Road adjacent to Margarita Road. According to the certified EIR for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, the project would generate an estimated 3,086 students in Grades K-8 (based upon TVUSD's generation factor of 0.55 students per dwelling unit). In addition, 1,178 high school students would be generated from the previously approved project (based upon Elsinore Union High School District's generation factor of 0.21 students per dwelling unit). The certified EIR determined that the proposed 61 acres of school sites would provide adequate school services for TVUSD students. Since certification of the EIR, the project is building out at a lower density than originally envisioned. Therefore, the number of students generated by the proposed project will be reduced accordingly. The Temecula Valley Unified School District has already determined that the Junior High School site in Planning Area 30 is no longer required. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The original EIR assumed that the original Specific Plan project would generate 3,086 K-8 students and 1,178 high school students. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 539 single-family dwelling units (assuming that Planning Area 8 would built out with 335 single family homes) from that anticipated in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Using generation factors of 0.55 students per unit for Grades K-8 and 0.21 students per unit for high sehooi, there would be a decreaseof296 K-8 students and 113 high school students from those generated by the Original Specific Plan project. Amendment No. 8 will reduce impacts to schools, and no further mifigaton is required. PARKS AND RECREATION Previously Identified Impacts Implementation of the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7) would create a demand for parks and recreation facilities in the project area. To meet this demand, the Specific Plan includes an extensive Open Space and Recreation Program. This program will provide 142.5 acres of land for park, recreational open space, parkway and pasco uses, which is equivalent to 9.53 acres of park and recreation land per 1,000 residents. The provision of this acreage will adequately mitigate the increased recreational demands generated by the Approved Project. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 28 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDtlM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Implementation of Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474 dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction Would cause 1,351 fewer project residents (based on the City of Temecula's generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit). When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 has decreased by 174 dwelling units and 109 dwelling units under the adult retirement option, while the total park and recreation acreage has increased slightly from 142.5 to 144.0 acres. Amendment No. 8 includes 30.6 acres of parks/recreation areas, 3 1.9 acres of greenbelts, and 8 1.5 acres of roadway paseos for a combined park and recreation total acreage of 144.0 acres. Th~ approved Development Agreement allows for parks, greenbelts, and roadway paseos to count toward park and recreation credit. A comparison of park and recreation open space for both Amendment No. 7 and Amendment No. 8 is contained in Table 6, Park/Recreation Acreage Comparison Analysis. Table 6 Park/Recreation Acreage Comparison Analysis Ame~dmont / Plan No. of Population Amount of Amount of Acreage Dwellin~ Multiplier Park/Rec Park/Rec That Units Acreage Required Acreage Exceeds ($ AC/I,000) Provided 5 AC/l,000 Amendment No. 7: 5,246 2.85 74.8 142.5 +67.7 Adopted Land Use Plan Amendment Proposed LUP 5,072 2.85 72.3 144.0 +71.7 No. 8: Proposed Adult 5,137 2.85 73.2 144.0 +70.8 Land UR Rctir*n~nt Plan Option As depicted in Table 6, above, Amendment No. 8 would result in a net increase of 1.5 acres of land devoted to park and recreation uses over that provided in Amendment No. 7. Therefore, Amendment No. 8 would not result in any increase in potentially significant impacts associated with parks and recreation. No additional mitigation measures are warranted. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 29 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 V. UTILITIES Special Background Information Beginning in January 2001, California began to experience a shortage in the supply of electricity. That situation was a result of three fundamental changes within the organization of the power industry: (1) a halt in power plant construction during the 1990's, (2) deregulation in 1996, and (3) an increase in the price of natural gas. According to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the majority of the energy crisis stems from the lack of new plant construction during the 1990%, which corresponded directly to the decline in the availability of electrical energy early in 2001. Because of the decreasing supply and a high demand for energy, the wholesale price of electricity began to rise. This situation was further exacerbated by deregulation. The deregulation agreement of 1996 placed a price cap on the dollar amount the California utilities, like SCE, could charge their customers. Because of the price cap, SCE was forced to charge consumers less for energy than the price they had to pay. This price discrepancy eventually forced SCE into debt, and because of waning credit the company was no longer able to buy enough power to satisfy demand. SCE, however, was able to buy power on a daily basis with cash reserves, but this was not a rehable means by which to supply all of their customers on a continual basis. As a direct result of SCE's financial difficulties, on January 17, 2001, the DWR was given authority to purchase power on behalf of SCE. The power purchased by DWR was used to supply those customers who were beyond the dally capacity of SCE. The DWR paid for the electricity with funds from the State of California General Fund and this money would be reimbursed to the State by a three cent (3¢) increase per Kilowatt hour (KW) charge. This charge was added to consumers' bills starting on June 3, 2001. Additionally, on August 21, 2001, the California Senate passed a bill allowed SCE to issue bonds for up to $2.9 billion. The money generated from the bonds will allow SCE to reimburse the companies they owe; approximately 70 percent of their debt. Most notably, these measures are a first step to providing SCE with the ability to regain its credit status, thus, enabling SCE to begin providing all of its customers with electricity. In addition to the steps taken by SCE and the state, within the last year the California Energy Commission (CEC) has approved a total of 16 power plant projects. Of these approved projects three have been completed and are currently producing 1,415 Megawatts (MW) of electricity per year (one MeguWatt supplies 750 homes). An additional plant, an out-of- service unit in Huntington Beach, is being upgraded and retrofitted, and completion is expected in November 2001. This plant will add an additional 450 MW per year to the energy grid. The remaining 12 plants are either being constructed or are in the process of obtaining financing. These 12 plants are expected to be online between 2001 and 2004 (see Table 7, California Power Plant Project Status). In addition, the CEC is reviewing proposals for 20 new power plants, and has announced plans for 31 additional power plants. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 30 of 36 October 26. 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Combined, these 79 projects, which will be located throughout California, will result in an additional 30,482 MW produced per year. These projects are expected to be completed between September 2001 and August 2005. Most notably, eight of these power plants will be located in Riverside County and seven will be located in San Bernardino County. It is important to note that some aging facilities will require special pollution permits and expensive maintenance, which may render them too costly to operate. Therefore, some power plants presently producing energy may be taken off-line. Additionally, approximately 22 executive orders were issued by Governor Gray Davis in the first six months of 2001. The intent of these executive orders was to promote conservation and to temporarily ease restrictions found within the California Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQG) that pertain to power generation. More specifically, the executive order eased regulations pertaining to power plant construction, shortened new plant approval time, eased power generation restrictions, and eased overall plant production and management guidelines. Most of these executive orders will expire December 31, 2001, which will came the approval time for new power plants, existing plant emission standards, and overall plant management requirements to revert to the standards set forth in the (CEQG). Table 7 California Power Plant Pro,iect Status Projects approved Over 300 Capacity (MW) Location Status On-line Date Mega Watt (MW) (By County) Sunrise~ 320 Kern Co. Operational June 2001 Suuer~ 540 Sutter Co. Operational July 2001 Los Mendanoat 555 Contra Costa Operational July 2001 Operational Total 1,415 Huntington Beach~ 450 Orange Co. Construction Nov. 2001 La Paloma2 1,1MS Kern Co. Cons~'Uction April-June - 2002 Delta2 880 Contra Costa Construction April 2002 Moss Landing2 1,060 Monterey Co. Conshmcfion June 2002 High Desert 720 San Benardino~ Consmaction July 2003 Elk Hills 500 Kern Co. Construction March 2003 Blythe 520 Riverside Co? Construction March 2003 Pastoria 750 Kern Co. ConsU'uction January 2003 Operational and Under 7,343 Construction Subtotal View 1,056 SanBernardinos I Financing,I June2003 Mountain PALOMA DEL SOL Page 31 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Projects approved Over 300 Capacity (~[W) Location Status On-line Date Mega Watt (MW) (By County) Otay Mesa 5 I0 San Diego Co. Financing July 2003 Three Mountain 500 Shasta Co. Financing December 2003 Contra Costa 530 Contra Mesa Financing July 2003 Midway-Sunset 500 Kern Co. Financing June 2004 Financing Subtotal 10,439 Wildflower Larkspur 90 San Diego Co. Construction July 2001 Wildflower Indigo 135 Riverside Co.3 Construction July 2001 Alliance Century 40 San Bernardino~ Consmsction September 2001 Alliance Drews 40 San Bemardino~ Construction Sepmaber 2001 OWF Hahf°rd 95 Kings Co. Construction September 2001 Calpine Cdlroy Phase I 135 Santa Clara Co. Constxuction September 2001 Calpeak Escundido 49.5 San Diego Co. Construction September 2001 Under Construction Subtotal 584.5 Pegasus 180 San Bemasdino Financing April 2002 Calpine King City 50 Monterey Co. Financing December2001 Calpine Gilroy . 49.5 San Diego Co. Financing - Septembe~-- 2001 Finuneing Subtotal 864 APPROVED TOTAL 11,303 Denotes power plants that became operational in the summer of 2001 Denotes power plants that are expected to be operational in the summer of 2002 Denotes power plants that will eventually be operational in the region of the proposed project. *Source: California Energy Commission (CEC), Website: htto://www.enerc, v.ca.~ov/sitinecases PALOMA DEL SOL Page 32 of 36 October 26, 2001 AnDESDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Previously Identified Impacts The residential, commercial and office uses in the Approved Project (i.e., Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) will create a demand for energy estimated at 63,388,761 kWH per year for electricity and 35,574,929 cubic feet/month (4,115,715 therms per year per dwelling unit based on new ussage rates) for natural gas. The Southern California Edison Company and the Southern California Gas Company provide electricity to the project site and have indicated that they would be able to meet these estimated demands. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment'No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in a corresponding reduction in utility demand (see Table 8, Estimated Natural Gas and Electricity Demand Comparison). Consequently, impacts to utilities would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required. Table 8 Estimated Natural Gas and Electricity Demand Comparison Approved Project [ Proposed Project Public (Amendment No. 7)I (Amendment No. 8) Utilities and Impact after Impact after Service E~timated Usage Mitigation F.~ated Usage Mitigation 4,115,715 thcrms per 3,976,688 them'is per yc~ per dwelling unit year per dwelling unit Natural Gas5 (based on new usage Insignificant (based on new usage Insignificant rates) rates) 42,030,975 kWh per year Electricity6 (63,388,761 based on Insignificant 37,958,936 kwh per Insignificant .. new usage rates) year 5 New generation rates provided by Southern California Gas Co. (SCG) provide for 799 therras/year/dwelling unit for single-family residences and 483 therms/year/dwelling unit for multi-family dwellings of five or more units.. Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (e.g., a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and that there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for commercial cons~uction from SCG. 65,621 kWh/du/yr for residential, and 13.54 kWh/sf/yr for commercial PALOMA DEL SOL Page 33 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 Xe SOLID WASTE Previously Identified Impacts The project site is located within the E1 Sobrante service area. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan will result in an increase in the amount of solid waste generated on the project site when compared to e×isting conditions. There will also be a corresponding increase in the service needs for waste haulers. The population of 14,546 estimated to be generated by Proposed Project will result in approximately 57.5 tons of waste a day assuming that 7.9 pounds of waste is generated per person per day. This will incrementally shorten the life span of the E1 Sobrante Landfill; however, the landfill has received County approvals for a major multi-year expansion that would dramatically extend the life expectancy of the landfill. The expansion project is already under construction. In addition, California law currently requires all municipalities to recycle or divert 50% of their solid waste streams from landfills. This practice is expected to continue and will also contribute to the life expectancy of the landfill. Analysis of Change in Project ImPacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474 dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction would result in 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula General Plan's generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit). When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in the generation of less amounts of solid waste, which would reduce the demand for landfill space. Consequently, impacts associated with solid waste would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required. LmlO, RIES · Previously Identified Impacts The project is currently served by library facilities located near the intersection of Ynez Road and Rancho California Road in Rancho California. Due to the increase in population that Paloma del Sol will generate, mitigation fees will be required by the project to increase the facility size, book collection and library staff. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474 dwelling units when compared to the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction would result in 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula General Plan's generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit). PALOMA DEL SOL Page 34 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in less demand for books, library space, and library facilities. Since impacts to libraries would be reduced, and no further mitigation is HEALTH SERVICES Previously Identified Impacts The following medical facilities serve the project area: (1) Inland Valley Regional Medical Center (80 beds); '(2) Menifee Valley Medical Center (84 beds); and (3) Rancho Springs Medical Center (99 beds). Other facilities for specialized medical cases are also located throughout the area. No mitigation measures are required, as it is believed that medical facilities respond to "market" demand. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474 dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction would mean a decrease of 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecuia's new generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit). When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population that would occur if Amendment No. 8 is implemented would result in a reduced - demand for health services. Consequently, impacts to health services would be reducedrand no further mitigation is required. AIRPORTS Previously Identified Impacts Paloma del Sol is not affected by any "Airport Influence Areas," and therefore was not discussed in the adopted EIR, nor were mitigation measures required. Analysis of Change in Project Impacts The project is not within an Airport Influence area, and does not require mitigation measures. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 35 of 36 October 26, 2001 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235 AA. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS Previously Identified Impacts Earthquakes, floods, and wildfires are natural occurrences that cannot be prevented. The County Office of Disaster Preparedness is responsible for coordinating the various agencies to assure preparedness and recovery from a natural disaster. Seismic safety, slopes and erosion, wind erosion and blowsand, flooding, and fire services impacts and accompanying mitigation are discussed in separate sections of the Analysis of Change in Project Impacts Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474 dw~lling units, or 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon the City of Temecula's new generation factor of 2.85 persohs per dwelling uni0, from that envisioned in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. In comparison to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. Implementation of either the Proposed Land Use Plan or the Adult Retirement Option would result in a reduction in population that would be exposed to seismic safety hazards, including ground shaking. As such, no further mitigation is necessary. III. CONCLUSION In all cases, impacts associated with impl~mentstion of the Proposed Project (£e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 8) would be the same as or less than those analyzed in the certified FEIR and Addendum No. 3 for the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7). The Proposed Project will be required to comply with all mitigation measures identified in the certified FEIR and the subsequent N. IR addendums~-including-this EIR- addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4). No additional mitigation measures are necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. PALOMA DEL SOL Page 36 of 36 October 26, 2001 APPENDIX ADDENDUM N0.4 TO EIR 235 ULA YALLL:Y /TEM~ VALLEy ~ SCHO0~ DI,TITJCT D/romar afFadl/t/~ EXHIBIT B GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION MAP R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc gpa res-doc 4 bJ Eo AI-FACHMENT NO 2 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0102 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, WEST OF BUTFERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION. WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0102 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on November 7, 2001 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on ,2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.16 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed specific plan amendment is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended, and Development Code. The proposed Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Development Code. The Specific Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of existing Land Use Designations and serves as an implementation tool for the General Plan. Therefore, as proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 1 B. The Specific Plan Amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a master planned community with specific design guidelines and standards that ensure compatibility and interface with the surrounding community in terms of density, design and circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and designed, the Specific Plan is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints of the site which would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or anticipated developments. Moreover, the proposed Specific Plan land uses are consistent with the land uses of the General Plan and will serves as the tool to regulate and implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. The applicant has submitted an application for Tentative Tract Map which indicates that the site is physically suitable for the land uses and development proposed in the Specific Plan. D. The proposed project will ensure development of desirable character which will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding neighborhoods, with extensive landscape buffers and interfaces. The commercial office/neighborhood commercial development is proposed within a Village Center and is designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve the needs of the Paloma Del Sol community. The proposed commercial office/neighborhood commercial land is north of Highway 79 South where similar commercial and retail uses currently exist along the Highway corridor. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula has certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and finds that the Addendum was prepared consistent with applicable CEQA provisions. The Council also finds that the Addendum was considered in association with the approval of this Specific Plan Amendment. Section 4. Specific Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the specific plan amendment known as the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, on property located east of Margarita Road, north of Highway 79 South, west of Butterfield Stage Road and south of Pauba Road, as contained in Exhibit A and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of January, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 8~h day of January, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 20027 Resos 02-_ 3 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO SPECIFIC PLAN R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 10 Ill SUMMARY OF CHANGES SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO PALOMA DEL SOL (MEADOWS) SPECIFIC PLAN The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 was filed pursuant to City Council approval of the "Agreement Regarding Paloma del Sol" on January 11, 1994. Amendment No. 4 added 6.5 acres of Very High density residential to Planning Area 6 and 1.5 acres of Park to Planning Area 37, reduced the Community/Neighborhood Commercial area in Planning Area 1 by 4.9 acres, and reduced major roads acreage by 3.1 acres. Specific Plan Amendment No. 5 increased the number of Medium density dwelling units from 2,338 to 2,487, reduced the number of Medium-High density dwelling units from 2,356 to 2,251, reduced the number of Multi-family dwelling units from 910 to 590, added a 4.0-acre Park/Recreation area site, increased the Community/Neighborhood Commercial acreage from 31.5 acres to 32.3 acres, and reduced the roadway landscape requirements adjacent to commercial uses. Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 ehcompassed several minor changes to the Specific Plan. The Park in Planning Area 29A was increased from 4.0 acres to 5.0 acres. Planning Area 28 was reduced in size by one acre resulting in a reduction of dwelling units from 117 to 113. The dwelling units were transferred to Planning Area 2 bringing the total number of units in Planning Area 2 up to 120. Roadway cross- sections and standards ha'ee-t:reerrwere updated to conform.with the City's General Plan. Access points and neighborhood entries on certain planning areas ~were relocated to conform with approved Tentative Tract Maps. Streets "G" and "I-I" have b,.,;aa, ere renamed as Campanula Way. The phasing plan has been revised to reflect current expectations, and wording has been added that gives the Director of Community Development the authority to allow minor variations from Specific Plan standards without a Specific Plan amendment. Overall, Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 did not result in any total acreage or dwelling unit changes. :Fhe-pmpose~Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 involve~l_ land use changes in Planning Areas 1, 6, and 8, the creation of Planning Areas l(a), "Village Core," and l(b), "Villages," and the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road to Meadows Parkway. As part of the ~,rc, v6acd changes to Planning Area I, an application ha~ bc,.i, was submitted to the City of Temecula to process Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan in conjunction with a Development Plan and a 10-year Development Agreement (which contains an additional 15 year covenant allowing rebuilding and uses in accordance with the Development Agreement for a total of 25 years), both pertaining only to a portion of what is cu,,~,;ly was designated by adopted Amendment No. 6 as Planning Area 1. The Amendment will included a division of Planning Area 1 into a series of subgroups identified as Planning Areas I, 1 (a) and 1 (la) for planning purposes with the existing L~ super market center and remaining undeveloped community/neighborhood commercial property north of L~,~kj the super market center along Margarita Road frontage ~,, bc known as Planning Area 1. The Development Plan application -ill focused on the newly created Planning Areas la and lb. The Development Plan will permitted the construction of a 276,243 square foot community commercial center with a centralized village core and a series of supporting focused retail villages on 24-acres with.locations for community gathering places and pedestrian linkages to join the surrounding uses in support of the village concept. PALOMA DEL SOL I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES SPECIF~C PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-1 B SUMMARY OF CHANGES The village core will beer,,.,v, i~cd of was designed to provide interactive people~inviting spaces ~I,,~ ,~ill imgadein coniunction with sit-down restaurants, small scale food establishments, offices, and retail uses surrounding and connected to a large active courtyard plaza zha; will i.,.l.;dc containing both passive and active water features. In the village core common area, a friendly atmosphere will bc was created to promote the use for live performances, interactive demonstrations and community events. To support the village core, a series of retail villages will be established to enhance the synergy of the community shopping center. The four sub-villages will include a"Home Village," a "Sports Village," a "Music and Media Village," and a "Food and Healthy Village." A brief d,.o,~.ill, ti6i. ,.,f ,~,~¢h village i~ ao f,,ll6w~. .... [ ....... uu.u.q~ ~u.~iuiiity'. In addition, Amendment No. 7 added updated vignettes added to the Design Guidelines (see Figures 16A, 16B; and 16C) to provide varying perspectives of the proposed 35-acre Planning Area. P,~LOMA DEL SOL I. SLrMMARY OF CHANGES · S?EC~C PLAN NO. 219/AM~rDM~NT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-2 ~1 SUMMARY OF CHANGES As part of Amendment No. 7, Planning Area 6 ~ was reduced from 36.3 acres to 34.3 acres to account for the increased size of Planning Area 1. In addition, Planning Area 6 -il| b,, was divided into two planning areas 6A and 6B. Planning Area 6A will now include_s 22.3 acres ,~ ...... ,, ....... ~,d as High density (9-12 du/ac) residential with a maximum of 268 dwelling units. Planning Area 6B ~s pianm'd-~ includes 12 acres of Very High density (13-20 du/ac) residential with a maximum of 240 dwelling units. The reduction and division of Planning Area 6 will resulted in a decrease of 82 dwelling units from 590 to 508 units. All affected base maps and land use tables have b,;zn were updated to reflect these proposed changes to Planning Area 6 and a descriptive summary of Planning Areas 6A and 6B h-aved~'e~ was added to Section IIL SPECIFIC PLAN. Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 also proposed the development of an active senior community within Planning Area 8. A Tentative Tract Map for the active senior project tm'ee-bee-a was submitted along with Amendment No. 7. Planning Area 8 ......................... ~,.., ..... ~1 ..... ...... ,,~ ,,,,,L,, ou ........ ,; now includes feature design standards that will enable this planning area to be developed as a private gated active senior community. If developed as an active senior community, Planning Area 8 will include a private recreation area for senior community residents and contain street/sidewalk landscaping and housing architecture targeted for active adult living. As part of Amendment No. 7, eExamples of the planned unique senior street/sidewalk landscaping and housing architecture ha-,c be.c,, were incorporated into Section IV. DESIGN GUIDELINES (See Figures 51A-E). As a result of the changes proposed for Planning Area 1, a ,cal',s ....... ; of Campanula Way ~o el ..... d ..................................... was altered from a throughway at a 100-foot right-of-way to a 78-foot right-of-way with two traffic circles (which will require a-122-foot rights-of-way at their widest points_) and limited on-street parallel parking. The northerly segment wc, uld intersects with De Portola Road and provides access to Planning Area 6A, Planning Area 38 and Planning Area 37. The southeasterly segment w6~ild intersects with Meadows Parkway and services the commercial center and Planning Area 6B. The roadway segment -~a,,Id allows for the provision of on-street parking to promote the village center concept. The alteration MIl resulted in a total reduction of 0.7-acre in major streets acr,;~. All affected base maps ha,~ b,.,-, were changed to reflect the realigned design with traffic circles including bicycle routing and utility services. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, which is fully described in this document, reduces the total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan from the currently entitled 5,246 units to a maximum of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units. This dwelling unit decrease represents a 2% to 3% reduction in residential units. The High and Very High categories would remain unchanged by approval of Amendment No .8. The decrease in overall net residential density from 5.1 du/ac to 4.9 du/ac results in the allocation of more land to each single family detached residential unit. The gross proiect density decreases similarly from 3.8 du/ac to 3.6 du/ac. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted in the original Specific Plan, the total decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at 5,137 du) to 10% (at 5,072 du). PALOMA DEL SOL I. SUIVIMARY OF CHANGES SPECIF~C PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-3 I~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES Aa~d. .... i N,,. 6 ,~.~. N~,. 219 A .... ~ N~. 7 ..... 36.3 ~ V~,~ --,s .......... 12.0 240 ............. 3 35.0 17.~ 17.~ 20.0 .......... ~ ......... 20.0 3~.~ 3~.~ 28.0 ..... 2~.0 B2.0 ' ' ' 82.0 103 4 ...... 102 7 The commemial uses planned for Planning Area 27 at the comer of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Road have been eliminated. Planning Area 27 has been reconfigured and relocated to an area south of the Planning Area 28 and 29 and includes 9.0 acres fi.om Meadows Parkway to Butterfield Stage Road. Thi~ area will be preserved as natural open space, and contains existing wetland vegetation. This change is accompanied by the reconfiguration of Planning Areas 24, 28 and 29 and elimination of Planning Area 29B. Planning Area 24 in Amendment No. 7 is designated for 2.9 acres of Park/Recreation uses on the border between Planning Areas 13 and 23. In Amendment No. 8, Planning Area 24 will be reduced by 1.9 acres and shifted north to be located adjacent to the southern border of Planning Area 27 and adiacent to the northern right-of-way of Sunny Meadows Drive. A new Park/Recreation Area (Planning Area 24) has been located adjacent to the Planning Area 27 Open Space. The former Planning Area 24 (designated in Amendment No. 7 as a Park/Recreation Area situated between Planning Areas 13 and 23) has been merged into the greenbelt system and is no longer identified as a separate Planning Area, although the area still exists. Overall, the acreage devoted to PALOMA DEL SOL I. SUIViMARY OF CHANGES SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-4 ~ll~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES Greenbelt Paseos within Paloma del Sol has increased since the former location of the Planning Area 24 Park/Recreation site has been incorporated into the pasco greenbelt system. Planning Area 28 has expanded from 25.0 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 7 to 49.4 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 8. The number of dwellings proposed in Planning 28 correspondingly increased from 113 to 190 units. Planning Area 29 remains as a Park/Recreation Area, but the location and configuration of the parcel are somewhat altered. However, the acreage of this Park/Recreation Area remains unchanged at 5.0 acres. In addition, the elementary school proposed for Planning Area 29B in Amendment No. 7 has been deleted from the land use plan since the Temecula Valley Unified School District has indicated that the site is no longer needed. Due to the high demand for office and commercial uses in the village center area near the super market center and the planned Home Depot, Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes that the 8.0-acre medium high residential uses allocated for Planning Area 38 be converted to Community/Neighborhood Commercial. Planning area specific development standards have been established for Planning Area 38. (See Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No. In addition, the residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been changed from Medium High to Medium. Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes several minor residential dwelling unit and acreage adiustments in Planning Areas 3, 4, 9, 13, 14, and 26 to reflect the approved and constructed implementing tracts. An acreage and dwelling unit comparison between Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 is delineated on the next page. PALOMA DI~L SOL I. SUM31ARY OF CHANGES SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219~AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP4) Page 1-5 II~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES SUMMARY OF CHANGES TABLE (Comparison of Specific Plan Amendments No. 7 and 8) S.P. No. 219 Amendment No. 7 S.P. No. 219 Amendment No. 8 Land Use Density Acres Dwelling Land Use Density Acres Dwelling DI~/A(~ Units DU/AC ~nits Medium 4.24 491.0 2,083 Medium 4.2 610.7 2,551 Medium (Senior 4.49 89.0 400 Medium (Senior 3.8/4.5* 89.0 335*/400 Community) Community) Medium High 5.41 416.5 2,255 Medium High 5.5 303.8 1,678 High 12.0 22.3 268 High 12.0 22.3 268 Very High 20.0 12.0 240 Very High 20.0 12.0 240 Community/ Community/ Neighborhood 35.0 Neighborhood 43.0 Commercial Commercial Neighborhood Neighborhood Commercial 17.5 Commercial 2.5 Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0 Junior High School 20.0 Junior High School 20.0 Elementary School 41.0 Elementary School 31.0 Parks or Parks or Recreation Areas 32.5 Recreation Areas 30.6 Greenbelt Paseos 28.0 Greenbelt Paseos 31.9 Natural Open Natural Open -° 9.0 Space Space Roadway Paseos 82.0 Roadway Paseos 81.5 Major Streets 102.7 Major Streets 102.2 PROJECT 3.8 1,391.5 5,246 PROJECT 5,072/ TOTAL TOTAL 3.6 1,391.5 5,137 Implementation of the adult retirement option for Planning Area 8 would increase the total dwelling unit allocation for Planning Area 8 to 400 du, raises the total medium density dwelling unit allocation to 2,951 du and would raise the total dwelling units allowed in the Specific Plan to 5,137 du. PALOMADELSOL I. SUMMARYOF CHANGES SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/A.MENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-6 ~l~ ~UMMARY A. PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Project Location and Local Land Uses The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan project site is comprised of 1391.5 acres in the City of Temecula in southwestern Riverside County (See Figure 1, Regional Map and Figure 2A, Vicinity Map). The site is bounded by Pauba Road on the north, State Highway 79 South on the south, Butterfield Stage Road to the east, and Margarita Road to the west. Existing land uses in the project area include residential, commercial, open space, agricultural and public/quasi-public. a. Existing On-site Land Uses and Zoning Designations The project site is characterized by rolling terrain. Several washes, beginning on-site, are evident in the north-central portion of the site. Those washes meander through the site, draining the site to the southwest and south. The existing zoning &the site is SP (Specific Plan). Significant portions of the site had historically been used for dry farming agricultural purposes. Those areas include the north-central/northwest, and southeast and southwest portions of the site. The southern portion of the site, adjacent to State Highway 79 South was temporarily developed with effluent holding/percolation ponds of the Eastem Municipal Water District. The overall site has been or is currently being mass graded for development. b. Surrounding Land Uses As shown on Figures 2A and 2B, the site is surrounded predominantly by existing and proposed single family land uses, agricultural land uses, the Temecula Valley High School and the Linfield Christian High School. Land north of the eastern portion of the site is "Vintage Hills" residential development. Properties northeast of the site are developed with several single family residences on large lots. Land to the east of all but the extreme southern portion of the site is vacant, however, a single family subdivision (Crowne Hill) is proposed to be developed on that land. Property east of the extreme southern portion of the site is being dry farmed. Immediately to the south of Highway 79 South is being developed with commercial uses. Land to the west of the site is being developed with "estate lot" single family homes (Los Ranchitos). Property northwest of the site is being developed with the Temecula Sports Park. 2. Project Description The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan project combines residential, commercial, schools, a neighborhood park/recreation areas, a__daycare center, greenbelt/paseos, open space and an extensive circulation network, within a comprehensive plan. The land use designation and residential densities for the PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan have been blended to reflect a mixed use concept responding to the changing urbanizing character of the Rah,A,,~ Cal',fo,i~a Temecula area. The Specific Plan is designed to consider access links, compatible land use transitions with neighboring properties, views, arid landform relationships. PALOMADEL SOL II. SUMMARY Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page II-1 Bsinore TEMECULA kX IFORNIA -,,~ _ PROJECT .~'--- LOCATION I~verSide Co. San Diego CO. REGIONAL MAP _~PA L 0 M A D E L S 0 L AMENDMENT #8 I1-2 A total of 5,2465.072' dwelling units ~'ei_s proposed on I,G3,?,.,?,1,037.8 acres throughout the site. As indicated on Figure 3, Specific Land Use Plan (including Table I, Detailed Land Use Summary), 2,4932,886 d.u. of Medium density uses on 580699.7 acres; 2,2551,678 d.u. of Medium-High density uses on 416.5303.8 acres; 268 d.u. of High density uses on 22.3 acres; and Very-High density units totaling 240 units on 12 acres are proposed. In addition, the following land uses are proposed: Community/Neighborhood Commercial (35.C,43.0 AC); Neighborhood Commercial (17.52.5 AC); F,~,,~lhree Elementary Schools (4-1-31.0 AC); one Junior High School (20 AC); ~cfour Nclr, l,bon~ood Park/Recreation Areas (Ig.G21.1 AC); Twvone Neighborhood Parks (14.59.5 AC); Oven Snace (9.0 AC): ami a Daycare Center (2.0 AC), greenbelt paseos (31.9 acres), roadway paseos (81.5 acres), and major streets (102.2 acres). Implementation of the adult retirement option for planning Area 8 increases the total dwelling unit allocation for Planning Area $ to 400 du, raises the total medinm density dwelling unit allocation to 2,355 du and would raise the total dwelling units allowed in the Sp~ffic Pla~ to 5,137 du. 3. Market Obiectives This project is proposed for development based on extensive buyer profile studies that were conducted for the project. The studies provide data regarding: location features which influence people in their choice of where to live; housing features considered important; features keeping people from buying a home; and groupings of features. A number of housing products are being designed at this time with features desired by home purchasers who would be identified as the target market for the project. Examples may be viewed in the Design Guidelines Section of this report (Section IV). It is thought that this research will permit the close targeting of homebuyers likely to move to PALOMA DEL SOL and t~,:a por'd,~,, of Pdvcr~ldc C,~,ry. the Temecula area. In addition, a number of house sizes, and neighborhood types (i.e. cluster, courtyard, conventional single family) will be offered to provide maximum variety and price range. It is the intent of the PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan to be unified in overall theme but varied in individual character to provide complimentary land uses. Additional specific market objectives are: To provide affordable, moderately priced single family detached homes. A market forecast states that it is expected that the supply of expensive single family homes will begin to grow faster than demand, and that homes in moderate price ranges should be more marketable. To provide a housing product with larger and fewer rooms with all else being equal. Market study shows that general product features associated with faster sales rates are a prefererice for larger and fewer rooms all else being equal. More bathroom facilities also appear to be associated with better sales. To provide land uses that extend and are consistent with ongoing development along Highway 79 South and in the urban core developing in Temecula. PALOMA DEL SoL II. S~Y Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page II-5 To reinforce the community identity of the project vicinity through control of project design elements such as architecture, landscaping, color, paving, walls, fencing, signage and entry treatments and through an extensive, viable circulation network. To reflect anticipated marketing needs and public demand by providing a diversity of housing types and locations which will be marketable within the region. To provide detached and attached, high-quality housing to serve a specmam of buyers. To provide "move-uP" opportunities for present residents in the vicinity and in the surrounding areas of Riverside and San Diego Counties. To attract commercial uses that will be oriented to serve community needs, those of persons employed on-site, and off-site users accessing the site from Highway 79 South. To provide appropriate adequate flood control measures designed to .contain flows in the two major on-site su-eambeds. To provide an aesthetic and functional open space system that responds to site conditions in its configuration and provides an extensive scenic amenity for future residents. To provide school sites on the project site which will permit elementary and middle school students to travel a short distance to attend school. To provide trail systems which will encourage and provide for the on-site use of alternate modes of transportation (bicycle, pedestrian). To provide a functional roadway system on-site which fosters the safe and efficient movement of local on-site traffic, while discouraging use by through tratTic and slowing traffic speeds in the immediate area of the ballfields, High density residential and community commercial by incorporating the use of traffic circles. To provide varied recreational opportunities and facilities for the use and enjoyment of on-site residents. To provide unique and aesthetically pleasing landscaping palettes which will provide for an auractive and visually cohesive project. To provide housing oppermnities for employees of the rapidly growing industrial areas of Temecula. P.~x,oa~.~ n.e~ So~, II. SUMMARY Specifle Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page II-6 SPECIFIC PLAN A. DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND STANDARDS [] PLANNING OBJEc~r~vES This Specific Land Usc Plan is being prepared within the framework of a detailed and comprehensive multi-disciplinary planning program. Issues such as engineering feasibility, market acceptance, economic viability, County Comprehensive General Plan goals and objectives, development phasing and local community goals have been fully examined and considered. To further ensure the environmental compatibility, aesthetic satisfaction and functional integrity of the plan, specific planning goals and objectives were identified. These were defined and identified in part through a careful analysis by an Oppommities and Constraints Study. With this analysis and the site goals and objectives in mind, the PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan: Considers topographic, geologic, hydrologic, and environmental opportunities and constraints to create a design that generally conforms to the character of the land by retaining and utilizing basic existing lanclforms as much as possible. Reflects anticipated marketing needs and public demand by providing a range of housing types which will be marketable within the developing economic profile of Temecula area as well as the County of Riverside generally. Provides residential development and adequate suppo~ facilities (commercial use, comrmlllity uses, schools, open space and recreation) and circulation in a convenient and efficient manner. Provides direct and convenient access to individual residential neighborhoods, recreational areas, and schools via a safe and efficient circulation system composed of a network of Arterial, Major, Secondary, Collector and Local roadways, each designed for appropriate traffic and user needs. Provides for alternative medes of ~ransportation within and adjacent to the site including pedestrian, bicycles, and equesu-ian trails, which will foster the conservation of valuable energy resources as well as lessen air pollution in the immediate area. Establishes a unique open space/environment utilizing a greenbelt paseo system and expanded parkway greenbelts to link project parks, recreation areas, and schools. Establishes design guidelines for the development of the Paloma del Sol Village Center PALOMA DIgL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Spec/ftc Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page IH-1 1. Specific Land Use Plan a. Project Description PAI.OMA DEL SOL is envisioned to be a high quality, mixed-use, master-planned community. Through a strong cohesive community design, The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan, when implemented, will offer a diverse, convenient living environment for future residents. The PALOMA DEL SOl. oroiect will be a highly amenitized community offering certain elements not often found along many standard master-planned communities such as an expansive lushly landscaped parkway system located within all Collector, Secondary, Major, and Arterial roadways, and also along Highway 79 South. Also, a lengthy and expansive Pasco System will serve to provide land use definition; to provide recreational opportunities; and in the major function of providing for the use of alternative modes of transportation (pedestrian) through the site. Recreation centers (areas) are also planned which will support and provide facilities for organized forms of recreation. The PALOMA DEL SOL property will be identified and unified through design elements such as architecture, signage, landscaping, color, walls, fencing, and entry treaUnents consistent with themes identified in the marketing studies. Some variability of design will be allowed so that individual development enclaves will be identifiable and compatible with the overall community, and will be able to establish their own individual design character. For a description of specific design elements within this Specific Plan please see Section IV, Design Guidelines. ,'l,,c Fita~re 3A deoicts all of the on-site areas that have chan~ed on the Amendment No. 7 (Plannin~ Areas 3.4. 5. 8. 9 12. 13. 14. 23. 24. 26.' 27. 28, 29, 29B, and 38)site plan f,~r ~o reflect the most recent Soecific Plan amendment (Soecific Plan Amendment No. 8) ]~ ............... ~,~ 2,," '~" tmad-~c-P~. Svecific Plan Amendment No. 8 is depicted in Figure 3B, Specific Plan Land Use Plan - Amendment No. 8, and is summarized on Table I, Detailed l.and Use Snmmarg. For specific information regarding Planning Areas, please refer to Sections HI.B. and C., Planning Area Development Standards and Zoning Regulations. The proposed land uses within the Specific Plan include: RESIDENTIAL - Development within the project will generate a density of -~,c,.~ 43.6 units per acre overall, and housing types will be spread over four density categories varying from Medium to Very High Density. The acreage shown for each planning area represents gross acreage, which ~ subject to minor fluctuations when detailed engineering and roadway alignment studies are completed. MEDIUM DENsrrY (2-5 DU/AC) residential areas include 2,4932.886 dwelling units on 535699.7 acres of land located throughout (predominately on the periphery) the site. Medium Density use is proposed for Planning Areas 4,5. 8 (senior option), 9, 10, 14, 17, 18,23.25, 26, 28, 31 and 33. It is anticipated that these homes will be located on 5,000 to 7,200 square foot lots and will be targeted for move-up, first-time buyers and some retirees. Planning Area 8 is planned as an active seniors community, but may be developed as Medium density family housing if the plans for the senior community are not implemented. PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN Spec/fie Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-2 7 W -J 0 Z <~ ~< IJ.l ir W W ~© W TABLE 1: DETAILED LAND USE SUMMARY Designation plannin~ DellsJty Tm'get Area Acreage R*n~e Density Units (du/ac) (du/ac) (du) 9 ~.0 2-5 3.1 10 ?~.0 2-5 4.5 ~51 14 .~0~ 2-5 4.7 17 73.0 2-5 4.5 325 M~dium 15 32.0 2-5 4~:6 23 56:6 2-5 4..5 256 25 16.0 2-5 4.2 67 26 ~o~9.s 2-5 ~i4 28 ~M.9~4 2-5 4~3.~ 31 67.0 2-5 3.2 214 33 37.0 2-5 4.5 165 M~lium (Senior Community) $* 89.0 2-5 3:8 ~i4.5) 335 ~(400~ 2 ~0.0 5-8 64 120 13 32.0 5-8 ~5~ ~1~ 15 17.0 5-8 5.5 93 M~ ~ 16 49.2 5-8 5.5 271 20 ~.0 5-8 5.5 ~0 21 36.8 5-8 5.5 202 22 ~.0 5-8 5.5 352 V~ ~ I 6B 12.0 13-20 20.0 V~ ~ Sub~ 1ZO 13-~ 20.0 CO~L ~ OI'~R ~i~. ~ 1, 1~ 1b, 38 ~2,~3~0 - - ~ ~ ~ 2.0 - - I~ ~ 30 . 20.0 - - ~ Sch~ 7, 11,~32 41.031:0 - . ~&R~fi~. 12, 19, ~, 2~ 37 32.530~6 - - ~ S~ 27 9;0 - - ~lt ~ 35 ~3L9 - - ~S~ 102.71~ - - PRO~ TOT~ 1~91~ ~.6 Im~lcmentatlon of the adult v~zment o~tlon for plannin~ ~ 8 ingl'~s~ the tOtal ~well~ IIRit allo~afio~ for PA 8 to 400 ~1, raises tim tOtal medium density du allocation m 2,951 and would ~ lh~ total dwelling unit~ allowed in the Sp~xific ~ to 5,137 du. PALOMA DEL SOL HI. S~ECn~C PhAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-5 MEDm'M (SENIOR COMMUNITY) is proposed for Planning Area 8 which contains 89.0 acres. If the Senior Community is implemented. ~_ total of 400 units will be constructed within the planning area at a density of 2-5 dwelling per acre. The Senior Community will target active retired ' individuals that wish to live within a private gated ¢ommtntity. If the Senior Community is not implemented, Planning Area 8 will be developed as a family oriented Medium Density Residential neighborhood and will sti-H have a maximum of 40,033.~5 units and a density of 2-5 dwelling units per acre. MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY ($-8 DU/AC) will be located in Planning Areas 2, 3, 5 13, 15, 16, 20, 21, and 22; 23 ,~,d 35. A total of 2,25.51,678 homes are to be constructed within this category of land use on a total of 416..5303.8 acres, which is generally targeted to first-time buyers. The minimum lot size is 4,000 square feet. The Medium High density residential land use is "as a rule" located in the central portion of the site. This use also touches the southern boundary of the site adjacent to Highway 79 South. I-IJGH DENSrrY housing is proposed for Planning Area 6A which contains 22.3 acres. A total of 268 homes will to be constructed at a density of 9-12 dwellings per acre. This planning area may include High density detached homes or townhomes, targeting first-time home buyers or the rental market. VERY HIGH DENSITY housing is proposed for Planning Area 6B which contains 12 acres. A total of 240 dwellings will be constructed at a density of 13-20 dwellings per acre. This Planning Area may include condominiums and apartments, which will be targeted for first-time home buyers and possibly the rental market. Where Medium, Medium High, High, and Very High density housing types are planned, private recreation facilities and common open space will be provided to supplement community open space uses. Private recreational areas may include facilities such as a pooli spa, and/or barbecue areas. Exact design and layout of these facilities will be accomplished in conjunction with detailed future tract layouts. COMMERCIAL - The community will be served by ~Lccfive commercial sites totaling 52..543.0 acres. The commercial uses proposed will be Neighborhood and Community/Neighborhood uses primarily for residents and persons employed oo- site. The commercial sites are located in Planning Areas 1, l(a), l(b), 36, and -2-338. All ~ixfive sites will have a community orientation while Planning Areas 1, l(a) and 1Co) also will be easily visible and accessible from'Highway 79 South and will therefore contain some highway-related commercial uses. For a list of permitted uses, see Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance. VII I.AGE CENTER - The o,,,~iLca~outhwest comer of P~t. OMA DEL SOL (bounded by Highway 79 South, Margarita Road, de Portola Road and Meadows Parkway) is part of a Village Center as defined by the Temecula General Plan. Although P~t. OM~ VEL SOl. was originally designed and has been partially constructed as a suburban master planned community, many of the design concepts and performance PALOMA DEL SoL III. SpECiFIC PLAN Specific Phm No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page III~6 standards pertaining to the village corn can still apply to the Paloma del Sol Village Center. The PnLOMn D~ SOL Village Center encompasses Planning areas 1, l(a), 1Co), 6A, 6B, 36, 37 and 38 which are planned for comme~'cial, single family residential, multi-family residential and neighborhood park uses. Specific design guidelines and standards that apply to future implementation of the village center are found in Section 1VD, Village Center Design Guidelines. Standards pertaining to backbone pedestrian and bicycle systems are found in Section 1VC, Landscape Design Guidelines and Community Elements of this Specific Plan. The SP Zone for these planning areas contains standards that support the village center design concepts. SENIOR COMMUNITY - Planning Area 8 may become a private gated active seniors community restricted to residents who meet appropriate age restrictions. Zoning will allow age resffietion upon approval of CC&R covenants which provide that the project will be marketed as age restricted in conformance with applicable State or Federal law. Such a community will offer unique streel/sidewalk landscaping and housing architecture. All park and recreational areas within the community gates will be private, designated for use only by Senior Community residents. Guidelines and standards pertaining to the implementation of the Senior Community are found in Section IV, Design Guidelines, of this specific plan. GRI:~NBELT/PASEOS, ROADWAY/PASEOS, SLOPES - A significant portion (I IG.G113.4 acres) of the project site is being designed as greenbelt/paseos, roadway paseos and slopes. These paseos serve several functions and act to "tie" the community'S neighborhoods to each other while providing alternative modes of travel (pedestrian, bicycle, etc.) to major destination points (schools, and commercial facilities, and recreation facilities) within the community. The paseos generally follow drainage courses and that will in most cases continue to function in a drainage capacity; however, the majority of off-site and on-site water now carried in the central east/west drainage channel will be carried through an underground system of pipes. Additionally, at broader locations within the paseos, recreational facilities may be planned. All roadways shown on the Specific Plan Land Use Plan also will have greenbelt/paseos (parkways) expanded fi.om the standard right-of-way. The greenbelt/pasco system is expected to provide a major aesthetic and unifying amenity for the entire project. SCHOOLS - A total of 6-1-51.0 acres will be allocated for school sites. F,,,~ Three elementary school sites are planned, containing a total of 4-1-31.0 acres. One elementary school site is located in the southwestern quadrant of the site adjacent to Margarita Road. An additional school site is located within ,;ach 6f ...........u,~,.~ ,e,~,~,~,,o ,,~ ........ u,,. o,,~ the northwest quadrant adjacent to Pauba Road and another is located within the center of the southeast quadrant. A 20-acre Junior High School site is located in the n~henmortheastern portion of the site, adjacent to Meadows Parkway. Elementary schools are proposed in Planning Areas 7, 11, 29, and 32. The Junior High School is proposed in Planning Area 30. RECREATION AREAS/PARKS - ."l"c,~c. cFour ,,G,12,,~,L,,,,d bark/recreation areas (Planning Areas 12, 19, and-24 and 29) totaling 21.1 acres, are planned to serve PaLOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific PLan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page IH-7 residents of the community. An existin~ 9.5 acre neighborhood park has been constructed and dedicated to the City of Temecula ( o_~n Planning Area 37). :amoffr~ ---'-'-' ...................... In addition further recreational opportunities will occur in the Medium, Medium-High, High and Very High density residential areas. For a full discussion of proposed recreational opportunities please see Sec. BI.Afl and Section IV, Design Guidelines, of this Specific Plan. ROADS - Major roadways totaling I~3.4102.2 acres will be implemented in conjunction with the proposed project. The City of Temecula's Circulation Plan will adequately serve future traffic volumes for the region. On-site traffic will be handled by a hierarchical roadway system consisfng of Arterial, Major, Secondary, Collector and Local roadways. Looping Collector roadways will generally carry interior traffic to higher traffic carrying Major and Arterial roadways (See Figure 4). In addition, ..... I .......... Class II bicycle lanes will be striped along most roadways throughout the site (Figure 6). b. Land Use Development Standards Three levels of development standards and guidelines have been established that, when combined, ensure an ordefly, sensitive methodology for implementation and development of the permitted uses established for the P~LOM~ DEL SOL by the Zoning Standards set forth in Sec. rn.C. At one level, special techniques and mitigations have been designed for application, as appropriate, to each Planning Area~ These specific standards are discussed at length in See. III.B of this Specific Plan and will be employed to insure a high &vci,,v~,,~ quality development, consistent with, ..... io;~,~j and providin~ ~,6vidc v,,,-i~ioaa for, the proper transition between the varying land uses and product intensity within the P~a_DM~ DEL SOL nroiect. A second level encompasses design techniques relative to architectural, landscape and community- wide development guidelines. These measures are discussed extensively in the Design Guidelines, Sec. IV of this Specific Plan. At a third, broader level, general project-wide provisions have been established. These standards, which will work in coordination wi/la the Planning Area Standards and D~sign Guidelines to insure overall project sensitivity are: 1) This Specific Plan shall be developed with a maximum of 5-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-~5,072 dwelling units within a total 1,391.5 acre area in the manner illustrated on the Specific Land Use Plan (Figure 3). Generally, the uses permitted shall include residential, neighborhood and community/neighborhood commercial, park, recreation, schools, open space, and circulation. These uses are more appropriately delineated in the Planning Area Concepts (Figures 15A- 15KK). 2) Uses and development standards will be in accordance with the zoning regulations established by this Specific Plan and detailed in the Planning Area Development Standards, Sec. III.B, and will be defined by Specific Plan objectives, future detailed development plans and potential conditional use permits as appropriate. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page 11I-8 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) lO) 11) 12) Standards relating to signage, landscaping, parking and other related design elements will conform to the zoning regulations also as set forth in Sec. IlI.B and the Design Guidelines in Section IV. When appropriate and necessary to meet the goals of this Specific Plan, the standards will exceed the zoning requirements provided herein. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of all City of Temecula Ordinances or as amended by this Ordinance and State laws. It also shall conform substantially with this approved Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 78 (S.P. No. SP-4), as filed in the Office of the City of Temecula Planning Department, unless otherwise amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain clearance from the City of Temecula Planning Department verifying that all pertinent conditions of Specific Plan approval have been satisfied for the phase of development in question. Any potential public open space/recreation areas on the site will be developed per appropriate zoning requirements and operated to maintain public access to recreation facilities. Design features such as special architectural treamaent, perimeter and interior landscaping and buffering of parking lot/loading zone areas will be incorporated into project design to minimize any potential conflict between higher intensity commercial uses and any abutting residential enclaves (Please sec ;he Section IV. Design Guidelines, See. An environmental assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, development plan, specific plan amendment or any other discretionary permit required to implement the specific plan. At a minimum, the environmental assessment shall utilize the evaluation of impacts addressed in the EIR prepared for this Specific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. 78 (S.P. No. SP4). A change of zone application, which would constitute a Specific Plan Amendment, may be required, as determined by the Planning Department, with a subsequent development application if the proposed use varies substantially from the use(s) provided for by the zoning standards established by this Specific Plan. Lots created pursuant to this Specific Plan and .any subsequent tentative maps shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zones applied to the property by this Specific Plan. If necessary, roadways, infrastructure, open space and any other public facilities will be coordinated by and paid for through an assessrhent or community services district or area to facilitate construction, maintenance and management. Final development densities for each Planning Area shall be determined through the appropriate development application up to the maximum density ide.ntified based upon, but not limited to, the following: PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-9 13) 14) 16) 17) 18) a) b) c) d) Adequate availability of services. Adequate access and circulation. Innovation in housing types, design, conservation or opportunities. Sensitivity to neighborhood design through appropriate lot and street layouts. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for each phase~ improvement plans for developed common open space areas, including irrigati°n plans; shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the stage of development in question. Irrigation plans shall be certified by a landscape architect. For the security and safety of future residents the applicant and/or developer shall incorporate the following design concepts within each individual tract: a) Circulation for pedestrians, vehicles and police patrols. b) City-required lighting of streets, waikways, bikeways and commercial area. c) Visibility of doors and windows from the street and between buildings. d) Fencing heights and materials. Any common areas identified in the specific plan shall be maintained by a permanent master maintenance organization. The organization may be public or private. The maintenance organization shall be established prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the first land division or issuance of any building permits for any approved development permit. It is anticipated that maintenance associations, if formed, will be established as follows: The master property owners association shall be charged with the un qualified right to assess their own individual owners who own individual units for reasonable maintenance and management costs which shall be established and continuously maintained. The property owners association shall be responsible for private roads, parking, open space areas, signing, landscaping, irrigation, common areas and other facilities as necessary. Specific Plan 219 is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. Light and glare may adversely impact operations at the Observatory. Outdoor lighting shall be from low pressure sodium lamps that are oriented and shielded to prevent direct illumination above the horizontal plane passing through the luminare. The Director of Community Development may approve minor variations in standards and design guidelines without requiring an amendment to the Specific Plan as follows: Site Design - Changes in the location of pedestrian pathways and linkages, parking lots, building orientation and lot configuration from the typical examples shown in PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. ~19/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-10 19) Figures 14A, 14B, 14C, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50A and 50E. The required elements may not be deleted. Signage: Changes in copy, size, materials and color as long as the proposed signage is compatible with the existing signage in Paloma del Sol and the typical signage shown on Figure 50D. Landscaping - Reductions inthe required landscape development zone up to 15% and plant material substitutions. Monumentation - Reductions in comer cut-off area not to exceed 15%, changes in monurnentation signage, materials and color as long as the propose changes are compatible with existing monumentafion in P~LOM~ DEL SOL and the typical plans in the Specific Plan. Walls and Fencing - Changes in materials and color that are compatible with existing walls and fencing in PALOMA DEL SOL and typical wall and fencing details shown in the Specific Plan. Increases in height not to exceed 10% of the maximum allowed by the Specific Plan. Architecture - Additional styles and detailing that are compatible with the eclectic Mediterranean styles prescribed for the Specific Plan Setbacks - Reductions from required setbacks not to exceed 15%. Parking - Reductions in the required parking and parking area landscaping not to exceed 15%.~ Phasing - Phasing that differs from the Conceptual Phasing Plan and the Public Facilities Phasing Plan of the Specific Plan as long as infrastructure and community facilities needs of the community are met. Changes in major design criteria such as land use, minimum lot size, park dedication requirements and roadway standards will require an amendment to the Specific Plan. Transfer of Dwelling Units -- The proposed number of dwelling units contained in a residential application may exceed the maximum expressed in that Planning Area by up to twenty pement (20%) without an amendment to the Specific Plan, provided that an equal or greater number of units was unused in a previously approved or concurrently submitted application within another Planning Area or combination of Planning Areas, or the owner of another Planning Area files a written relinquishment of an equal number of dwelling units in another Planning Area. All transfers are to be approved by the Planning Depastment. PALOMA DI~L SOL III. SPEC1YIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-11 2. Circulation Plan a. Circulation Plan Description The project roadway concept depicted in the Circulation Plan (Figure 4) was developed as a result of a thorough traffic analysis conducted by Wilbur Smith Associates conducted for the original EIR (See Technical Appendices). The circulation plan has been revised based on. a more recent traffic study dated (September %, 1999); also prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates;-to address the traffic impacts associated with the Villages @ Pasco del Sol commercial center proposed for Planning Areas l(a) and l(b). The 1999 analysis evaluated not only the proposed Plaza del Sol commercial area development, but also: 1) background traffic growth, 2) proposed adjustments to the sizes, configuration and uses allowed in residential Planning Areas 6 (now 6A and 6B) and 8 and 3) other known area development projects that would affect traffic flow and distribution. The 1999 analysis also contains a "City Build-Out Assessment" which considers full build-out of the City of Temecula, City of Murrieta and surrounding unincorporated County of Riverside areas. Because the study also considers off-site circulation impacts not directly related to the Specific Plan. Area, the discussion that follows attempts to distinguish clearly between those improvements to be provided by the applicant and/or any subsequent developers as part of the development of PALOMA DF, L SOL and those improvements delineated in the traffic analysis but not included within the scope of this Specific Plan. Those improvements contemplated to be constructed in conjunction with development of PALOMA DSt, SOL Specific Plan are specifically delineated in the Circulation Plan Development Standards. Principal east-west roadway access to the site is provided by Highway 79 South. Highway 79 South is a paved two-lane road between Interstate 15 (I-15), and proposed Butterfield Stage Road which will be improved to a 4-lane roadway in 1999/2000. Additional east-west access to the site is provided by De Portola Road, Rancho Vista Road, Pauba Road and Rancho California Road, all paved two or four-lane roads. The only north-south road currently servicing the project study area is Margarita Road, a paved two and four-lane Arterial roadway between Highway 79 South and Rancho California Road. Meadows Parkway, a planned 4-lane roadway which already has been constructed south from Rancho California and Pauba Roads into the northern and central areas of Paloma del Sol, will be completed to Highway 79 South with full width improvements prior to the opening of the commercial uses in Planning Areas l(a) and 1Co). On-site circulation is accommodated efficiently by a network of roadways. Each ¥oadway's location and size (Figure 4) are designed to facilitate the efficient movement of traffic throughout the site. The main objective of the circulation plan is to provide direct and convenient access to individual residential clusters, schools, recreation areas, and commercial facilities through a safe and efficient system ot~ arterial, major, secondary, collector, and local roadways, and a pedestrian trail sidewalk system. Roadway cross-sections are shown on Figures 5A-C. In addition, a Class II striped bicycle trail system will be provided as depicted on Figure 6. PALOMA DI~L SOL III. SPEC1FIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page HI-12 Primary north-south on-site traffic will be handled by a Major roadway, Meadows Parkway, which will have a 100-foot right-of-way between Pauba Road on the north and Highway 79 South on the south. From Campanula Way to Highway 79 South, Meadows Parkway will consist of a ~,,,, 100-foot,~ade divided ~four-lane road. De Portola Road will be a Major roadway with a 100-foot right-of-way. That road will provide a route for off-site traffic to move through the site, consistent with the City's Master Plan of Highways. A significant portion of on-site traffic will be handled by a collector loop road system consisting of two lanes of travel in a 66-foot fight-of-way. One loop road (Roadway"B", Figure 4) forms a full circle which will provide access to all Planning Areas to the west of Meadows Parkway and north of De Portola Road, with the exception that the Daycare Center (Planning Area 34) will receive access from Pauba Road. All Planning Areas to the east of Meadows Parkway and north Of De Portola Road will take access from Loop Road D, with the exception that the Neighborhood Commercial facility will receive access from Pauba Road. Planning Areas between De Portola Road and Highway 79 South will receive access from Margarita Road, Highway 79 South, De Portola Road or Campanula Way as designated on Figure 4, Circulation Plan. Turning lanes will be provided at various locations throughout the project as specified in the Traffic Impact Analysis (See Technical Appendices). As noted, in addition to the vehicular circulation system, bicycle use will be encouraged by the provision of a bicycle trail system as depicted by Figure 6. Class II bicycle trails will be located on Collector, Secondary, and Gateway roadways as depicted on Figure 6. Pauba Road at the northern boundary of the site will also contain a bicycle trail. A Class I bicycle trail will be provided adjacent to Meadows Parkway and De Portola Road. This system will connect neighborhoods and points of destination throughout the site. b. Circulation Plan Development standards 1) The proposed Circulation Plan provides an efficient traffic design that meets or exceeds the public safety, security and transportation needs of the project. The un-site system depicted on the Circulation Plan (Figure 4) has been derived from the Master Circulation Plan outlined in the project Traffic Study and will serve as the composite circulation plan for the Specific Plan. (See Technical Appendices.) The illustrated, on-site roadway improvements will be phased in accordance with this plan. 2) Heavy through traffic should be eliminated from residential neighborhoods and commercial/high density interface areas. Major roadways should be implemented as non- access roadways, with residential neighborhoods served by smaller residential collectors. 3) The subdivision shall comply with the street improvement recommendations/mitigations measures outlined in the project traffic study (Please see Sec. V.D.1.) PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPI~CIFIC PLAN Specffic Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-18 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) On-site roads will be constructed as: a) b) c) d) e) g) Highway 79 South (142' R.O.W.) Arterials (110' R.O.W.) Majors (100' R.O.W.) Secondaries (88' R.O.W.) Collectors (66' R.O.W.) Commercial Collector with on-street parking and traffic circles (78' R.O.W.) Local Streets (60' R.O.W.) · Note: Median islands, traffic circles and bus turnouts are proposed on ce~ain project carries (collector and local stxeets). In this case, the R.O.W. provided shall be increased to allow construction of the medians, traffic circles and bus turnouts according to City sumdards. Landscaping requirements will be based on street width in accordance with the Roadway Landscape Treatments depicted on Figures 23 through 31in the Design Guidelines (Sec. IV.B). Some Major roadway improvements may be implemented through an assessment district or similar financing mechanisms. All roads shall be constructed to ultimate City standards in accordance with Ordinance No. 460 and 461 as a requirement of the implementing subdivisions for the Specific Plan. The project proponent shall participate in the .Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as approved by the City of Temecula subject to certain reimbursements under Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement. The project shall comply with the conditions and requirements set forth by the City. A bike path system as described in the Design Guidelines (Sec. IV) shall be constructed in accordance with City standards for such facilities. Bus shelters shall be constructed upon approval of routes and locations by the City and the Riverside Transit Authority (PTA). PALOMA DBL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page III-19 3. Drainane Plan a. Drainage Plan Description The majority of the project site is located within the Temecula Creek watershed, close to the confluence of Temecula Creek and Murrieta Creek. The site generally drains in an east to west direction, and is an eventually tributary to Temecula Creek through a number of existing culvert crossings of Highway 79 South: Total off-site tributary area is composed of approximately 192 acres from Buttodield Stage Ranch to the east of the site. ........ j witl, Development of the site will alter the natural on-site drainage courses __.:,,,,,, to acc, laL, ,.xtcnL After development, new drainage courses will consist of streets, channels and swales, underground storm drains and/or a combination of the above. A significant amount of off- site as well as on-site flows will be piped under the greenbelt/paseo system (Figure 7). The majority of water will exit the site to the west and south in pipes varying in size up to 120 inches in diameter. The actual size and location of the drainage system will be determined at the tract map stage of development. A small portion of the northern part of the site may be within the Mutrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan under the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Flood Control District. b. Drainage Plan Development Standards 1) Drainage and flood control facilities and improvements shall be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District requirements. 2) It is anticipated that drainage/flood control facilities will be maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 3) Please see Sec. V.C.4, Flooding, for mitigations viewed as further development standards for drainage. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-20 5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan : a. Public Facility Phasing Description In order to insure timely development of public facilities, a phasing plan has been prc~.ed for the il~ccfour Neighborhood Park/Recreation Areas (Planning Areas 12, 19; ~d 24 ~d!!~9), for the Neighborhood Parks (Planning Areas--29A--~ 37); for the Paseo/Greenbelt System, for the Equestrian Trail along Pauba and de Ponola Roads, for each Elementary School (Planning Areas 7, 11, 29, and 32), and for the Junior High School (Planning Area 30) (See Figure 10~). b. Public Facility Phasing Schedule Public facility consWaction shall be phased as provided by the Public Facilities Phasing Table (Table 2) and Figure 10. 6. Grading Plan · Grading Plan Description Grading for PALOMA DEL SOL site is tailored to the existing topography of the site. It is intended that the proposed plan be sensitive to and reflect original natural land forms, where possible, so that different land uses and residential enclaves are distinguished and separated by topographic features (See Figure 11, Grading Concept.). Portions of the site that are fiat or gently sloping will require minimal cut and fill operations. Earthwork quantities will be balanced in logical areas on-site. The Grading Plan also establishes a basis for appropriate treatment of drainage requirements and accommodates a street system that meets City of Temecula standards for acceptable grades. b. Grading Plan Development Standards All grading activities shall be in substantial conformance with the overall Conceptual Grading Plan (Figure 11), and shall implement any grading-related mitigation measures outlined in: Seismic Safety (gec. V.C:I.) Slopes and Erosion (Sec. V.C.2.) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations (See. VLE.&F.). 1) Prior to any development within any area of the Specific Plan, an overall Conceptual Grading Plan for the portion in process shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The Grading Plan for each such area shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual stages of development within that area. 2) 3) All streets shall have a gradient not exceeding City standards. Prior to initial grading activities, a soils report; and geotechnical study shall be performed that further analyze on-site soil conditions and include appropriate measures to control erosion and dust (See Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations). 4) PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLA.N Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page Ili-25 Table 2 PUBLIC FACILITIES PHASING Planniug Public Facility Size Milestone and Requirements Area of Site 12 Nci*~hborhood Park/Recreation 7.4 AC To be completed during Phase IV, prior to Area issue^cc of'the 4.$76th buildin;~ permit. 19 Neighborhood Park/Recreation 7.7 AC T,~ hc ....... ~; ........... ~ ....... , v .......... ~,,..,~ v ........ 'to be completed during Phase II, prior to the issuance of the 2.376th buildin~ permit. 24 Neighborhood Park/ .,a~^c To be completed during Phase IV; prior to the Recreation Area 1.0^c issuance of the 4.576th building permit and in conjunction with developmeut of Planning Areas ....... 2(;. 29~ Neighborhood Park/ 5.0 AC ';',~ b~ ' .... ' ...... Z~Z. This fa¢iliW shall be constructed and fully operable prior to the issuance of the 200"' building permit in Tract 24] 88, excluding tho 67 dwellin]~ units in Tree, t, 24188-1. 37 Neighborhood Park 9.5 AC Bas been completed and dedicated to the City of Temecu]a. 35 Grconbelt/Paseo System -- To be completed concurrently with adjacent developmenL N/A Equestrian Trail -- To be completed concurrently with development of Plannin~ Areas 8, 9, 101 ~ 28, 31, 32, 33 and 34. 7 Elementary School I 1.0 ^c To be constructed by the School District in accordance to their pupil demand and funding capabilities. 11 Elementary School 10.0 ^C To be constructed by the School District in accordance to their pupil demand and funding capabilities. 32 Elementary School 10.0 ^C To be constructed by the School District in accordance to their pupil demand and funding capabilities. 30 Junior High School 20.0 ^C To be constructed by the School District in accord- ance to lheir pupil demand and fimdinl~ capabilities. Note: Timing of improvements may be modified through a development agreement. PALOMA DI~L SOt. Specific Plan No. °10/Araondmcnt No. 8 (S.P. No. SP'4) 1II. SPr~Cri~c PLaN Page III-27 0 0 5) Detailed grading plans shall be prepared prior to any on-site grading for each project or group of projects. 6) The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all planting and irrigation systems until those operations are the responsibility of other parties. 7) The overall shape, height and grade of any cut and fill slope shall be developed in concert with the existing natural contours and scale of the natural terrain of a particular site. 8) Potential brow'ditches, terrace drains or other minor swales, determined necessary at future stages of project review, shall be lined with natural erosion control materials or concrete. 9) Grading work shall be balanced on-site wherever POssible. 10) Graded but undeveloped land shall be planted with interim erosion control plant materials. ! 1) All cut and fill slopes shall be cons~xucted at inclinations of no steeper than two (2) horizontal feet to one (1) vertical foot unless otherwise approved by the City. 12) Grading shall not be permitted prior to approval of grading permits for the development area in question. 7. O~en Space and Recreation Plan a. Open Space and Recreation Description A major unifying element of the PALOMA D~L SOL community is the Open Space and Recreation Program. The Program is extensive and provides a vast array of recreational opportunities in which all members of the Community can participate. Further, the program incorporates many diverse elements in a eoordinatext, cohesive plan that interrelates with and links the various neighborhoods of the community with each other and to certain destination points, such as schools and shopping facilities. Opportunities vary from passive (i.e. undeveloped open space),, to active (i.e. neighborhood park), to potentially structured (i.e. recreational programs). Varying types and degrees of activities will be available which will provide residents the opportunity to take quiet "walks in the park;" use an on-site equestrian trail; participate in community meetings and social gatherings; participate in active outdoor informal recreational activities; and participate in potentially structured professionally organized and instructed courses and sporting events which could occur at one of the five park/recreatiun centers. In fact, the proposed program is significant in that 254.9153.0 acres of land will be devoted to park, recreational, open space, parkway and pasco uses which is equivalent to approximately 16.0 10.5 acres per 1,000 residents. The various recreational facilities are linked to each other and the other elements of the community with an extensive parkway and pasco trail system. The "heart" of the system is the "Backbone Community Pasco System." That system is augmented by neighborhood open space corridors and a parkway system adjacent to all collector and higher volume roadways. The parkway and pasco system will be landscaped as shown in the Design Guidelines (Section IV) and will at a minimum PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page 1II-29 contain one or more sidewalks. Bicycle trails (Class II) will be provided as shown on Figure d. The overall Recreation and Open Space concept is depicted in Figure 12. The elements and acreage of the Program are provided in Table 3. The various elements of the Program are discussed below. 1) Community Recreational OpPortunities. Community recreational opportunities are those opportunities which are available for the use and enjoyment of members of the PALOI~ DEL SOL community. They are segmented and discussed as follows: · Neighborhood Parks/Recreational Areas · Schools · Equestrian Trail · Activity Nodes · Rancho California Sports Park a) Neighborhood Parks. T,~oA neighborhood park* (Planning Are~ and 37) totaling 14.59.._~5 acres areis provided. ,~,,~ v,~,~, ,~,~ ,,,~-,,-,, in the southwest and ii,oi[[i,Lat portions of the site. The parks will ~c is l:..-,d~ca~d developed and raay includes_, o ...... o ,~. ball riel&, soccer fields, picnic areas, to; lot~, cxciG.,c ~,~,,,o,~, ............................................ barbe M,~,,~,'~ ~'~"~,~'~, u,,~-~,~,~, o~,,, ,~..~', ~'~ r,.,,~i, cues, and a restroom/snack bar "- ........ ~ ................. l~ablicThe park* · viii Bc is_owned by the City of Temecula and maintained by the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) ............................ b) Neighborhood Park/Recreational Areas...'l'~.ccFour neighborhood park/recreation centers totalifig Ig.G21.1 acres are provided. Plannin~ Area 12. adiacent to the elementary school site in Plannin~ Area 11. ~rovides oark/recreational om~orUmities on 7.4 acres. O~lanning Area 19-) is located in the northwestern part of the site and contains 7.7 acres. A~lanning Area 24) contains g A, ...... pan 1.0 acres and is located ~ctwcca Plar~,k, ca ....... in the northeastern of the site. adjacent to and south of the oven mace use in Planning Area 27 ........ ............... planning Area -1-~2___9) contains :]n~5 0 and also is located in the a,,,,ah~iortheastem portion of the site. adiacant to and north of the oven space use in Planning Area 27. These ¢;.,,;c;~areas could provide facilities for community meetings, workshops, social events and active participation recreational activities. They will function in at least the same, if not expanded capacity, as fully developed public parks and could be constructed as public parks. Each park or recreation center may contain a community building and may include.the following representative facilities: · · · · · · · · · Pool complex (swimming pool, pool deck, wading pool and spa) Tennis courts (2 lighted) Sand volleyball court Off-street parking lot Adventure play Group barbecue patio Open play area Family picnic area Shade arbor PALOMA DEL SOL III. SP~.Cn~C PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-30 Z~ z IZl (.,) LU LU 0n~ .u Table 3 RECREATION]OPEN SPACE PROGRAM I. COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES A. Neighborhood Park~ 'B. Neighborhood Park/Recreational Areas -1-~021.1 C. School Recreation Facilities 1. Elementary Schools (5 AC each x ,~3_ schools) -2015.0 est. 2. Junior High School 12 est. 3. Temecula Valley High School 25 ,.,,;. acrea~,e added for this facility) D. Rancho California Sports Park (No acreage added for this facility) E. Equestrian Trail (adjacent to Pauba and de Portula Roads) 4.0 F. Activity Nodes within the Community "Backbone" Pasco Systero - calculated 2.2 at the rate of I acre per 6,500 persons TOTAL H. PRIVATE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OPPORTUNITIES To be provided in each Medium-High, High and Very-High Density Planning Area by the developer of that particular planning area - calculated at the rate of one acre pet 500 persons. C. Very-High Density 0:61.~4 TOTAL ':2.~,12.4 IH. OPEN SPAC~ GREENBELT/PASEOS AND PARKWAY PASEOS A. Open Space Corridors by Residential Density To be provided in each Medium and Medium-High Density planning Area by the developer of that particular planning area - calculated at a rate of one acre per 250 persons. 1. Medium (except for Planning Areas 31, 25 and 26 for which no provision for 23.027.3 open space, grcenbelts/paseos or parkway paseos will be made because of the 7,200 square foot minimum lot size ) 2. Medium-High 22.6 19.0 minus I~.$ 9.5 acres for private active participation opportunities. B. Community "Backbone" Paseo System (28 minus 2.2 acres for activity nodes) 25.8 C. Natural Open Space (Planning Area 27) · 9.0 D. Roadway Pesoos 1. Medium Density Residential $5.,~52.8 2. Medium High (Clusters) '26-.$26.9 3. High / ycry High (Apartments) TOTAL 147.2153.1 OVERALL RECREATIONAL AND OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITIES -2'54:9278.3* Private recreation area of at least one sere shall be provic~i within Planning Area 8 if it is developed as a Senior Community. If Planning Area 8 is developed as a family-oriented Medium density neighborhood, no private recreation ~ are required consistent with the requirements for Medium density residential uses elsewhere in the Specific Plan. In either case, planned public open space in the form of g~nbelt and parkway pzzeos adjacent to the perimeter of Planninoo Area 8 shall be provided. PALOMA DEL SOL IH. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-32 c) d) e) , ,,~,,, ,, ,,. .... ,~, ,,,~o~ ,,,~,,,,,,.o ........... , ,,,~, ~ct~wtles for all al~e ~roul~s can occur at ~ park/recreation center. There are Tot Lot(s) fo'~ young children '"'tots-", .i, dventure Play Area(s) for older children, and various other listed facilities for teens and adults. Not only are the park/recreation centers diver~e from a standpoint of age groups catered to, but also to activities that can be accommodated. As noted, community meetings can occur at these centers, but other events will also be accommodated such as social gatherings (sewing circles, bridge clubs, hobbies), and arts and crofts instruction may also occur. In addition, sports instruction clinics may als0 be held at these locations. Schools.. ,y,~ schools are proposed to be located on the site, and another (Temecula Valley High School) is existing just north of the site. The Junior High School site is located in the northeastern portion of the site, and ,o~ elementary schools are located throughout the site. Associated with and on school grounds are recreational equipment and fields for school children and which also may be used by the community. Typical recreational equipment and sports fields which, may be provided at these school sites will include the following: Playground equipment, basketball courts, tennis courts, volleyball courts, softball field(s), soccer field(s), and football field(s). Equestrian Trail. Extension of regional equestrian trails will be provided along the south side of Pauba Road and along the north side of de Portola Road in landscaped parkways. The trail will be 10 feet in width. Activity Nodes. Within the Community Pase0 System a number of activity nodes (minimum size: 0.5 AC) will occur at a rote of one acre per 6,500 residents, yielding a total of approximately 2.42 acres. These nodes may include the following facilities/equipment:. Picnic tables, tot lots, family picnic, horseshoes, and group barbecue facilities. These Community Activity Nodes will be available for use of all residents, and as such, will be maintained by the master home owner's association or TCSD. Rancho California Sports Park. The Rancho California Sports Park, to COntain more than 86 recreational acres upon its completion, is located immediately northwest of the site, at the intersection of Margarita and Pauba Roads. This park will contain sports fields and recreational facilities for use by all residents in the area. PALOMA D.~L SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page Iti-33 2) Private Active Participation Opportunities. In Medium-High density single family detached neighborhoods and in neighborhoods containing attached housing types, private recreation facilities wilt be provided at a rate of one acre per 500 persons. It is expected that there will be a number of these recreational facilities throughout the site in the Medium-High, High and Very High density areas. The pasco and roadway systems have segmented the property into numerous residential enclaves (neighborhoods). It is envisioned that the majority of those enclaves will have private recreational facilities. Private recreational areas may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wetbars, and kitchen facilities. In the Medium density areas these private recreational facilities will be located within secondary pasco parkways which weave through the neighborhoods. Planning Area 8 (Medium density), if implemented as a Senior Community, creates a community geared toward "Active Seniors." Private recreation facilities for its community residents are planned to provide the following amenities: a) Competition sized pool b) Gathering center (no less than 5,000 square feet) c) 2 tennis courts d) May also contain: putting green,' shuffle board, paddle tenniS, badminton, volleyball The extent of recreational facilities and private common open space provided will be designed and programmed based on detailed site planning for the Senior Community. Timing of construction will be based on development Plan approval. Tract maps in Planning Area 8 (if seniors) shall contain conditions which state the recreation building and main recreation common area grounds must be completed on or before 50% of the units have been sold and transferred to home buyers. It should be emphasized that PALOMA DEL SOL is being planned asa single integrated community and that the community-wide recreational facilities (paseos/trails, community recreation centers, neighborhood parks, and the equestrian trail) will be available to all residents of PALOMA DEL SOL. Future individual tract approvals must therefore receive credit for the overall project-wide open space and recreation systems in assessing open space and recreation requirements for each future individual tract. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amev~m~at No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-34 3) Open Space, Greenbelt Paseos, Parkway Paseos. Open Space Corridors will be provided in the Medium and Medium-High density residential neighborhoods and will be calculated at a rate of one acre per 250 persons. One exception is that provisions for internal greenbelt/paseos are not required when average lot sizes meet or exceed a 7,200 square foot minimum. If Planning Area 8 is developed as an active senior community these open space corridors may be private but shall be connected to the public pasco system. Such connections may be controlled using pedestrian entry gates. If Planning Area 8 is not developed as a private access-controlled residential neighborhood, these open space corridors shall be public. G-reenbelt/paseos will provide several functions. Fa'st, they will give additional separation between numerous dwellings in the Medium and Medium- High density residential neighborhoods (essentially, higher density single family neighborhoods). Second, they will provide an area for a limited amount of passive recreational opportunities to occur. Third, in many instances, they will provide a link to the community paaeo system (discussed below)~ Fourth, in the Medium-High density residential areas, they will provide an area in which neighborhood active participation recreational facilities can be located. Facilities, other than those just noted, will not be provided within these corridors with the pOssible exception of a trail in some locations. However, pasoo areas will be landscaped with tuff, trees, etc. so that they will be aesthetically pleasing. The corridors will be oWned and maintained by a neighborhood homeowners association. b) Comity "Backbone" Greenbelt~Pasco System. The community pasco system containing a total of-283L9 acres of land, will provide pedestrian and bicycle access links throughout the PALOMA DEL SOL community. The system will vary in width and will meander throughout the community. (See Figure 11.) Being fully landscaped, the system not only will function as a trail system, but it also will be aesthetically pleasing and' will provide dwelling unit and land use separations. The system will .contain a pedestrian path that is 8 feet in width, and community activity nodes will provide linkages not only to each neighborhood within the Community, but also to major destination points including schools, park, community recreation centers, shopping facilities, and the Rancho California Sports Park just northwest of the site. Since all residents of PALOMA DEL SOL will be allowed to use this system, it will be maintained by the Master HomeoWners' Association or the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD). ¸c) Parkway Open Space Adjacent to Roadways. An expanded parkway system will be located adjacent to all collector and higher volume roadways. The parkway system will be landscaped with tuff, trees, and various additional plant materials. Community "theme" walls will be located adjacent to the parkways. Parkways will vary in width with a buffer located adjacent to Highway 79 South. Some of the parkways will meander, thus creating changing and interesting viewpoints to those using them. Sidewalks will be provided on each side of the parkways throughout the development. Also to be included are bicycle lanes on selected roadways. P.~.LOMA DEL SOL' III. SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-35 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) II) 12) Open Space and Recreation Plan Development Standards One neighborhood park will be provided for the benefit of all residents within the community. The two neighborhood parks may contain the following facilities/equipment: picnic area(s), tot lot(s), exercise course(s), playfield(s), rest rooms, parking areas, and a basketball court 0aalf-eourt), soccer fields and baseball fields. Three neighborhood park/recreational areas will be provided for the benefit of all residents within the community. The neighborhood park/recreation centers may be developed as public or private passive parks. As an alternative, the sites may be developed as private or public active parks or recreation centers which may contain the following representative equipment: Pool Complex (swimming pool, pool deck, wading pool and spa), tennis courts, volleyball courts, tot lot, adventure play, group pienicdbarbecue facilities, open play turf area, clubhouse building, and parking areas, and may also contain shuffle board, paddle tennis, or badminton (See Section IV, Design Guidelines for further definition of included equipment). F'ivc Four sites will be provided for schools (ferar three elementary schools, and one junior high school). When oonsmacted, those schools will have playgrounds and areas which may contain the following facilities: Playground equipment, basketball courts, tennis courts, volleyball courts, softball-soccer-football fields. An equestrian trail (10 feet in width) will be provided in the parkway area on the south side of Pauba Road and on the north side of De Portola Road. Activity nodes for the use of all residents.will be provided in the Community Pasco system at the rate of one acre per 6,500 residents. The average size of those nodes will be IA to ~'acre. The Activity Nodes may contain picnic tables, seating and open play areas. Exercise par courses may also be provided. The Activity Nodes will be owned and maintained by the Master Homeowners' Association or the TCSD. Private active participation recreational areas will be provided in the Medium-High, High, and Very- High density residential areas at a rate of one acre per 500 persons. Private active participation recreational areas may include the following facilities: pool(s), spa(s), cabana(s), meeting room(s), barbecues, wetbar(s), and kitchen facilities. Open Space Corridors will be provided in the Medium and Medium-High density residential land use areas at a rate of one acre per 250 persons, unless lot size minimums exceed 7,200 square feet. Within the Medium-High density residential areas private active participation recreational uses will occur within these corridors. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECI~C PLAN Spedfic Plan No. 219/Amen&nent No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-36 14) 15) 16) 17) 18) 19) ~1) Open Space Corridors will be owned and maintained either by a homeowners' association or the TCSD as appropriate. A Community Paseo System will be provided for the benefit of all residents in the PALOMA DEL SOL community. The Community Paseo System will be owned and maintained by a master homeowners' association or the TCSD. A Parkway System will be provided on all collector and higher volume roadways adjacent to and throughout the project site. The Parkway System will contain sidewalks on each side of the sweet. The Parkway System will be maintained by either the Master Homeowners' Association or the TCSD. All recreational and open space areas will be landscaped, and irrigated. All recreational facilities will provide parking in accordance to City of Temecula standards. Landscaping within recreation and open space areas will be further governed by the Development Standards in the Landscaping Plan section of this Specific Plan (Section IH.B.8.) and the Design Guidelines Section i Section IV) of this Specific Plan. PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) HI. SPECIFIC PLAN Page HL37 B. PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ZONING REGULATIONS Development standards and zoning regulations for PALOMA DEL SOL have been established at three levels: General Development Provisions, which.were addressed in Section. III.A. 1; Design Guidelines, which are provided in Section. IV; and Planning Standards to which this section is devoted. Planning Areas were selected on the basis of logical, separate units of development. Criteria ~onsidered in this process included uniformity of use as it pertains to zoning and relationship to adjoining product and surrounding topography. The Planning Area'graphics for this section (Figures 15A-tttJ) were derived from the Conceptual Landscape Plan (Figure 13A), The site plans depicted herein are only conceptual in nature. Although development may conform closely to some elements of the illustrative plans provided in Section IV, it is apticipated that actual lotting will not be determined until the tract map stage. A Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance was prepared and submitted separately from this Specific Plan document. The zoning provisions within that Ordinance establish use restrictions for each Planning Area~ The zoning provisions should be used in conjunction with the planning standards for each respective Planning Area. Immediately following this page are three examples of single family residential lotting configurations which may be developed at various locations within the Specific Plan site (See Figures 14A, 14B, and 14C). The "Typical Traditional" configuration as well as the "Typical Courtyard" configuration may be developed at various locations in the Medium density category. The "Typical Ouster" configuration may be developed in the Medium High density category. These figures are provided to give the reader an example of how some neighborhoods within the specified land use categories may be developed. They are not intended to be representative of all residential development of the same density. In addition, three examvles of single family residential lotting confi ~urations which may be developed within the senior community on Plannine Area 8 are shown on Fi~'ares 14D, 14E, and 14F. PALOMA DEL SOL HI. SPF. CIFIC PLAN SPF. Cn~C ~ NO. 219/AMEm)~ NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page 11144 1. Planninn Area 1, l(a), and l(b) a. Descriptive Summary Planning Are~ 1, 1 (a) and 1 Co), as depicted on Figure 15A, provides for the development of 35.0 acres ,ill,of Community/Neighborhood Commercial uses. A typical site plan is depicted in the Design Guidelines, Section IV. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planni.'ng Are~ will be provided from Margarita Road, State Route 79, and Campanula Way-t~r-the-nm~. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. Access to the individual planning areas shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. Access along Highway 79 is subject to Caltrans approval. 2) A Minor Community entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Highway 79 and · Margarita Road at the southwest boundary of the Planning Area (see Figure 32). 3) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Campanula Way and Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area (see Figures 35 and 36). 4) A Major Community entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Highway 79 and Meadows Parkway at the southeastern boundary of the Planning Area (see Figures 32 and 33). 5) Roadway landscape treaunents, such as those depicted on Figures 25, 23A, 23:arB~ and 27, respectively, Shall be provided along Highway 79, Margarita Road, Meadows Parkway, and Campanula Way, except for commercial frontage. The primary character of the commercial frontage shall consist of extensive turf mounding, grouped trees and shrubs. 6) A bicjcl~ u,dl Class 1I bicycle lane will be located ino~n Meadows Parkway;, and Campanula Way to the north and east of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6. 7) Pedestrian access between Planning Areas 36 and 38 and Hauning Area 1 shall be provided as shown on Figures 50A and 50C. 8) Hease refer to Section Hi.A.1 through III.A for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: nI.A.1. Specific LandUse Plan HI.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Han III.A.4. Water and Sewer Hans m.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan m.A.6. Grading Han m.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan PALOMA DEL SOL In. s~c PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDIVl;ENT NO. 8 (Sp~fLqc Plan SP4) Page In-51 9) lO) ~) 12) 13) 14) 15) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV.B.3.c for general criteria pertaining to design of commercial areas and Section IV.B.3.c.1, for criteria related to siting and orientation of commercial uses. The commercial land uses permitted within this Planning Area are designated in the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance. A Development Plan will be required for definition form and uses of each commercial area. Existing uses in Planning Areas la andlb (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the respective Development Agreement. The fight to rebuild is extended for an additional 15 year covenant period for rebuilding in the event of damage, destruction or remodeling beyond the term of the development agreement. Waste disposal containers will be limited to designated, confined areas set aside for solid waste collection. A minimum of one Commercial entry statement shall be provided along Campanula Way (see Figure 37). Details for the Major and Minor Commercial entry statements are depicted on Figures 42B through-42F. Pedestrian plazas shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A. Planning Area 1 lies within the Paloma del Sol Village Center and is therefore, subject to the Village Center Design Guidelines as contained in Section IV.D of this specific plan. These guidelines contain standards and examples pertaining to pedestrian oriented design (Section IV.D.2.b), building scale (Section IV.D.2.c), intensification (Section IV.D.2.d), parking design (Section IV.D.2.e), signage (Section IV.D.2.f) and transit provisions (Section IV.D.2.g). An illustrative site plan that depicts an initial design for Planning Area 1 is shown on Figure 50E. PALOMA DI~L SOL 111. SPEC1FIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDIvl]~rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page I11-52 Plannine Area 3 a. Descriptive Sumrn~ry Planning Area 3, as depicted on Figure 15C, provides for the development of ~844.8 acres Medium High density residential use. A ,,,,~d~, total of 25525~4 dwelling units arri_s planned at a ~-get density of ~,~5.7 du/ac (Density Range 5-8 alu/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Design Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See $.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Plsnning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a m,,j~, ,,,ad,,.,., (Campanula Way) ~,~ ................................. Access points', depicted, are conceptual. Access to the indlvidaal planning areas shall be de,ermined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. 2) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Ponola Road and Campanula Way at the nonbem boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35.) 3_.) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 2~, 23B, and 27, respectively, shall be provided along Highway 79, De Ponola Road and Campanula Way. 4_) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto Campanula Way along th~ northwestern boundary of the Planning Area. A Class I bicycle trail will be located in De Portola Road C,~,,I~,~,,A,~ ';','ay to the northeast and a Class II bicycle lane will be located along ,.~,~ Po, a,~l,~ R,,,~d Campanula Way to the northwest of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6. 6_) A site of archaeologicalfdistcrical significance is located within this planning area. Prior to issuance of Development or Grading Permits, an appropriate detailed mitigation program shall be identified and, if necessary, completed. This program shall be aPl)roved by ~e History Division of the Riverside County Parks and Recreation Department. 7_) Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. PALOMA D~L SOL HI. SPECIFIC PLAN SPm:~'IC PLAN NO. 219/AMI~'DMI~n' NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page 111-56 Please refer to Section III.A.1. through IlI.A.8. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific LandUse Plan llI.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. PAI. OMA I)l~ Sol. HI. SPECIFIC PLAlq SPF~'IC PL~ NO. 219/AMIiIqDMIS~ NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page 111-$7 d L~ 4. Planninn Area 4 ' a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 4, as depicted on Figure 15D, provides for the development of 4043.2 acres ,itl of Medium density residential use. A s,ia.n~iiimii [Oral of Igg188 dwelling units a~cls planned at a target density of 4-:54.4 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance NO. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Vehicular A-access to the Planning Area will be provided from a Mai,>, ,,~ad,ay (De Portola Road~ttrtbemor~. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual and, as such, shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. No vehicular access shall be ~ermitted into Plannine Area 4 from Butteffield Sta~e Road. A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road at the northeast boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and 36.) ,~3) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto De Portola Road at the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) Roadway landscape treatraents, such as those depicted on Figures 25, 23A and 23B, respectively, shall be provided along Highway 79, Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road. A Class I bicycle trail will be located in De Portola Road to the nOrth of the Planning Area as' shown on Figure 6. Please refer to Section III.A.1 .through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: m.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan 1TI.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans m.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. 98_) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.' PALOMA DEL SOL ]II. SPECIFIC PLAN S~EClFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMI~/qDMI~r NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page 111-59 5. Planning Area 5 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 5, as depicted on Figure 15E, provides for the development of 3 5.5 acres witho~f Medium lligh density residential use. A iiio~h,,~ total of 155 ] 52 dwelling units m~is planned at a target density of 5r54.3 du/ac (Density Range 5-82-5 du/ac). A conceptual site plan is depicted in the Design Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a ,..jo, ,,,,,,,-.: ~,~ampanula Way) ,,~ ~,,~ a,~iiz~,, De Ponola Road on-thtmmrth-omnd Meadows Parkway o,i il ..... ~. Access points, as Access ,,~ ,,,,~ · ........ ~,,~.,,~ ,~,.o shall be detertmned when tract depicted, are conceptual. ' "-' ...... ' ' -- ' maps or development plans are submitted. 2) A--Minor Project entry statemen~ will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and Campanula Way at the northeastern b,,,,.,la,·comer of the Planning Area and at the intersection of Meadows ParkWay and Campanula Way at the southwestern comer of the Plannin~ Area:. ( _S_S_S_S_S_S_S_S_S~ Figure 35:). 3) A Community Intersection entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and De Portola Road at the northwestern comer of the Planning Area. (See Figure 34.) 4) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statements will be provided at egress points onto Campanula Way at the southern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 5) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 23B, 23~,, and 27 respeetivc~. shall be provided along De Portola Road, Meadows Parkway;, and Campanula Way. 6) Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities. 7) A Class I bicycle trails will be located alon~ Camnanula Way to the south and Class II bicycle lanes will be located alon~ in De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway to the north and wes.t, remecuvelv. ,~,,~ ,~,~,,t~,~,,,,a ,, o· oo~,,~u,,,,~,,~ l'l~h,liig A,,;:. as shown on Figure 6. 8) Balconies may encroach into building setback lines. PALOMA DEL SOL I~. SPECIFIC PLAN SPF. C~IC PLAN NO. 219/AMEI~MENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan sP-4) Page HI-61 9) Please refer to Section I~.A.1. through I~.A.8. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: IlI.A. 1. Specific Land Use Plan llI.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans IH.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan IH.A.6. Grading Plan rfl. A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan m.A.8. Landscaping Plan 10) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECBeiC PI..A.N SPECIFIC PLA~ NO. 219/~/,,Ir~.NT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page I]I-62 J Planning Area 8 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 8, as depicted on Figure lSH, provides for ~ development of 89~ acres for either a Medium density private gated active senior community o~r~or family oriented Medium density ~dential use. A iiio~iniaii~ ~ntal of-.~,,~, dwelhng umts ~ planned at a target density of -..~ du/ac (Density Range 2-$ .alu/ac). A typical site plan for family oriented develop ..... 14A. If plans for thc Sem~ Community are ~mplcmented, Planmng Area 8 and shall conform wath the typical s~te plans depicted on Figures 14D, and 14F. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). Planning Standards Access to the Plannln~ Area wall be prowded fi.om c,,.~,~, ,,. .... ~o ~ ~ ~.,~ ,-. o-~.~ ~, ~ .~,.,., P~o P~co ..,~,~ ~,~ ~,~ ,,,-,, ~ .... ~, De Portola Road on .................. pi .,~ ~,..., and Meadows Parkway ,...,~ ~,~o[. Access points as de cted are conceptual. Access t~ ..... ,,~, ..... ~.,...,,~ o~,o shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. 2) A Minor ProJect entry statement wall be prowded at the.intersection of ~ o,,,~ ,~-,~,..~ and Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and · 36.) 3) A Project Intersection en ~.~t~.m_~a~d paseo c~s~ing will be provided at the intersection of ......... ,~,,~ at the northern boundary of the Planning ~a. (See Fi~s 38 ~d 39). 4) A Community Intersection Entry Statement will be provided at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and De Portola Road (See Figure 34). 5) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto at the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 6) A Paseo entry statement will be provided at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 39.) 7) 8) A landscaped transition area as depicted ~ Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the Planning Area and Planning Area 7 to provide a buffer between residential and adjacent elementary school land use~. A Community Paseo System segment ~~.tb:~ ~ shall be promded at the northwestern bound~ of the Planning Area: (~ee Figure~ ~0~ PALOMA DEL SOL HI. SPEC~C PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219[AMI~IDMEIqT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-71 s) 10) 11) 12} 13) 14) Roadway landscape treatments, such as tho,s,e_,,,d?icte~d~n_ Fi__ es .?-27 2fl and 23B ,¢a~,cc;;vcly shall be provided along "~" Sh¢¢~, ~, ~;, ~c , De Portola Road; and Meadows Parkway. If implemented, the Senior Community will include 5 unique street/sidewalk landscape treatments. A cross section of these treatments and ~ planned location within the Senior Community conceptual site plan is depicted on Figures 5lA, 5lB, 51C, 51D and 51E. Class I bicycle mils will be located along Meadows Parkway and De Portola Road to the east and south, respectively. Class II bicycle lanes will be located alonq Amarita and Leena Way to ly trail ---'" '-- ' .............. the north and east. respective . Bike s and bike lanes are ,~,,, ~ ,~,~,~,, ,~, ,,, o~,~, su,,oiiiidiiig giC. l'l,~,~,:,,g A~a aa shown on Figure 26~. An equestrian trail will be located in the northern parkway of De Portola Road on the south edge of the Planning Area (see Figure 24). Garages shall have a fxont yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20'(twenty) feet fi'om back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. Please refer to Section III.AA. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site wide: III.AA. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPF~IFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMEIqDME~ NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-72 z _o J 0 ~ ~. Planninn Area 9 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 9, as depicted on Figuro 15I, provi~ for ~ development 9f~ acres ~-itl~Medium density residential use. A iii,,~diii,~ii total of 135~3~/dwelling units ~ planned at a target density of 3.1 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted.on Figure 14A. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided fi.om ,~ ,~,,~,~, ,~ ,,~z ~ ~, o .... ~?~ ~ ~d ~om De Ponola Road~. Access point, as depic~d, ~e concept. Access ~ ~,~ h,di~idual pl~,i,,g ~ca~ shall be de~e~ined when ~act maps or development plus m submi~ed. 2) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of "D" o ,,~ ~ ~ and Meadows Parkway at the northwest boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and 36.) 3) A Major Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and Campanula Way at the eastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35.) 4) Project Intersect]on entry statements will be provided at the intersection of"D .... 5~ ~ and Campanula Way. (See Figure 38.) 5) A Community Intersection entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway. (See Figure 34.) 6) A minimum of one ~ neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D" ohcc~3; along the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 7) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 24, 23B, 27, and.~:26 respect~velyshallbeprowdedalongDePortolaRoad, Meadows Parkway, D ~,,~,.~ and Campanula Way. 8) A Class I Bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the west and along De Portola Road to the south. A Class II bicycle h-a[l~ lane will be located along Leena Way to the north and along the Gateway access to the east ii, all ,,~ad~ ~uzr~h, dh,g fi,c l'la,.fi,,g A~ca as shown on Figure 6. 9) An equestrian trail will be located in the parkway to the south of the Planning Area along De Portola Road. (See Figure 24.) 10) Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SP~ClFlC PLAN NO. 219/~M~T NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III-74 12) Please refer to Section III.AA. through m.A.8, for the following Developmem Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan m.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan m.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III~A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Sections WA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape architecture. PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN SI'F, CIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMElqDMImT NO. 8 (Slncific Plan SP..4) Page RI-75 d Z Planning Area 13 a. Descriptive Summary Planmng Area 13, as depicted on F~gnre 15M, promdes for ~ ~evelopment of 32~ acres ...... ~-~,~ ~ . . ~ Medium Htgh dens!~t¥~'esldentlal use. A mammmn-total of 176~6~ dwelhng umts are!~ planned at a target density ofb:5~q~O'.du/ac (Density Range 5-8 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Design Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinan;e No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a collector roadway ("D" $~¢ct) r,~ t,~,c ~;~: ~ ~4~¢.~ ..... caa~. Access potnts, as depicted, are conceptual. ~ ' Fl/uhihig /uC.~ ~hall ¢~ determined finalized when tract maps or development plans are submitted. 2) A minimum o~one n~j~.hborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D" o,~ ~~;e~ at the eastem boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 3) A landscaped ta'ansition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the Planning Area and the Elementary School (Planning Area 11 ) to assist in the distinction between different land uses. 4) A Community Pasco System segment shall be provided at the northern and western boundaries of thC Planning Area. (See Figure 30.) ~ ~oadway~!~dsc~og~geatment, o,,~, as depicted on Figure 27, shall be provided along 'D" 6) Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools,' spas, cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities. 7) A Class II b~cvcle tr~ lane~l ocated in C ,,:, ............ ~~y ~ov~g to me west as ShOWn on gum . 8) Please refer to Section m.A.1, through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: m.A.l. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans m.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan 9) Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. 1 O) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. P.~OMA DEL SOL Ill. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLnN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III-85 4- Planning Area 14 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 14, as depicted on Figure 15N, provides for~ development of~ wJ~ acres Medium density residential use. A iii,~hii~ii ~otal of 230~!~welling units ,~ planned at a target density of 4.7 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure b. Land Use and DeveloPment Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 9%01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). e. Planning Standards 1 ) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a ~olL~ ..... d ,o~ ("D" Sh ~;) ~,~ ;I,~ ~W~a~.~ and Meadows Parkway ~,~ ,,,~ ,~o~. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. Access * ;I,¢ indlv[du,,l vl,,,,,i,,g a, ca ahall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. 2) AMmorProjectentrystatementwfllbeprowdedatthemtersectlonof ........... ,., o,~,, ~ ..... ~ and Meadows Parkway at the southwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figures 35 and 36) 3) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D" me southern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 4) A Pasco entry statement with pedestrian crossing will be provided at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area as depicted by Figure 49. 5) Community Pasco System segments shall be provided at the northern and eastern boundaries of the Planning Area. (See Figure 30.) 6) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted o~y~e s 23B and 27 respectively shall be provided along Meadows Parkway and "D" ?,;,'cc . 7) A Class I bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the east in C611cc;,x "D" S;,ccZ and a Class II bicycle lane will be located alone ~ ~W:~Y to the north ~,, wc~; of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6. 8) Please refer to Section III.A.1. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and 9) Standards that apply site-wide: III.A. 1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3: Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan m.A.8. Landscaping Plan Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. PALOMA D~L SOL III. SPECIF!C PLAN SPECI~C PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMEIVI' NO. 8 (Sl~cific Plan SP-4) Page III-87 1 O) Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape architecture. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SI'EClFIC Pt,AN NO. 219/AMENDMm, rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP..4) Page III-87A W 23. Planning Area 23 a. Descriptive Summar~ Planning Area 23, as depicted on Figure 15W, provides for the development of 6656.6 acres w[tlio_._f Medium lllgh density residential use. A maximmn-total of 363256 dwelling units arcis planned at a target density of 5.54.5 du/ac (Density Range 5,~82-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Desigu Guidelines, Section IV.C.3. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1)' Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a~,~,,~,,, ..............,,~,,,,~,,,: ~ ,., o .... jSurmy Meadows Driv~ and .... Meadows Parkway ............ Access points as depicted, are conceptual. Access ,,, ..... ,,,,v,,,u,,, },,o~,..s .... shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. 2) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of "D" $~rcctSunny Meadows Drive and Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figures 35 and 36) 3) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statements will be provided at egress points onto "D" ShcctSunny Meadows Drive and Meadows Parkway at the northern, &lid eastern, and western boundaries of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) 4) A Communit~ Paseo entry statement ~,., v ....... ,~, ~,,~.o,.~ will be provided at the southwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 49.) A pedestrian crossing will be provided at or near the Community Paseo entr~ statement. The pedestrian crossing shall be located to maximize pedestrian safety when crossing Meadows Parkway. 5) A Community Paseo System segment shall be provided at the southern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 30.) 6) Roadway landscape treatments, ~ch as fl-,o$c depicted on Figures 23B and 27 shall be provided along Meadows Parkway and .....~, StrcctSunnv Meadows Drive. 7) A Class I bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the east, and a Class II bicycle lane will be ...... " ............. Su cot) along Sunny Meadows Drive to the located ,. ,,,~ ,.~-,.,~,~,~, ~,,~, .-,,,,,-, t ~ ~ west of~e Planning ~ea mi iii i ........ a ...... ~ [v ....... ~ u ..... .mums~ Area as depicted in Fibre 6. 8) Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities. 9) Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2Ig/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III-112 Please refer to Section III.A.1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and . Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan 11) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. P~.co~a^ DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 113 24. Planning Area 24 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 24, as depicted on Figare 15X, provides for th..xe development of 2.9 a 1 .O-acres ,~, khfor a nt~ghborl~nxt-park/recreation area. At,pica ne ghborhood conceptuallandscape/site plan is provided in the Design Guidelines, gcc;k,, I;'B. Figure 47. b, Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided .................................. % local street intcrna tq Planning Area 26. 2) Pedestrian access to the Planning Area will also be provided from .... :"' ,,,,,,, .......... ,,,~ .... thc pedestrian hnkage between resMentml and park land uses (seq F gure landscape transition area/open space landscape buffet' as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C, will be provided along the eastern, western and northern boundaries of the planning ar/~a to butTer adiacent land uses. 4) A Class Il bicycle tra+} lane will be located in at~uStre~Sunn¥ Meadows Drive to thc ~astsouth of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6. 5) For park concept design plans, see Figure 47 in the Design Guidelines section of this Specific. Plan. T,i~ · -'-." ........... ' .... ,, ................. ~,.,., ......... This famht¥ shall be constructed and fully operable prior to the issuance of the 200'" building permit in Tract 24188. excludin~ the 67 dwel lin g units in Tract 24188 - 1. Please refer to Section III.A. 1 through III.Ag for the ibllowing Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.AA. Water and Sewer Plans IILA.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan 7) Please also see Section IV, Design Guidelines, for related criteria. PALOMA VEL SOL Iii. SPECIFIC PLAN SP£ClPIC P).n~ NO. 219/AuE)qt}MENT NO. II (Specific Plan SP-4) Page i11-1 ] $ 26. Planning Area 26 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 26, as depicted on Figure 15Z, provides for the development of:3029.5 acres Medium density residential use. A ,.,~h.,,, total of 149130 dwelling units areis planned at a target density of 4.54.4 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure 14A. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from a ~olLct,,. i,~ad.ay ("D" St,~.t) to thc west aid "C" Sh.- ct to tlic ,,~,tLSunny Meadows Drive. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. Access t,~ ~h~ had~vld~al f, lai-~ii~iig areas shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. A local street within Planning Area 26 shall provide vehicular access to the park/rec.reation area (Planning Area 24). A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D" 5~i-¢c;Sunny Meadows Drive at the western boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) A Pasco entry statement will be provided at the southeast and southwest boundaries of the property. (See Figure 39.) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those-depicted on Figures 23C, 27, and 27 respeetive~, shall be provided along Butterfield Stage Road, thc Collcc3o~ L~F R,~ad CD'' S~,~:) aad "C" St~¢c~and Sunny Meadows Drive. If the LDZ falls below 32', only single story residential units shall be allowed on the lots immediately adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road. A Community Paseo System segment shall be provided at the southern boundary of the property. (See Figure 30.) A bicycle trail Class II bicycle lane will be located in "D" StrcctSunny Meadows Drive to the st of th P1 ' g A d ' lC ........................ PALOMADELSOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2 lg/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-120 Please refer to Section III.A. 1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan m.A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIF1C PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-121 27. Planning Area 27 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 27, as depicted on Figure 15AA, provides fi ' ~ ....... or preservation .....,,1, ....... of-I-59.0 acres b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) No vehicular access to this Planning Area is planned, although maintenance crews may access this area from Meadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive as necessary. 9tccm~s-t~:rt~ 2) A Minor ,~,~..,,..,L~ prolect entry statement will be provided at the ~ntersect~on of...o..L,u · --,,,.,. .... o~ ...... o ,, ........... ,..o ..... o,~. ..... ;, ,~ .... · ........ ~ .-.,,.,,.Meadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive (See Figures :3-235 and 36.) 3) Roadway landscape treatments, su¢l, as ~liosc depicted on Figures -24-and--2-3Pr23B, 23C and 27, shall be provided along Pa,ba Ro~dMeadows Parkway, Sunny Meadows Drive and Butterfield Stage Road. 4) The Planning Area may also be accessed by a bicycle hail Class II bicycle lane which is located along Pauba R,~adMeadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive. (See Figure 6.) PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC P~N NO. 219/A~£NDM£m'NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page 1II- 123 5) A residential/~ landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted byin Figures 13B or 13C shall be created between the Planning Area and Planning Areas 26 and 28 to provide a buffer between adiacent residential ' ' land uses. This buffer area should contain a pedestrian connection to the residential neighborhood in Planning Area -2-826 as shown in Figure 50~B. Please refer to Section III.A.1. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A. 1. Specific LaBd Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENI NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 124 28. Planning Area 28 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 28, as depicted on Figure 15BB, provides for the development of~49.4 acres wlzJio__f Medium density residential use. A nia×hnuin total of 113190 dwelling units are planned at a target density of 4x53.._.~8 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure 14A. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) 2) 3) 4) s) Access to the Planning Area will be provided from $out|ica~z ,~,d froni Meadows Parkway zo ilic wc~z and Butterfield Stage Road. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. ~ ................. · Access ~,, ~.~ ~,~,,~,~ ~.~,..~ ~o shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are submitted. A Major Community entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Pauba Road and Meadows Parkway at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figures 32 and 33.) A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at the egress point5 onto "C" S;~-cctMeadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road at the sau;hca~;~,~vestern and eastern boundaryie_~s of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the ~o,.thnortheastern boundary of the Planning Area at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and ,.. ...... anba Road. (See Figures 35 and 36.) A pedestrian linkage shall be provided between the residential neighborhood in Planning Area 28 and the open space area in Planning Area 27 and the park/recreation area in Planning Area 29A as shown on Figure 50B. Often, this is accomplished by providing an open space linkage with a trail from the end ora residential cul-de-sac, but other site planning options are possible. A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the Planning Area and Planning Area 29 to assist in the distinction between residential and clc.,¢.;&:, ~choolpark/recreation area land uses. Roadway landscape treatments, o,~,.h as fiiosc depicted on Figures 24, 23A~_, 23B, and 28 respectively, shall be provided along Pauba Road, Butterfield Stage Road; and Meadows Parkway aiid ..... o ...... PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AM£NDMENT No. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 126 10) 11) 12) An equestrian trail will be located in the parkway to the north of the Planning Area. Vehicular access across this trail will require the use of special site planning criteria (such as "double stop signs") at the development plan stage to ensure the safety of equestrians using this trail. A residential/open space landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C shall be created between Planning Area 28 and Planning Area 27 to provide a buffer between adiacent open space. This buffer area should contain a pedestrian connection to the residential neighborhood in Planning Area 28 as shown in Figure 50B. A Class I bicycle trail will be located alon ac streets c,n ..... ,,,,,,, o,~..,, ,,,,,, .... ,, .... ~Meadows Parkway and Pauba Road to the east and a Class II bicycle lane Pauba Road to the east. (See Figure 6.) Please refer to Section III.A.1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.AA. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape architecture. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-127 d 29. Plannine Area 29-A a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 29-A, as depicted on Figure 15CC, provides for th_~e development of 5.0 acres wiflifo_~r a neighborhood park/recreational facility. A typical site plan is depicted in the Design Guidelines, Section. IVB. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Accesstoth ' ' ' -'-'~-" .... "- J"'""" ...... ' ~' ' e Planning Area will be provided from .... ,~,~ .......... ~,~ ........ ,~ ,,,~ ~ .... vl.~a a local street within Planning Area 28 and from Meadows Parkway. 2) A R:roadway landscape treatment, as depicted on Figures 23B a,d 2~, shall be provided along Meadows Pa kway to the west 3) For park facility conceptual design plans, see the Design Manual Section of this Specific Plan (Section IV.B.). This Planning Area will be constructed, fully operational and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 174th building permit in Planning Area 23 or the issuance of the first building permit in Planning Areas 26 or 28, whichever occurs first. 4) A Class I bi ycle trail ill be locat d i .................... ~ .......... Meado Parkway, to the east as shown on Figure 6. A park/open space landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C shall be created between Planning Area 27 and Planning Area 29 to provide a buffer between adjacent open space. A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the Planning Area and Planning Area 28 to assist in the distinction between residential and park/recreation area land uses. This buffer area should contain a pedestrian connection to the residential neighborhood in Planning Area 28 as shown in Figure 50B. A pedestrian linkage shall be provided between the residential neighborhood in Planning Area 28 and the park/recreation area in Planning Area 29~ as shown in Figure 50B. PALOMA I~EL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLA~q NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 129 Please refer to Section III.A.1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A. 1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape architecture. P~OMn ~)EL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMI~NDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-130 1., , 4', O% PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIHC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 132 ~3938. Planning Area 38 a. Descriptive Summary Planning Area 38, as depicted on Figure 15A, provides for thee development of 8.0 acres withofMcdl,mi .............. lC 'ty/N 'ghb h dCo ' fuse ................... ~ ....... ~,,~ ..... ,, v ........ ~ ,~. A conceptual site plan is depicted in ~e Desi~ Guidelines, Section IV.C.3. b. Land Use and Development Standards Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab). c. Planning Standards 1) Primary 9r vehicular access into the Planning Area will be provided from Campanula Way to-thc .... ~ ................ Access points depicted are conceptual Access i.dlvldual pl,~,,h,~ ,~,~,~ shall be determined when development plans are submitted. 2) A project intersection entry statement, as depicted on Figure 38, will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and Campanula Way. 3) one Commercial entry statement shall be provided along Campanula Way (see Figure 37). Details for the Maior and Minor Commercial entry statements are depicted in Figures 42B through-42F. 4) Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 23B and 27i respectively; shall be provided along De Portola Road and Campanula Way. The primary character of the commercial frontage shall consist of extensive turf mounding, grouped trees and shrubs. A Class I bicycle trails will be located in along De Portola Road and a Class I bicycle trail and a Class II bicycle lane will be located along the east side of Campanula Way adjacent to the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6. Pedestrian access between Planning Area 38 and Planning Areas 1, 1 (b) and 36 shall be provided as shown on Figures 50A and 50C. A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B and 13C, shall be created between Planning Area 38 and Planning Areas 1, l(b) and 36 ta pr,y~-Mc a 1- '~ ....... '21---'' ................. "~ .... AS d rypedest i linkage to Planning Area ~r73_..~6 shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A. PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 152 Please refer to Section III.A. 1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan III.A.2. Circulation Plan III.A.3. Drainage Plan III.AA. Water and Sewer Plans III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan III.A.6. Grading Plan III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan III.A.8. Landscaping Plan Planning Area 38 lies within the Paloma del Sol Village Center and is therefore subject to the Village Center Design Guidelines as contained in Section IVD of this specific plan. These guidelines contain standards and examples pertaining to pedestrian oriented design (Section IV.D.2.b), building scale (Section IV.D.2.c), intensification (Section IV.D.2.d) and signage (Section IV.D.2.f). Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV.B.3.c for general criteria pertaining to design of commercial areas and Section IV.B.3.c.1, for criteria related to siting and orientation of commercial uses. The commercial land uses permitted within this Planning Area are designated in the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance. I1) A Development Plan will be required for definition form and uses of each commercial area. 13) Existing uses in Planning Areas 1 a andl b (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the respective Development Agreement. The right to rebuild is extended for an additional 15 year covenant period for rebuilding in the event of damage, destruction or remodeling beyond the term of the development agreement. Waste disposal containers will be limited to designated, confined areas set aside for solid waste collection. Pedestrian plazas shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A. PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIHC PLAN S?EC]FIC PLAN NO. 219/AMEN1)MENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III= 153 EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT R:\S P A'Q.001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc EXHIBIT B CITY OFTEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 01-0109 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 PLANNING DIVISION General Requirements The applicant and owner of the mai property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency of instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 2. The applicant shall comply with all underlying conditions of approval for Specific Plan No. SP-4, and its previous amendments, unless superseded by these conditions of approval. 3. The text of Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan No. SP-4 shall conform with Exhibit A "Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8" or as amended by these conditions. 4. Figures 15A and 15KK shall be modified to show a vehicular access point between Planning Areas 36 and 38. Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the Amendment 5. The applicant shall submit the amended Specific Plan text to the Community Development Department - Planning Division. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understood and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant Signature R:\S P AX200I\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc spa res..doc ATrACHMENT NO 3 DRAFT ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11 -Ol.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural History. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: Newland Communities LLC ("Owner") filed Planning Application No. PA01-01-0109 (General Plan Amendment), PA01-0102 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan Amendment No. 219 & Amendment of Planning Area No. 38 Zoning Standards), PA 01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 4) ('~the application") in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. On November 7, 2001 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the project at which time all persons interested in the project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. recommending to the City Council that the Project be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions. On 2001, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. At the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended. Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further defines and declares that: Specific Plan No.8 implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and provides balanced and diversified land uses, and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within the City. Specific Plan No. 8 is consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element thereof, the City's Growth Management Program Action Plan and constitutes a present valid exercise of the City's police power. R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-~ 1 Specific Plan No. 8 is compatible with surrounding land uses. It proposes similar residential neighborhood adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods. In addition, it proposes commercial uses adjacent to existing commercial development. d. Specific Plan No. 8 will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. e. The City Council finds the City of Temecula has certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 8, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and finds that the Addendum was prepared consistent with applicable CEQA provisions. The Council also finds that the Addendum was considered in association with the approval of this Specific Plan Amendment. Section 3. Adoption of Amended Zoninq Standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby adopts revised zoning standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, as set forth in the attached Exhibit A. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of January, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-__ 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 02- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of January, 2002, 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 22nd day of January, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNClLMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-_ 3 EXHIBIT A AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS R:\S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc zon. ord.doc 4 Medium Density. Residential Planning Area 4, gi 8 (if not seniors), 10, 14, 17, 18, i ~ 25, 26, 28 & 33 Medium Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED. a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone: ( 1 ) One family dwellings. (2) Two-family dwellings. (3) Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and country clubs. (4) Home occupations. (5) Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991 ) and the development standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in area. (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. Nurseries, horticultural. (3) SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County ordinance No. 348 (1991). Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40'). Lot area shall be not less than 5,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family dwellings shall be not less than 4,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. The minimurn lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site. rev. 10/24/01 ' -1- .C. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 45 feet with a minimum average depth of 85 feet..However, for two-family dwelling lots, the minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 85 feet. That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet. The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 45 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cui- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along eurvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: ( I ) The from yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public tight-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. (3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall also apply: (a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildIngs or structures. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. (4) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 Medium Density Residential (Senior) Planning Area 8 (if seniors) Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential (Sen/or) Zone: SECTION 6.1 ' USES PERMITTED. a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential (Sen/or) Zone: (1) (2) (3) (4) One family dwellings. Public parks and public playgrounds. Home occupations as permitted otherwise by City of Temecnla Development Code. Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in area. (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years unless such offices are combined with a community or recreation center in which case not to exceed 5 years. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40'). Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion ora lot used as a building site. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 40 feet with a minimum average depth of 70 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -3- The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 40 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows (all setbacks are measured f~om the back of sidewalk or, if there is no sidewalk, from the back of curb): (1) The front yard shall be not less than: 10 feet to the living area of the building, 8 feet to a porch, 18 feet to a front entry garage, 8 feet from back of curb to a side entry garage or 5 feet from back of sidewalk to a side entr7 garage. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet to the living area ora building, 5. feet to a porch or 18 feet to a front entry garage on the street side of a house. Side Yard encroachments up to 2 feet are allowed for a chinmey and/or media niche. Where such projections are proposed on facing sides of adjacent dwelling units, encroachments shall be off-set to allow adequate site drainage. The mar yard shall be not less than 10 feet, except on comer lots where the rear yard shall not be less than 5 feet provided the street side yard shall not be less than 10 feet. Where courtyards are included on the interior side of the smacture then the rear yard shall not be less than 8 feet. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side Or rear yard withom approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. Patio covers are allowed in rear yard areas only, except for end units which are allowed patio covers only in courtyard areas. Patio covers shall be set back from rear or side property lines as follows: 5 feet minimum to a support post, 3 feet minimum to the edge of the shade structure (canopy). (3) (4) (5) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -,t- Medium Density_ Residential Planning Areas 9 & 31 Medium Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED. a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone: (1) (2) (3) (4) One family dwellings. Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and eountr~ clubs. Home occupations. Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (199 l) and the development standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 0991). The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (I) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inlmbitants where no assistunts are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in area. (2) Temporary real estate lract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (407. Lot area shall be not less than 7,200 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion ora lot used as a building site. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 60 feet with a minimum average depth of 100 feet. That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -5- The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 60 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cui- de-sacs may have a m lnimm fi:ontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: (I) The front yard shall be not less than 15 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 10% of the width of the lot, but not less than 3 feet in width in any event, and need not exceed a width of 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet fi'om the existing street line or fi:om any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. The rear yard shall be not less than 10 feet. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. '(3) (4) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev: 10/24/01 Medium High Density Residential Planning Areas 2, 3,-S;, 13, 15, 16, 20, 21, ~ 22 Medium High Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium High Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED. a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium High Density Residential Zone: ( 1 ) One family dwellings. (2) Two family dwellings. (2) Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and comaU3' clubs. (3) Home occupations. (4) Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to · the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated fi:om a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in are~ (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Medium High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed 3 stories, with a maximum height of 40 feet. Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family dwellings shall be not less than 3,500 square feet per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site. rev. 10/24/01 -7- The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 40 feet with a minimum average depth of S0 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 75 feet. That portion ora lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimllnl width of 20 feet. The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 40 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cui- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: ( 1 ) . The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. (3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall also apply: (a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or structures. (4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without . approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -8- High Density Residential Planning Area 6A High Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this High Density Residential Zone: SECTION 8.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall fa'st have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) (2) (3) (4) Any use permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone. Apartment houses or condominiums. Nursery schools for preschool day care. Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Depm~aent of Social Welfare or the County Department of Public Welfare. Accessory buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is established as an incidem to a principal use and does not change the character of that use. On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use or institution, not to exceed five percem (5%) of the surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which the sign is located. The follgwing uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant to this ordinance: (1) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State Departmem of Social Welfare or Riverside County Depa~h~tent of Public Welfare during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. (2) Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County and State Codes and Ordinances. Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). SECTION8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -9- do The minimum lot area shall be 7,200 square, feet for a multifamily or condominium project with a minimum average width of 60 feet and a minimum average depth of 100 feet. The minimum lot area for small lot single family detached shall be 3,000 square feet with a minimum average width of 30 feet and a minimum average depth of 100 feet. For a single family detached product, the minimum from and rear yards setback to the main structure (livable portion of the building) or a side loaded garage shall be 5 feet. The minimum front setback for a from-loaded garage shall be 16 feet from the back of sidewalk and a roll up garage door shall be required. If the garage is located in the rear of the lot and is accessed from the front, the rear setback shall be 5 feet and the garage shall be a single story structure. If the garage is located in the rear and accessed by an alley, the minimum rear setback as measured, from the centerline of the alley shall be 10 feet. The alley width shall be a minimum of 20 feet. The front setback shall be measured'from any existing or future public or private right-of-way slreet line as shown on any specific slzeet plan of the City. The rear setback shall be measured from We existing rear lot line or from the centerline of any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. The minimum side yard shall be 5 feet, if the side yard adjoins a slxeet, the side setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. No structural encroachments shall be pem'dtted in the front, side or rear yard except as allowed by City Ordinance. The maximum density shall be twelve (12) units per acre. All buildings and.structures shall not exceed 35 feet in height. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (199.1). rev. 10/24/01 -10- Very High Density. Residential Planning Area 6B Very High Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Very High Density Residential Zone: SECTION 8.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) (2) (3) (4) Any use permitted in the Medium High Density Residential Zone. Apartment houses. Nursery schools for preschool day care. Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Department of Social Welfare or the County Department of Public Welfare. bo Accessory buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is established as an incident to a principal use and does not change the character of that use. On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the slructure, use or institution, not to exceed five percent (5%) of the surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which the sign is located. The following uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant to this ordinance: (1) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. (2) Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County and State Codes and Ordinances. Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the developmem standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). SECTION 8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Very High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -11- f. g. h. The minimum lot area shall be 7,200 square feet with a minimum average width of 60 feet and a minimum average depth of 100 feet, unless different minimums are specifically required in a particular area. The minimum front and rear yards shall be 10 feet for buildings that do not exceed 35 feet in height. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be set back from the front and rear lot lines no less than 10 feet plus 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from any existing or future public right-of-way street line as shown on any specific street plan of the City. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same a s required for a front setback. The minimum side yard shall be 5 feet for buildings that do not exceed 35 feet in height. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be set back from each side lot line 5 feet plus 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet; if the side yard adjoins a su~et, the side setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjuslment pursuant to City Ordinance. High density multi-family dwelling units shall be set back a minimum of 1 $ feet from any existing or future public right-of-way s~eet line as shown on any specific sU:eet plan of the City. Said setback shall be applicable for front, rear and side yards should they adjoin a street. No lot shall have more than 50 percem of its net area covered with buildings or slructures. The maximum density shall be twenty (20) units per acre. All buildings and structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991)~ rev. 10/24/01 -12- Community_/Neighborhood Commercial Planning Areas 1, For Planning Areas l(a) & l(b), see Pages 18~-28~ Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zone The following regulations shall apply in all Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones: SECTION 9.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings w/th not more than 200 square feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use, provided a 'Development Plan is approved. ( 1 ) Antique Shops. (2) Appliance Store, household, not to exceed 10,000 square feet (3) Art supply shops and studios. (4) Art and fine art sales. · (5) Automobile parts and supply stores, not to exceed 7,500 square feet. (6) Bakery goods distributors, not to exceed 7,500 square feet. (7) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (8) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or drive-up teller or ATM. (9) Barber and beauty shops. (10) Barbecue Stores. (I 1) Baseball ticket, card and logo merchandise stores. (12) Beauty aid/supply and/or health stores. (13) Bed and bath stores. · . (14) Blind and window cover stores. (15) Blueprint and duplicating services, copy shops or 24-hour Copy andBusiness Service Stores. (16) Book stores and binders. (17) Building materials with more than 75% indoor including the outdoor sale of garden supplies. (18) Card and gift stores. (19) Car washes. (20) Carpet or floor covering stores. (21) Catering services. (22) Ceramic painting stores. (23) Check cashing centers. (24) Child learning centers. (25) Children's store including educational toys and gifts. (26) Civic and govemmeut uses including post office and library uses. (27) Cleaning and dying shops. (28) Clothing stores, not to exceed 25,000 square feet. (29) Coffee houses. (30) Confectionery or candy stores. rev. 10/24/01 -13- (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) (50) (51) (52) (53) (54) (55) (56) (57) (58) (59) (60) (61) (62) (63) (64) (65) (66) (67) (68) (69) (70) (71) (72) (73) Converdence stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. Day care centers. Delicatessens. Department stores not to exceed 50,000 square feet. Dollar stores. Donut shops. Drug stores with drive-thru, not to exceed 20,000 square feet. Dry goods or general merchandise stores. Employment agencies. Express delivery collection points. Fabric stores. Feed and grain sales only as an incidental accessory use to a pet shop. Fimess club (including 24-hour operation). Florist shops. Food markets and frozen food lockers. Frame, lens or eyeglass stores. Furniture Stores. Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off- premises consumption. Gitt shops. Golf equipment stores. Hardware stores. Health centers, or similar personal sexvice establishments, not to exceed 7,500 square feet. Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances, furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repair thereof. Hobby shops. Honey baked ham stores. Ice cream, yogurt, frozen yogurt or juice shops. Ice sales, not including ice plants. Interior decorating shops. Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs. Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing. Laundries and laundromats. Leather goods stores. Linen stores. Loan stores. Locksmith shops. Mail order or intemet businesses. Mattress or bed stores. Meat markets, not including slaughtering. Music, media, or video rental stores. Musical instruments stores. Nail and manicure stores. Newsstands. Notions, novelty or tabletop stores. rev. 10/24/01 -14~ (74) (75) (76) (77) (78) (79) (s0) (Sl) (82) (83) (84) (85) (86) (87) (88) (89) (90) (91) (92) (93) (94) (95) (96) (97) (98) (99) (lOO) (lOl) (lO2) (103) (104) (105) (106) 007) (108) (109) (110) (111) (112) (113) (114) .(115) (116) (117) Nursery schools for preschool day care. Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning and real estate. Office supplies including home office service stores. Outlet stores. Paint and wallpaper stores, not including paint contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square feet. Party supply stores. Patio furniture stores. Pet shops and pet supply shops. Photography shops and studios and photo engraving. Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery stores. Plumbing shops, not including plumbing contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square feet. Postal annex stores. Printer or publishers. Produce markets. Radio and television broadcasting studios. Recording studios. Recycling collection facilities with no outdoor storage allowed. Refreshments stands. Restaurants and other eating establishmems, including those serving beer, wine or · alcohol and with outdoor seeting. Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, karate, martial arts, music and swimming. Shoe stores and repair shops. Shoeshine stands. Shopping center management and leasing offices. Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship. Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 40,000 square feet. Speaker stores, including small appliances. Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting stores. Stationery stores. Suntanning stores. Supplemental, diet or weight loss stores. Tabletop and git~ stores. Taxidermist. Tailor shops. Theater, not including drive-ins. Tire sales and service, not including recapping. Tobacco shops. Tourist information centers. Toy shops. Travel agencies. Typewriter sales and rental, including incidental repairs. Vitamin shops. Watch repair shops. Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage. Wine tasting rooms and sales. rev. 10/24/01 -15- The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to City Ordinance. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. Gasoline service stations with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-promises consumption. Liquid petroleum service station with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off- premises consumption, provided the total capacity of all tanks shall no exceed 10,000 gallons. Bars and cocktail lounges. Billiard and pool halls. Dance halls. Fast food restaurants with drive-thru. Multifamily or mixed use multifamily/commercial uses provided a Development Plan is approved in accordance with the City of Temecuia Development Code. Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a., b. and c. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Planning Director finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls. SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City or Temecula Ordinance No. 460 (1991). SECTION 9.3 ~ELETED) SECTION 9.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development are required in the Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones: There is no mini mum lot area requirement, unless specifically required by zone classification for a particular area. There are no yard requirements for buildings which do no exceed 35 feet in height except as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of- way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured from the specific plan slxeet line. rev. 10/24/01 -16- All buildings and structure shall'no exceed 50 feet in height. Automobile storage space shall be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula Development Code. as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -17- Community/Neighborhood Commercial Planning Area l(a) - Village Core as crosshatched on Exhibit "A' attached hereto and made a part hereof The following regulations shall apply in the Village Core Commercial Planning Area 1 (a) Zone of the Villages ~ Paseo del Sol. SECTION 9.1 USESPERMITTED. The following uses are permitted only in enclosed buildings. (1) An and fine art sales. (2) Art supply and studios not to exceed 3,000 square feet. (3) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (4) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or ATM in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (5) Barber and beauty shops. (6) Baseball ticket, card and/or logo merchandise store. (7) Beauty aide/supply store and/or health store. (8) Blueprint and duplicating services or 24 hour Copy and Business Service Store in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (9) Book stores and binders not to exceed 2,000 square feet. (10) Card and gift store which may include antiques as incidental sales. (11) Check cashing center in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.. (12) Child learning center in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (13) Children's store including educational toys and gifts. (14) Civic and government uses including post office and library uses. (15) Cleaning, dying or tailor shops. (16) Clothing stores, not to exceed 5,000 square feet. (17) Coffee house. (18) Confectionery or candy stores. (19) Copy shop in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (20) Day care centers in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (21) Delicatessens. (22) Dental or medical offices in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (23) Donut shop. (24) Dry goods or general merchandise stores not to exceed 3,000 square feet. rev. 10/24/01 -18- (25) Employment agencies in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (26) Express delivery collection point in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plazm (27) Fabric store not to exceed 3,000 square feet. (28) Florist shops including can or kiosk. (29) Frame, lens or eye glass store in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on ~outheast comer on Plaza. (30) Health centers or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 10,000 square feet in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (3 I) Health and beauty aids store. (32) Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances, furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repair thereof not to exceed 1,000 square feet. (33) Hobby shops and toy store not to exceed 5,000 square feet. (34) Honey 'baked ham store. (35) Ice cream, yogurt, frozen yogurt or juice shops. (36) Information center. (37) Interior decorating shops in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (38) Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs. (39) Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (40) Leather goods stores. (41) Linen store not to exceed 2,000 square feet. (42) Loan store in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (43) Locksmith shops. (44) Luggage stores. (45) Mail order or interact businesses in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza or any retailer as incidental to its operating retail store. (46) Medical or dental offices in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (47) Meat markets, not including slaughtering. (48) Music, media, or video rental stores not to exceed 2,000 square feet. (49) Musical instrument store. (50) Nail and manicure store. (51) Newsstands. (52) Notions, novelty or tabletop stores. (53) Nursery schools for preschool day care in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (54) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning and real estate in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (55) Party supply store. (56) Pet shops and pet supply shops not to exceed 3,000 square feet. (57) Photography shops and studios and photo engraving. (58) Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery store. (59) Postal annex store. (60) Post Office. (61) Printer or publishers in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (62) Produce markets, carts or kiosk. (63) Radio and television broadcasting studios or remote broadcasting. (64) Real Estate office in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (65) Recording studios. (66). Recycling collection facilities incidental to a retail store operation, but not including outdoor storage. (67) Refreshment stands. (68) Restaurants and other eating establishments, including those serving beer, wine or alcohol and with outdoor seating and including bakery goods baked on premises for distribution and allowing catering services as an integral use. Also, music and dancing is allowed as part of a restaurant and lounge operation. (69) Schools, busifless and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, karate, martial arts, music and swimming in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (70) Shoe stores and repair shops. (71) Shoeshine stands. (72) Shopping center management and lea~ing office in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (73) Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (74) Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 3,000 square feet. (75) Speaker stores, including small appliances not to exceed 3,000 square feet. (76) Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting store. (77) Stationery stores. (78) Suntan store. (79) Supplement, diet or weight loss store in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (80) Tabletop & gifts. (81) Tailor shops. (82) Tobacco shops. (83) Tourist information centers. (84) Toy shops not to exceed 2,500 square feet. (85) Travel agencies. (86) Typewriter or computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs and training in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (87) Vitamin shop. (88) Watch repair shops. (89) Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage or distribution from the premises in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. (90) Wine Tasting Room and sales. ~v. 10~4~l -20- The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to City Ordinance. (1) Bars and cocktail lounges. (2) Billiard and pool halls. (3) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a and b. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director or Planning Manager finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subsections and the Village Concept overlay. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls. SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City or Temecula Subdivision Ordinance. SECTION 9.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development are required in the Village Core: (1) There are no minimum lot area requirements, unless specifically required by zone classification for a particular area. (2) There are no yard requirements for buildings which do not exceed 35 feet in height except as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be setback from the from, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of- way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. (3) All buildings and structure shall not exceed 50 feet in height. (4) Calculation of required parking spaces required shall be provided as required by City of Temecula Development Code. Landscaping of parking area shall be consistent with the Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 as approved. (5) All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet at same grade as finished floor. rev. 10/24/01 -21- i! rev. 10/24/01 Community/Neighborhood Commercial Planning Area l(b) - Retail Villages shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, excluding the Village Core. The following regulations shall apply in the Retail Villages Planning Area 1 (b) of the Retail Villages the Villages ~ Paseo del Sol. SECTION 9.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses are permitted only in enclosed buildings. (1) Antique Shops. (2) ' Appliance Store or Electronic Store household, not to exceed 20,000 square feet. (3) Art supply shops and studios. (4) Art and fine art sales. (5) Automobile parts and supply stores, not to exceed 7,500 square feet. (6) Bakery goods distributors, not to exceed 7,500 square feet. (7) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (8) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or drive-up teller or ATM. (9) Barber and beauty shops. (10) Barbecue store. (11) Baseball ticket, card and/or logo merchandise store. (12) Beauty supply store. (13) Bed and bath store. (14) Blind or window cover store. (15) Blueprint and duplicating services or 24 hour Copy and Business Service Store. (16) Book stores and binders. (17) Card and Girl store. (18) Car washes. (19) Carpet or floor covering store. (20) Catering services. (21) Ceramic painting store. (22) Check cashing center. (23) Child learning center. (24) Children's store including educational toys and gil~s. (25) Civic and government uses including post office and library uses. (26) Cleaning, dying or tailor shops. (27) Clothing stores, not to exceed 25,000 square feet; (28) Coffee house. (29) Confectionery or candy stores. (30) Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. (31) Day care centers. (32) Delicatessens. (33) Dental or medical offices. (34) Department stores not to exceed 50,000 square feet. rev. 10/24/01 (35) Donut shop. (36) Drag stores with drive-thru, not to exceed 20,000 square feet. (37) Dry goods or general merchandise stores. (38) Employment agencies. (39) Express delivery collection point. (40) Fabric store. (41) Feed and grain sales only as an incidental accessory use to a pet shop. (42) Fimess club (including 2'/hour operation). (43) Florist shops. (44) Food markets and frozen food lockers. (45) Frame, lens or eye glass store. (46) Furniture Store. (47) Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off- premises consumption. (48) Golf equipment store. (49) Hardware store. (50) Health centers or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 10,000 square feet. (51) Health and beauty aids store. (52) Home Improvement Store with the outdoor sale of gardening supplies and plants in enclosed area with no roof, seasonal sales in a designated area of the parking lot and memhandise for sale or rent along storefront in designated striped areas as approved on the site plan. (53) Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances, furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repair thereof. (54) Hobby shops and toy store. (55) Honey baked ham store. (56) Ice cream, yogurt, frozen yogurt or juice shops. (57) Ice sales, not including ice plants incidental to a food, convenience or liquor store. (58) Information center. (59) Interior decorating shops. (60) Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs. (61) Laundries and laundromats. (62) Leather goods stores. (63) Linen store. (64) Loan store. (65) Locksmith shops. (66) Mail order or intemet businesses. (67) Mattress or bed store. (68) Meat markets, not including slaughtering. (69) Music, media, or video rental stores. (70) Musical instrument store. (71) Nail and manicure store. (72) Newsstands. (73) Notions, novelty or tabletop stores. (74) Nursery schools for preschool day care. rev. 10/24/01 -24- (75) Office supplies including home Office service stores. (76) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning and real estate. (77) Paint and wallpaper, not including paint contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square feet. (78) Party supply store. (79) Patio furniture store. (80) Pet shops and pet supply shops. (81) Photography shops and studios and photo engraving. (82) Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery store. (83) Plumbing shops, not including plumbing contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square feet. (84) Postal annex store. (85) Post Office. (86) Printer or publishers. (87) Produce markets. (88) Radio and television broadcasting studios or remote broadcasting. (89) Real Estate Office. (90) Recording studios. (91) Recycling collection facilities incidental to a retail store operation, but not including outdoor storage. (92) Refreshment stands. (93) Restaurants and other eating establishments including catering, and including those serving beer, wine or alcohol and with outdoor seating, including dancing. (94) Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, karate, martial arts, music and swimming. (95) Shoe stores and repair shops. (96) Shoeshine stands. (97) Shopping Center Management and Leasing Office. (98) Sign shop including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship. (99) Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 40,000 square feet. (100) Speaker store, including small appliances. (101) Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting store. (102) Stationery stores. (103) Suntan store. (104) Supplement, diet or weight loss store. (105) Tabletop & gif~ stores. (106) Tailor shops. (107) Theater, not including drive-ins. (108) Tire sales and service, not including recapping. (109) Tobacco shops. (110) Tourist information centers. (111) Toy shops. (112) Travel agencies. (113) Typewriter or computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs and training. ' (I 14) Vitamin shop. (115) Watch repair shops. rev. 10/24/01 -25- (116) Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage. (117) Wine Tasting Room and sales. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to City Ordinance. (I) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. (2) Gasoline service stations, including liquid petroleum ("LPG")(provided the total capacity of the LPG tanks shall not exceed 10,000 gallons) with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption. (3) Bars and cocktail lounges. (4) Billiard and pool halls. (5) Dance halls. (6) Fast food restaurants with drive-through. (7) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State Depart:re. ent of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a and b. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director or Planning Manager finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls. SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City or Temecula Subdivision Ordinance. SECTION 9.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development are required in the Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones: There are no minimum lot area requirements, unless specifically required by zone classification for a particular area. bo There are no yard requirements for buildings which do not exceed 35 feet in height except as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public fight-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of- way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. c. All buildings and slructure shall not exceed 50 feet in height. rev. 10/24/01 Calculation of required parking spaces shall be calculated and provided as required by City of Temecula Development Code. Landscaping of parking area shall be consistent with Specific Plan 219 Amendment No. 7. All roof mounted mechanical equipmem shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet at same grade as finished floor. rev. 10/24/01 -27- rev. 10/24/0l -28- Day Care Center/Information Center Planning Area 34 Day Care Center/Information Center Zone The following regulations shall apply in the Day Care Center/Information Center Zone: SECTION 8.1 USESPERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 0991): (1) Nursery schools for preschool day care. (2) Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Department of Social Welfare or the County Department of Public Welfare. (3) Architectural, engineering and community planning offices; provided there is no outdoor storage of material, equipment or vehicles, other than passenger cars. (4) Congregate care residential facilities. (5) Information center. Accessory buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is established as an incident to a principal use and does not change the character of that use. On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use or institution, not to exceed five percent (5%) of the surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which the sign is located. The following uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant to this ordinance: (2) (2) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County and State Codes and Ordinances. SECTION 8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development are required in the Day Care Center/Information Center Zone. There is no minimum lot area requirement, unless specifically required by zone classification for a particular area. rev. 10/24/01 There are no yard requirements for buildings which do no exceed 35 feet in height except as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be setback from the from, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of- way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured from the specific plan street line. All buildings and structure shall not exceed 50 feet in height. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991.). All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -30- Elementary. School Planning Area 7 School/Medium Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone: (1) (2) (3) (4) One family dwellings. Two-family dwellings. Public schools. Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and country clubs. Home occupations. The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in area. (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the School/Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40'). Lot area shall be not less than 7,200 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site. The minimum average width of that portion ora lot to be used as a building site shall be 60 feet with a minimum average depth of 100 feet. That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -31- The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 60 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear s~'eets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: (1) The front yard shall be not less than 20 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public fight-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 10% of the width of the lot, but not less than 3 feet in width in any event, and need not exceed a width of 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing public fight-of way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. (3) The rear yard shall be not less than 10 feet. (4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -32- Elementary_ School Planning Area 11 School/Medium High Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium High Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USESPERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted in the School/Medium High Density Residential Zone: (1) (3) (4) One family dwellings. Two-family dwellings. Public schools. Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and counlE/clubs. Home occupations. The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in RI'ea. (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the School/Medium High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40'). Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family dwellings shall be not less than 3,500 sq. t~. per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 40 feet with a minimum average depth orS0 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 75 feet. That portion ora lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -33- The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 40 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: (1) The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed slructure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet fi.om the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. (3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shail also apply: (a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or stnlctures. (4) No structural ~ncmachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -34- Eleiiieatai)- School Junior Hioh School ~enOOl Area~ .J~,, $0 and 32 Planning ':~ ~ School/Medium Density Residential Zone The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone: SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) One family dwellings. Two-family dwellings. Public schools. Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and country clubs. Home occupations. The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in (2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years in any event. (3) Nurseries, horticultural. SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40'). Lot area shall be not less than 5,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family dwellings shall be not less than 4,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 45 feet with a minimum average depth of 85 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 80 feet. That portion ora lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -35- The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 45 feet, except that lots fi'onting on knuckles or cul- de-SaCs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards. Minimum yard requirements are as follows: (1) The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right- of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. (2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot. (3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall also apply: (a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or structures. (4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in thc front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. Amomobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). rev. 10/24/01 -36- Neighborhood Park/Recreation Area Planning Areas 12, 19, 24, 29-A and 37 ParkZone The following regulations shall apply in all Park Zones: SECTION 8.100. USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Public parks and private recreation facilities. (2) Golf courses and appurtenant facilities, including clubhouses. A clubhouse is permitted to have customary retail shop and restaurant facilities. (3) Noncommercial community association recreation and assembly buildings and facilities. (4) Lakes, including noncommercial fishing therefrom. (5) Picnic grounds. (6) Parking lots, only for above-listed permitted uses, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991), except that not less than five percent of the interior of such parking lots shall have distributed landscap- ing in addition to the landscaping requirements of Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). (7) Water wells an appurtenant facilities. (8) On-site identification signs, maximum size - 10 square feet. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted: (I) Riding academies and stables. SECTION 8.101. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Lot Area. This zone is to be applied to those areas within subdivisions and other residential developments that provide open space and recreational area and facilities for the project. Therefore, no minimum lot size is established for the zone. Yards. Whenever a building is to be constructed on a lot in this zone, it shall have a from yard, side yard and rear yard, each of which shall be not less than 25 feet. If more than one building is constructed on one lot, there shall be not less than a 20-foot separation between the buildings. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. rev. 10/24/01 -37- c. Trash Areas. All trash collection areas shall be enclosed with a solid fence or wall no less than 6 feet high. do Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). All buildings or slrucmres shall not exceed 40 feet in height. rev. 10/24/01 -38- Community Open Space 35 Community Open Space Zone The following regulations shall apply in all Community Open Space Zones: SECTION 8.100. USES PERMITTED. The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991): (1) Undeveloped and manufactured open space. (2) Golf courses and appurtenant facilities, including clubhouses. A clubhouse is permitted to have customary re,ail shop and restaurant facilities. (3) Noncommercial community association recreation and assembly buildings and facilities. (4) Lakes, including noncommercial fishing therefrom. (5) Picnic grounds. (6) Parking lots, only for above-listed permitted uses, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991), except that not less than five percent of the interior of such parking lots shall have distributed landscap- ing in addition to the landscaping requirements of Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). (7) Water wells an appurtenant facilities. (8) On-site identification signs, maximum size - l0 square feet. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted: (1) Riding academies and stables. SECTION 8.101. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Lot Area. This zone is to be applied to those areas within subdivisions and other residential developments that provide open space and recreational area and facilities for the project. Therefore, no minimum lot size is established for the zone. Yards. Whenever a building is to be constructed on a lot in this zone, it shall have a from yard, side yard and rear yard, each of which shall be not less than 50 feet. If more than one building is constructed on one lot, there shall be not less than a 20-foot separation between the buildings. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard' except without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance. rev. 10/24/01 -39- c. Trash Areas. All trash collection areas shall be enclosed with a solid fence or wall no less than 6 feet high.. do Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). All buildings or structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height. rev. 10/24/01 Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial Planning Area 38 Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial Zone The following regulations shall apply in all Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial Zones: SECTION 9.1 USESPERMITTED. The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings with not more than 2,000 square feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use and other than as delineated below and outdoor seating for restaurants, employee eating and casual dining, provided a Development Plan is approved. ~,~v! (17)(11) (25)(12) (22)(13) (23)(14) (24)(15) (26)(16) (27)(17) Antique shops. Art supply shops and studios. Art and fine art sales. Banks and financial institutions with walk-up ,)~ &~vc-u~ teller or ATM. Barber and beauty shops.. Baseball ticket, card and logo merchandise stores. Beauty aid/supply and/or health stores. Bio-medical buildings. Blind and window cover stores. . Blueprint and duplicating services, copy shops or 24-hour copy and business service stores. . Book stores and binders. Carpet or floor covering stores. · Cellular phone stores wiflx ~ ..... o,~,~.:~ - . Check cashing centers. · Child learning centers or day care centers with outdoor play yard. . Civic and government uses including post office and library uses. . Cleaning and dying shops. . Coffee houses wi~h a,,d without drive through facilities. Congregate care facility. rev. 10/24/01 -41- (32)(20) (33)(21) (35)(22) (37)(24) Delicatessens. Dental offices. . Donut shops. · Emergency care medical facilities. · Employment agencies. . Express delivery collection points and shipping facilities. · Family fun center. (42)(27) Fimess club (including 24-hour operation) with outdoor recreation facilities such as basketball, volleyball, tennis or swimming. (43)(28) k'n--r/ (45)(29) (47)(30~ (4g)(31) (51)(33) (52)(34) (53)(35) (55)(36) ($6)(3% (6~)(39) (63)(40) ~vv/ (6~)(42) ~43) (71)(45) Frame, lens or eye glass stores. Garden office. Golf equipmem stores. . Health centers, or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 17,50,0, 35.000 square feet. , . Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances, furniture, carpets, draperies~ lamps, radios and television sets, including repair thereof. · Hotel lodging facilities. · Ice cream, yogurt, fi:ozen yogurt or juice shops. · . Ice sales, not including ice plants. . Interior decorating shops and offices. Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing. Lighting Stores. Loan stores. Mail order or interact businesses. . Medical and chiropractic offices. Musical instruments stores. . . Nail and manicure stores. Newsstands. · Notions, novelty or tabletop stores. rev. 10/24/01 -42- (74~(46) (76)(47) (77)(48) ($o)(sl) (84)(54) (g6)(56) (g7)(57) (90)(59) (91)(60) (93)(62) (94)(63) (96)(65) 0-79(66) (9g)(67) . Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning and real estate. . Office park management and leasing offices. . Office supplies including home office service stores. . Paint and wallpaper stores, not to exceed 20,000 square feet. Party supply stores. Patio furniture stores. Photography shops and studios and photo engraving. Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery stores. . Postal annex stores. . Printer or publishers. . Radio and television broadcasting studios. . Recording studios. . Refzeshments stands with outdoor seating. . Restaurants and other eating establishments, including those serving beer, wine or alcohol and with outdoor seating. Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, karate, martial arts, music and swimming. Shoe repair shops including incidental sale of shoes. Shoeshine stands. Shopping center management and leasing offices. . Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship. Speaker stores, including small appliances. . Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting stores. Statione~,'y stores. (99)(68) Suntarming stores. (I $$)(69)Supplemental, diet or weight loss stores. (I 02)(70)Tailor shops. ( 103.)(71 )Telemarketing offices. (I $6)(72)Tobacco shops. ( 1Sg)(73)Travel agencies. (I 1 $)(74)Typewriter and computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs. t ·, ~/~ 75)Vending machines ( 113)(76)Vitamin shops. rev. 10/24/01 -43- (I 14)(77)Watch repair shops. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to City Ordinance. /1\ (1) Assisted living facility. Nursery schools for preschool day care. Nursing homes. Church and church-school facilities. University. extension schools. Mulfifamily or mixed use multifamily/commemial uses provided a Development Plan is approved in accordance with the City of Temecula Development Code. do Any use that is not Specifically listed in Subsections a, b. and c. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Planning Director finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls. SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City or Temecula Ordinance No. 460 (1991). SECTION 9.3 (DELETED) SECTION 9.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards o{ development are required in the Commercial/Neighborhood Commercial Zones: ao There are no yard requirements for buildings wh/ch ......... ~ ....... '[- A wi~]in this zone, except as required for by the adopted Paloma del Sol Soecific Plan ~...~,~..o ~,, ,,~,~[. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public right-of- ay street lin ~I ....... ' ...... J ,v,, ,,,~ o~,~,~ v,,~, o,,~, ,,,,.. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rev. 10/24/01 -44- -C. 'e, rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side setback shall, be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right- ' -- --- I .... ~ I--- 1--- I - I ..... J ? __.I.~_~ _ __~. t~IL- All buildings and structure_s shall not exceed 70 forty-five (45) feet in height. Automobile storage space shall be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula Development Code. as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991). All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view at finish floor elevation to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. rev. 10/24/01 -45- ATTACHMENT NO 4 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING V'I-I'M 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4) R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01 .doc 13 ATrACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 293 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CENTER LOT, I PARK SITE LOT AND 16 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS AND PARK SITES OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BU'I-I'ERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955 030-032 WHEREAS, Newiand Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (the "Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on November 7, 2001 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 1 Section 2. Findinqs. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code. A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan, Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, as amended, Development Code and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; B. The proposed subdivision map is consistent with the subject Specific Plan Amendment and related General Plan Amendment. C. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use; D. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map; E. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the project boundaries; F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; G. The design of the subdivisions provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; H. The design of the subdivisions and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. (Quimby). The subdivisions are consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements Section 3. The Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an overall reduction of in dwelling units and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way. The analysis associated with the Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 concludes that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased from the original project, and that no additional mitigation measures are required. The City Council acknowledges the overriding consideration with regard to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that the environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed. R:/Resos 200~/Resos 02-_ 2 Section 4. Approval and Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4), the subdivision of 293 residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park lot and 16 open space lots which conform to the Planning Areas and park sites of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan and contained in Exhibit A, subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit B, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8~h day of January, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 8th of January, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 3 EXHIBIT A AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP R:~S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 14 mmm~mm,~m~mm m~ mm TF_NTATiV~ Tl:~a~OT NO. AMENID~D NO. 4 EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR V'R'M 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4) R:\S P AX2.001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 15 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: Project Description: PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 4) The subdivision of approximately 127 acres into 293 residential lots, I recreation center lot, I park lot and 16 open space lots which conform to the Planning Areas, Open Space Areas and Park sites of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8. Assessor's Parcel Nos.: 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-006, 955-030-032. Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($928.00) which includes the Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Seventy- Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Environmental Impact Report required under Public Resources Code Section 21151 and California Code of Regulations Section 15904. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 450, unless modified bythe conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon wdtten request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the R:\S P A~001\01o0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~oaloma cc vllm res.2.OOC 6 action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the lands use approval without further notice to the applicant. 4. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 4. 5. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement Between the City of Temecula and Mesa Homes (Paloma Del Sol). 6. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No 235. 7. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved ~ Monitoring Program. 8. Subdivision phasing shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 9. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: a. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. b. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. c. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. d. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. 10. The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. 11. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. The following notes shall be placed on the ECS: a. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy." R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 7 b. "EIR No. 235 and an Addendum to this EIR was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department." 13. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 14. The development impact fees associated with the project must be paid to the City of Temecula. 15. With the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety a copy of the acoustical study prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and subsequent study dated October 3, 1992, or as updated by subsequent reports, shall be submitted to ensure the implementation of the study to reduce ambient interior noise levels to 45 Ldn and exterior noise levels to 65 Ldn. 16. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Director of Planning approval. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved bythe Planning Department prior to final map recordation of the tract maps. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and parkways. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. A performance bond and a one year maintenance bond shall be required for all landscaping installed except for landscaping within individual lots. The amount of this landscaping shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. This bond shall be secured after completion of said landscaping and prior to release of the dwelling units tied to the timing of the landscaped area Erosion control planting shall commence as soon as slopes are completed on any portion of the site during and after the grading operations. A performance bond shall be secured with the Planning Department prior to issuance of any grading permits to insure the installation of this landscaping. Cut slopes equal to or greater than five (5) feet in vertical height and fill slopes equal to or greater than three (3) feet in vertical height shall be planted with a ground cover to protect the slope from erosion and instability. Slopes exceeding fifteen (15) feet in vertical height shall be planted with shrubs, spaces not more than ten (10) feet on center or trees spaced not to exceed twenty (20) feet on center or a combination of shrubs and trees at equivalent spacings, in addition to the ground cover. Other standards of erosion control shall be consistent with Ordinance No. 457.57. Community Theme Walls may be substituted for Project Theme Walls at the developers discretion. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. R:\S P A~001\01o0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~oaloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 8 22. Wood fencing shall only be allowed along the side yards and the rear yards of single family dwellings. Project Theme Walls shall be used along the side yards facing the street for corner lots. 23. The residential lot street tree requirements and front yard requirements shall be consistent with Section IV.C.3.a.1 .,2., and 3. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 24. Maintenance and timing for completion of all open space areas shall be as identified in Planning Application No. 92-0013 (Development Agreement) or shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, as amended, if the Development Agreement is null and void. 25. A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 26. A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits for review and approval. The following needs to be included in these plans: a. Typical front yard landscaping for interior, corner and cul-de-sac lots. b. Typical slope landscaping. c. Private and public park improvements and landscaping. d. All open space area landscaping including, private and public common areas, private recreational areas, paseos, equestrian trails, monuments and Landscape Development Zones. e. All landscape plans shall identify the number and size of all plants, the type of irrigation to be used, all hardscaping, fences and walls. f. The timing for installation of all landscaping walls and trails shall be identified prior to approval of these plans. g. The responsibility for installation of all landscaping and walls shall be identified. h. All private open space areas that will not be dedicated to the City as identified in the Development Agreement shall be developed as an integrated part of the open space lot that they are a part of and shall be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan. i. Fifty (50) pement of all trees planted within the project shall be a minimum of twenty four (24) inch box. The landscape plans proposed for each phase shall incorporate the fifty (50) percent mix of twenty four (24) inch box trees into the design. The provisions of Chapter 7.06 of the Development Code shall be applied to all landscaped areas with 2:1 slopes or greater. j. A note shall be placed on the conceptual landscape plans that all trees shall be double staked and automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaping. These provisions shall be incorporated into the construction plans. k. A note shall be added to all conceptual landscape plans that all utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping. This equipment shall be identified on the construction landscape plans and shall be screened as specified on this condition. The plant heights at sensitive locations for traffic safety shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. m. The timing for submittal and approval of the construction landscape plans shall be identified for all improvements within this condition. R:~S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 9 27. The development of this project and all subsequent developments within this project shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, as amended and Planning Application No. 92-0013 (Development Agreement) or any subsequent amendments. 28. Double-pane window treatment shall be required for second floor elevation windows in any two-story homes constructed on the lots identified in the Acoustical Study prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and its supplement dated October 3, 1992 and any other supplemental reports. 29. All Parcels in Planning Areas 26 and 28 that abut a portion of Butterfield Stage Road that are designed with a Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) of less than 32 feet shall be developed with single stow single family dwellings. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 30. If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 31. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working order. 32. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 33. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released. 34. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 35. The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. General Requirements 36. it is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 37. All underlying Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 3 approved December 8, 1992 shall govern, if conflicting conditions of approval prevail, the most stringent shall apply. 38. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 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. 39. R:\S P A~2001~1-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 10 All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 40. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho California Water District c. Eastern Municipal Water District d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau f. Planning Department g. Department of Public Works h. Riverside County Health Department i. Cable TV Franchise j. Community Services District k. Verizon I. Southern California Edison Company m. Southern California Gas Company n. Fish & Game o. Army Corps of Engineers 41. If phasing of the map for construction is proposed, legal all-weathered accesses as required by City Ordinances shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a paved City maintained road. 42. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Butterfield Stage Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' wide raised landscaped median. The developer is eligible to a reduction in the Street System Improvements Component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for residential construction as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "A"} dated July 14, 1998. b. The raised landscape median on Butterfield Stage Road shall include 250' of left turn storage capacity with 120' of approach transition or as determined by the Director of Public Works during design, for the intersection with Street "G". c. Improve Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\paloma cc vttm res.2,DOC 11 43. signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 12' wide raised landscaped median. The developer is eligible to a reduction in the Street System Improvements Component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for residential construction as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "A") dated July 14, 1998. d. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). e. Improve Sunny Meadows Drive (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of half- width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). f. Improve Streets "A," "G," "N," and "V" (Entryway Standards - 70' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of full-width street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). g. Improve Streets "B," "C," "D," "F," "G," "H," "1," "J," "K," "L," "M," "N" north of "P," "O," "P," "Q," "R," "S," 'ff'," and "U" (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of full-width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). h. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 800, 801,802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400, 401 and 402. e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. f. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. h. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. i. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 12 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. j. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. k. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303. I. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. m. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33ky or greater, shall be installed underground 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. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Pauba Road, Meadows Parkway, Sunny Meadows Drive and Butterfield Stage Road on the Final Map with the exception of one (1) opening on both Meadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road only and two (2) openings on Sunny Meadows Drive, as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. 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. 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. 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 Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. b. Special Study Zones. c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report. d. Archeological resources found on the site. 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. Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be constructed per the appropriate City Standards and as shown on the approved Tentative Map. R:\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~alorna cc vttm res.2.DOC 13 53. Left turn lanes shall be provided at all intersections on Sunny Meadows Drive, Pauba Road, Butterfield Stage Road and Meadows Parkway, as directed by the Department of Public Works. 54. Traffic signal interconnection shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers aJong the property fronting Butterfield Stage Road and Pauba Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 55. Prior to designing any of the above plans (i.e., left turn lanes, traffic signal interconnection, etc.), contact the Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. 56. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 57. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Buttedield Stage Road, Pauba Road, Meadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 58. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the Final Map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way. 59. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shatl be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 60. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 61. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). 62. This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip Reduction Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01. 63. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 64. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. R:\S P A~2001~1-0102 Paloma eel Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res,2.DOC 14 65. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities . located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." 66. Pedestrian access with sidewalk shall be provided from the cul-de-sac terminus of Streets "D" and "O" to Butterfield Stage Road and between the cul-de-sac terminus of Streets "K" and "G." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 67. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works e. Riverside County Health Department f. Community Services District g. Verizon h. Southern California Edison Company i. Southern California Gas Company 68. 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. 69. A Soils Repod 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 shah address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 70. A Geotechnicai Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 71. 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. ']'he 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. R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 15 72. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 73. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 74. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 75. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. 76. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 77. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 7'8. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation; and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 79. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 80. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. The developer is eligible to receive credits as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 81. The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets and collector streets as directed by the Department of Public Works, 82. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance. 83. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 84. All traffic signals shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as specified under Condition 54 but not later than issuance of occupancy for the final phase. 85. All traffic signal interconnect conduit and cable along Butterfield Stage Road from Pauba Road to the southerly tract boundary shall be installed per the approved plan at the time of street improvements. 86. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road at R:\S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc v~lm res.2.DOC 16 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. Street "G." A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 150th occupancy, unless additional traffic studies support delaying the installation or whenever Street "G" is constructed to Butterfield Stage Road, whichever comes first. The developer is eligible to receive reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems for the actual cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Pauba Road and Meadows Parkway. A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 100th occupancy, unless the Department of Public Works approves delaying the installation. The Developer is eligible to reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems for the actual cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Pauba Road and Butterfield Stage Road. A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 150th occupancy, unless the Department of Public Works approves delaying the installation. The Developer is eligible to receive reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems for the actual cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 93. If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the text of the Specific Plan or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedent. 94. All park and landscape plans submitted for consideration for TSCD maintenance shall be in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape and Irrigation Specifications and Installation Details and the Park Land and Landscape Dedication Process. 95. Construction of the 5-acre public park site (Lot No. 295) and the median landscaping shall commence pursuant to a pre-construction meeting with the developer and the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance to these areas into the TCSD maintenance programs. R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vtim res.2.DOC 96. The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for all maintenance of the park site and the landscaped medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 97. The park site (Lot No. 295) shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance for the amount of the improvements and a soils assessment report shall also be provided with the conveyance of the property. 98. Class II bike lanes shall be constructed in concurrence with street improvements along Butterfield Stage Road and Meadows Parkway. The multi-use trail along Pauba Road shall also be constructed in concurrence with the street improvements. 99. All perimeter walls, fences, entry monumentation, signage, parkway landscaping, pedestrian portals, trails, private recreational areas and open space shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association (HOA), private maintenance association or the property owner. 100. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. Prior to Final Map 101. Construction drawings for the park site (Lot No. 295) and the landscaped medians proposed for dedication to the City shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services. 102. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve the park site (Lot No. 295) and the landscaped medians. Prior to Issuance of Buildinq Permits 103. Prior to the installation of street lights or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application and pay the appropriate fees to the TCSD for the dedication of arterial and residential street lighting into the appropriate TCSD maintenance program. 104. The 5-acre park site (Lot No. 295) shall be improved, including the completion of the 90- day maintenance period and the conveyance accepted by the City Council prior to the issuance of the first building permit in Tract 24188, excluding the 67 dwelling units in Tract 24188-1 and excluding models. 105. The private recreation center (Lot No. 294) shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 200th building permit in Tract 24188, excluding the 67 dwelling units in Tracts 24188-1. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 106. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the Temecula Community Services District and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. This disclosure shall be in the format acceptable to the City and filed with the TCSD. R:\S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vt'tm res.2.DOC 18 107. Prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy within each phase, the developer shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant Signature R:\S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res,2,DOC 19 EXHIBIT A AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP R:~S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-ll-01.doc VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. AMENDED NO, 4 City of ATTACHMENT NO 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2001 R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-1 l~)l.doc 16 STAFF REPORT CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 28, 2001 Planning Application No. PA01-0109 (General Plan Amendment) Planning Application No. PA01-0102 (Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8) Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 Amendment. No. 4) Prepared By: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DO THE FOLLOWING: (1) CERTIFY ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8; (2) APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109); and APPROVE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102) AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING STANDARDS FOR PLANNING AREA 38 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102 2. ADOPT Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE PALOMA del SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955-030- 032. R:\S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~CStaffRpt..2.dcc APPLICATION INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Newland Communities, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants PROPOSAL: Planning Application No. PA 01-0109 proposes to amend the General Plan Map to reflect the proposed Specific Plan amendments. Planning Application No. PA01-0102 proposes to amend Specific Plan No. SP-4 (Paloma del Sol), Planning Areas 5, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 38; and eliminating Planning Area 29B. Planning Application No. PA01-0117 proposes Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 to create 293 single-family residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park site lot and 16 open space lots located within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29. LOCATION: North of State Highway 79 South, south of Pauba Road, west of Buttedield Stage Road and east of Margarita Road. EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan Overlay District, Paloma del Sol, (SP-4) PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan Overlay District, Paloma del Sol, (SP-4) BACKGROUND Specific Plan No. 4 (Paloma del Sol) was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988 as County SP-219. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Council approved various amendments to the Specific Plan, in the period of time from 1994 through 1999. A formal submittal for these new amendments was received on February 28, 2001. Staff held a Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant on April 5, 2001. From June to the present, staff has conducted additional meetings with the Applicant on various revisions to the text and figures in the Specific Plan Amendment and the vesting tentative tract map. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 The 15 acres associated with existing Planning Area 27 will be merged into proposed Planning 28 and designated for Medium Density single-family residential uses. The commercial uses are being located to the southwestern corner of the project site. A new Planning Area 27 has been re-located to the south and will be established as 9 acres of open space. The reconfigured Planning Area 28 has been expanded from 25.0 acres to 49.4 acres. Based on a density of 2-5 density units per acre, the number of dwelling units will increase from 113 to 190 units. · The Temecula Valley Unified School District has determined the 10.0 acre elementary school site planned for Planning Area 29B will instead be located in the Crown Hill R:~S P AL?.001 \01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~CStaffRpt.,2,doc 2 development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, the area has been eliminated and incorporated into Planning Areas 27, 28, and 29. The 2.9 acre Park and Recreation area designated for existing Planning Area 24 will be incorporated into the existing Greenbelt/Paseo system. A new Planning Area 24 wilt be designated as a 1.0 acre private Park/Recreation area adjacent to Planning Area 27. · Planning Area 29 remains as a 5.0 acre Park/Recreation area. but, will be relocated north of the open space area adjacent to Planning Area 27. · The commercial uses from Planning Area 27 will replace the Medium High residential uses in Planning Area 38. The residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been lowered from Medium High (5-8 DU/AC) to Medium (2-8 DU/AC). These changes will result in a reduction of 3 residential units in Planning Area 5 and a reduction of 107 residential units in Planning Area 23. Amendment of General Plan Land Use Map · The City's General Plan Land Use Map must be amended to reflect the changed land use designations affected by the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment. Vestin.q Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 modifies the previously approved Amendment No 3 by creating 293 single-family residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park site lot and 16 open space lots within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29. ANALYSIS Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes to relocate the existing Neighborhood Commercial area from the southwest corner of Pauba and Buttedield Stage Roads to the southwest corner of De Portola Road and Campanula Way. With regard to residential uses, the amendment would result in an overall 2%-3% reduction in residential dwelling units within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan boundary. The previously planned elementary school facility proposed for Planning Area 29B has been eliminated and public and private parks will be reconfigured and relocated. Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Relocation of Commercial Area The applicant is requesting to relocate the 15 acre Neighborhood Commercial area at the southwest corner of Pauba Road and Butterfield Stage Road (existing Planning Area 27) to the 8 acre Planning Area 38 located within the village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road. The reason given by the applicant for the proposed relocation includes concern over land use compatibility issues and their doubts about being able to attract a major commercial tenant. Staff concurs that a high potential exists for land use conflicts between the currently allowed commercial R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #Sh~CStaffRpt..2.doc 3 development and the existing and proposed residential development that surround the area. Moreover, staff believes it is appropriate to concentrate commercial development within the existing village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road. It should be noted that a portion of existing Planning Area 27 contains slope constraints. Subsequently, the relocation of the commercial designation results in a relatively even trade of level developable acreage. The applicant is proposing to amend the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance to provide for Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial uses and development standards for Planning Area 38. Staff has reviewed the proposed uses and development standards within Planning Area 38 and believes they are consistent with the Specific Plan and the long term vision in the General Plan. In addition, staff believes the expanded commercial area will enhance the village center and be compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses. Reduction in Residential Units The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 reduces the total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan from the currently allowed 5,246 units to a maximum of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units. This dwelling unit decrease represents a 2% to 3% reduction in residential dwelling units. The High and Very High categories will remain unchanged. The decrease in overall net residential density from 5.1 density units per acre to 4.9 density units per acre results in the allocation of more land to each single family detached residential unit. The gross project density also decreases similarly from 3.8 density units per acre to 3.6 density units per acre. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted in the original Specific Plan, the totat decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at 5,137 density units) to 10% (at 5,072 density units). Elimination of School Site The existing Planning Area 29B, which was located within the boundary of tract 24188, was intended to accommodate a 10-acre elementary school facility. However, the Temecula Valley Unified School District has since indicated that the school will actually be located in the Crown Hill development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, Planning Area 29B will be eliminated and the 10 acres will be re-allocated for parks, open space, and some medium density residential development. Parks & Open Space Areas Two neighborhood park/recreation areas will be provided within Tract 24188. Planning Area 29, which has been reconfigured and relocated slightly, will accommodate a 5.0 acre public park/recreation area. The facility will be constructed, fully operational and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the first building permit in Tract 24188 excluding the 67 dwelling units in Tract 24188-1. Planning Area 24 will accommodate a private 1.0 acre park/recreation area. The facility will be constructed and fully operable as a private facility to be operated and maintained by the homeowners association prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for the 4,576th residential unit within the specific plan. R:~ P AL?.001 \01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8XPCS ta rfP. pt ..2.doc 4 Specific Plan/EIR Addendum Typoqraphical Corrections Staff has identified several typographical and numerical errors within the applicant's latest submittal of the Specific Plan and EIR Addendum text. Staff recommends that the corrections identified in Attachment 7 be incorporated into the proposed amended Specific Plan and EIR Addendum documents prior to consideration by the City Council. General Plan Map Amendment The General Plan Land Use Map Amendment is necessary to conform to the current General Plan land uses and development criteria set forth in the proposed Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8. The map amendments have been determined to be consistent with the City's General Plan and both the amended and un-amended portions of the Specific Plan. The proposed General Plan Land Use Map is located in Exhibit A of Attachment 3. Vestin.q Tentative Parcel Map Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 is located within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29 of Specific Plan No. 4. The amendment serves to modify Amendment No. 3 by reducing the number of single-family residential lots from 351 to 293. Pedestrian Connections The previously approved map associated with Tract 24188 had various pedestrian connections incorporated into the design so as to enhance a pedestrian's ability to access adjacent streets and areas. Staff is recommending that three separate connections be incorporated into the latest map amendment. One connection would occur between Street "D" and Butterfield Stage Road. A second access would connect Street "O" with Butterfield Stage Road. And a third connection, located within the interior of the tract, will provide pedestrian access between Streets "G" and "K". The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is located in Exhibit B of Attachment No. 6. The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachment 8) indicating their agreement to incorporate the "G" Street/"K" Street connection. However, they do not believe that the "D" Street and "O" Street connections are appropriate. It should be noted that the "Q" Street connection requirement referenced in the correspondence was a misunderstanding and was only recommended as an option by staff and not as a specific requirement. Staff continues to believe that the three separate pedestrian connections are necessary and requests that the Planning Commission provide direction on this issue. Environmental Issues Lots "i~', "G", and "H" of Tract 24188 have been designed in conformance with Planning Area No. 27 which is designated as a 9.0 acre natural open space area. The layout of these lots serves to ensure that impacts to an existing drainage and wetland within the planning area will be fully avoided. Conditions of Approval The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachments 9 & 10) requesting that various Planning and Public Works conditions associated with Amendment 4 to Tract Map 24188 be modified and or deleted. Since that time, both Planning and Public Works staff have R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\PCSmffRpt..2.doc 5 reviewed the proposed amendments. Public Works staff concurs with all proposed amendments and has incorporated the amendments into the applicable recommended conditions of approval. Moreover, Planning staff concurs with all but two of the requested amendments and has incorporated the other amendments into the applicable conditions. The first outstanding amendment is associated with Condition of Approval No. 26 which requires that the applicant provide a conceptual landscape plan for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Correspondence submitted by the applicant's representative requests that the above condition be deleted given that the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan includes a Conceptual Landscape Plan exhibit. Moreover, the applicant believes that the Specific Plan provides the level of detail necessary to address landscaping issues at this point in the planning process. Condition of Approval No. 26 has been a standard condition applied to all previous tract maps within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, staff recommends this condition be required. The second outstanding amendment is associated with Condition of Approval No. 29 which requires that single-story dwellings be developed on all parcels in Planning Areas 26 and 28 which front on Buttedield Stage Road and have a Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) of less than 32 feet in width. The applicant's representative is requesting that Condition No. 29 be deleted given that none of the parcels within Planning Areas 26 and 28 fronting on Buttedield Stage Road have Landscape Development Zones (LDZ's) of less than 32 feet in width. Upon reviewing the proposed tract map, planning staff believes some of the parcels may indeed have LDZ's of less than 32 feet in width. Therefore, staff recommends that this condition be required. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City in conjunction with an overall reduction of dwelling units and realignment of Campanula Way. Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1 Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed. Adiacent Property Owner Correspondence On November 7, 2001 staff received correspondence from Darren Stroud, attorney with the Law Firm of Jackson DeMarco & Peckenpaugh (see Exhibit 11). Mr. Stroud represents James & Mary Corona. The Coronas own land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Buttertield Stage Road and Highway 79 South. The correspondence contends that the project applicants have failed to construct necessary flood control facilities in accordance with a previously required condition of R:XS p AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8'xPCStaffRpt..2.doc 6 approval and mitigation measures associated with the original approval of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The correspondence indicates that the failure to construct these facilities has resulted in a flood hazard on the Corona's property. Mr. Stroud is requesting that the City enfome the previously required drainage related condition of approval and associated mitigation measures by requiring construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits. Moreover, in the absence of such a condition, Mr. Stroud is requesting that a subsequent environmental impact report be prepared to evaluate current hydrology of the area and to mitigated increased flood hazards to the Corona's property. (See Attachment 12 for response from Applicant's Attorney). Public Works Department staff believes the issue of timing and construction of the flood control facilities has already been addressed. Moreover, staff believes the current planning actions being proposed have no affect on the timing and construction of the flood control improvements. With regard to environmental analysis, Planning staff does not believe that the planning actions as proposed have any significant environmental affect on flood hazard issues. Moreover, staff believes the proposed Addendum to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR adequately addresses potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, staff does not believe that additional environmental analysis is necessary. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission Certify Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the General Plan Amendment and amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. FINDINGS Specific Plan The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. The Specific Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of the majority of the existing Land Use Designations and serves as an implementation tool for the General Plan. Therefore, as proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended, and Development Code. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff, and is determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan (as it is proposed to be amended), Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a master planned community with specific design guidelines and standards that ensure compatibility and interface with the surrounding community in terms of density, design and circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and designed, the Specific Plan is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested amended land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints of the site which would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or anticipated developments. R:XS P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PCStaffRpt,.2.doc 7 The proposed project shall ensure development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding neighborhoods. The Community/Neighborhood Commercial development is proposed within a Village Center and is designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve the needs of the Paloma del Sol community and is adjacent to Highway 79 South where similar commercial and retail uses currently exist along the Highway corridor. Vestinq Tentative Tract Amendment The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan as amended and the City of Temecula Development Code; The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use; The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map; The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the project boundaries; The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; 10. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; 11. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. 12. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). R:~S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8XPCStaffRpt..2.doc 8 ATTACHMENT NO 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO FEIR NO. 235 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doe 17 DRAFT ATrACHMENT NO. 6 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-~-O A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DO THE FOLLOWING: (1) CERTIFY ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8; (2) APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109); and APPROVE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102) AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING STANDARDS FOR PLANNING AREA 38 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102) WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application Nos. PA01-0109 (General Plan Amendment), and PA01-0102 (Specific Plan Amendment, & Zoning Standards Amendment), (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered these Applications on November 7, 2001 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to the recommended conditions, together with the concurrent recommendation on the certification of Paloma del Sol EIR Addendum No. 4 after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. In all respects as set forth in the recitals hereinabove, which are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. That the Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application, hereby makes the following findings: General Plan Amendment: The General Plan Amendment is necessary to conform to the current General Plan land uses and development criteria set forth in the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8. Further, the General Plan Amendment serves to designate the Land Use for the parcels in a manner more conducive to future development. The City finds it necessary to change the Land Use Designation of parcels on the General Plan Land Use Map to ensure the public health, safety and welfare of the City and to facilitate future development of the parcels. R:~S P A~2001\01 ~)102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PC eir gpa spa res.doc 1 DRAFT Specific Plan Findin.qs A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. The Specific Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of some of the existing Land Use Designations and serves as an implementation tool for the General Plan. Therefore, as proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended, and Development Code. B. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff, and is determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan (as it is proposed to be amended), Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a master planned community with specific design guidelines and standards that ensure compatibility and interface with the surrounding community in terms of density, design and circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and designed, the Specific Plan is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested amended land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints of the site which would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or anticipated developments. D. The proposed project shall ensure development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding neighborhoods. The Community/Neighborhood Commercial development is proposed within a Village Center and is designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve the needs of the Paloma del Sol community and is adjacent to Highway 79 South where similar commercial and retail uses currently exist along the Highway corridor. Section 3. Recommendation to the City Council. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council do the following: 1. Approve a Resolution certifying Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR, and approving General Plan Amendment (PA-01-0109), located in Exhibit A and substantially in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; 2. Approve a Resolution approving Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (PA-01-0102), located in Exhibit B and substantially in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and 3. Adopt an Ordinance amending the zoning standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (PA-01-0102), and contained in Exhibit C, and substantially in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8XPC eir gpa spa res.doc 2 DRAFT Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 7th day of November 2001. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 01 - was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of November, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\S P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PC eir gpa spa res.doc 3 ATFACHMENT NO 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4) R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT 12-11-01.doc 18 DRAFT ATrACHMENTNO. 7 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-.~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955- 030-004, 955-030-006, 955-030-032. WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0117, (the "Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on November 7, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to the conditions after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed with the City of Temecula General Plan, as amended, the proposed Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH E CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. That the Planning Commission, in recommending that the City Council approve the Application, hereby make the following findings as required in Chapter 16 of the City of Temecula Subdivision Ordinance. A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan as amended and the City of Temecula Development Code; B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting pamels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use; R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~c tract res..doc DRAFT C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map; D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the project boundaries; F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; G. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; H. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 8, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an overall reduction of in dwelling units and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way. The analysis associated with the Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 concludes that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased from the original project and that no additional mitigation measures are required. The Planning Commission acknowledges the overriding consideration with regard to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that the environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed. Section 4. Recommendation to the City Council. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve a resolution approving of Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24188), for the subdivision of a portion of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan as shown on Exhibit A, and substantially in the form contained herein and incorporated herein by this reference. R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~pc tract res..doc 2 DRAFT Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 7tn day of November 2001. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certifythat PC Resolution No. 01 - was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of November, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\S P A~001~1-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~oc tract res..doc 3 ATFACHMENT NO 8 SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGES R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 19 J LO I.IJ ~0 ATFACHMENT NO 9 PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS LOCATION MAP R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 20 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. AMENDED NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO 10 T & B PLANNING CONSULTANTS PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS LETTER R:\S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc ; [ il T&B Planning Consultants · ~ Santa Aha · San Diego · Sacramento IN 100-I72 · 3242 HALLADAY, SUITE 100 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 (714) 662-2774 FAX # (714) 662-270~ email@tbplanmng.corn November 1, 2001 Mr. Matthew C. Harris, Associate Planner Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: Vesting Tentative Tract 24188 Amendment No. 4 (PA01-0117) Plan Amendment No. 8 (PA01-0102) and Paloma del Sol Specific Dear Matt: In response your comment letter dated October 10, 2001, the Paloma del Sol consultant team was directed by the applicant, NEWLAND ASSOCIATES, INC., to incorporate several additional access points into the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract No. 24188) for Paloma del Sol. Specifically, staff requested the following: Pedestrian access with sidewalk shall·be provided at the following points: a. Between the cul-de-sacs at the end of Streets "G " & "K". b. From the cul-de-sac terminus of Street "D" to Butterfield Stage Road c. From the cul-de-sac terminus of Street "0" to Butterfield Stage Road City staff has also requested a pedestrian access point from Street "Q" directly to Butterfield Stage Road. In response to staffs request, the project civil engineer (The Keith Companies) has provided accommodations for all of these access points on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. The revised map was recently resubmitted to the City for staff review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Where appropriate, we also included references to several of these access points in the Specific Plan Amendment document. Pedestrian Access Between Streets "G"and "K" · . .... be accommodated relatively easily· This We beheve that pedestrian access between Streets G and "K" can access point would occur in Lot "0" on the Tract Map. However, we still have concerns regarding the other requested access points. Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "D" to Butterfield Stage Road A pedestrian access point at this location is feasible. However, opening a cul-de-sac to pedestrians on such a busy street poses potential risks to little children wandering out onto Butterfield Stage Road. Plus, from a · ' " ' le security standpoint, it is much more d~fficult to provide defens,b space" with an open cul-de-sac than with a closed cul-de-sac. For these reasons, we feel that this proposed pedestrian access point should be eliminated from the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 24188-2't. I'~:~' (~: ~- c =:, ~ · ~ ~ Matthew C. Harris Paloma Del Sol November 1, 2001 Pa~e 2 Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "O" to Butterfield Stage Road This access point is difficult to provide from a purely logistical standpoint. The grade change between the Street "O" cul-de-sac and the parkway adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road is approximately 8.3%, which exceeds ADA requirements. Current ADA requirements for outdoor ramps is 6% maximum. In addition, a pedestrian walkway is proposed along through the middle of the 2:1 slope that abuts Planning Area 26. The Lot "G" drainage, which borders Planning Area 26, will contain sensitive wetland habitat. Proximity to children and domesticated animal s would likely have a negative impact on this vegetation. In addition, providing an access from Butterfield Stage Road directly to Street "O" would raise potential security concerns as well. We request that this access point be eliminated from the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "Q" to Butterfield Stage Road: The grade change between the Street "Q" cul-de-sac and the parkway adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road makes it almost a certainty that stairs would be required at this location in lieu ora ramp. This would conflict with ADA access requirements. In addition, opening a cul-de-sac on such a busy street poses potential risks to little children wandering out onto Butterfleld Stage Road. Plus, from a security standpoint, it is much more difficult to provide "defensible space" with an open cul-de-sac than with a closed cul-de-sac. For these reasons, we feel that this proposed pedestrian access point should be eliminated from the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 24188-2). Conclusion It is our intent to request the Planning Commission direct City staff to remove the Street "D", Street "O" and Street "Q" access points at the upcoming November 7~h public hearing. We hope that this letter clarifies the position of NEWLAND ASSOCIATES, INC. regarding the proposed access points. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincereiy, T&B PLANNING CONSULTANTS, ]NC. Mark T. Hickner Senior Project Manager Gary Thornhill / City of Temecula Debbie Ubnoske / City of Temecula Dave Hogan / City of Temecula Jim Delhamer / Newland Dean Meyer / Newland Sam Alhadeff/Adhadeff& Solar Craig Ryan / The Keith Companies Barry Bumell / T&B A'I-I'ACHMENT NO 11 DARREL STROUD LE'I'I'ER - NOVEMBER 7, 2001 R:\S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc 22 11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~002/067 JACKSON DEMARCO ~ t~E~:~pAUGH 28878 November 7, 2001 Dstroud~jdplaw.com (949) 851-7404 VL4 FACSIMILE AND HAND DELIVERY Planning Commission City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Arm: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner Re: Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5 Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Planning Application No. 01-0117- Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No.4 Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners: We represent James and Mary Corona and the Corona family (collectively the "Coronas"). The Coronas own land at the northeast comer of the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79. The Coronas' land straddles the boundary between Riverside County ("County") and the City of Temecula ("City"), and is directly impacted by the on-going development 'activities associated with the Paloma del Sol project ("Project"). The Coronas request that the following comments be included in the administrative record regarding the above referenced planning applications. Additionally, the Coronas request that the Planning Commission enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan ("Specific Plan 219'') by conditioning its approval o£the above-referenced planning applications on the construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits. 11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~003/067 JACKSON DEI~..HCO & PEC~n~NI~AUC-H Planning Commission November 7, 2001 Page 2 I. INTRODUCTION Prior to the development of Specific Plan 219 and construction of Butterfield Stage Road improvements, storm water flowed to the north of the Coronas' land, across Butterfield Stage Road, and through the Specific Plan 219 property. As a result, when the County first approved Specific Plan 219, it imposed a condition on the Project requiring the developer to construct a flood contmi channel either on-site or off-site to intemept those flows. The County likewise imposed mitigation measures on the Project to prohibit increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties and require that all flood-related hazards must be adequately mitigated. (Reference EIR 235, pp. 315-321, incorporated by reference.) Subsequently, the City adopted the County's condition of approval for Specific Plan 219 that the developer construct the flood control facilities either on-site or off-site. The City fzrst adopted the condition in 1991. However, the flood control facilities have never been built. Accordingly, development of Specific Plan 219 by its predecessor and Newland Communities' ("Newland") has resulted in filling the natural drainage course that formerly flowed to the north of the Corona Ranch property, across Butterfield Stage Road, through Specific Plan 219, to Temecula Creek. This has resulted in a flood hazard on the Coronas' land where none previously existed. The flood control facilities are necessary to mitigate the hazardous condition created on the 'Coronas' land by Newland's development of Specific Plan 219 and the Butterfield Stage Road improvements. Yet, Newland continues to develop the property without complying with the condition and mitigation measures that require it to construct the flood control facilities, further increasing the likelihood of flood-related hazards to the Coronas' property. Once again, Newland is requesting amendments to the Project's entitlements without having constructed, or even committing to construct, the flood control facilities. On November 2, 2001, the Coronas, for the first time, became aware of the Planning staff's recommendation to approve the above referenced planning applications (e.g., amendments to the City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, and Vesting Tentative Map No. 24188) for the Project. However, the Coronas respectfully request that the City enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219 by conditioning any approval of the above-referenced applications on construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building penn/ts. In the abserice of such a condition, a subsequent environmental impact report ("EIR") will need to be prepared prior to consideration of the above-referenced applications to evaluate the current hydrology of the area and to mitigate the increased flood hazards to the Coronas' land resulting from the Project. Furthermore, without such a condition, the Planning Commission must suspend all action on the Project, including the above-referenced planning applications, until after construction of the flood control facility necessary to mitigate Project-related flooding hazards to the public roads and private property adjacent to the' development. 11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~004/067 JACKSON DEI~AI~CO & PECKEN'P~UGH Planning Commission November 7, 2001 Page 3 CONSTRUCTION OF THE FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES ARE REOU/RED BY A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1MPOSEB ON SPECIFIC PLAN 219 As mentioned previously, the conditions of approval for Specific Plan 219 require compliance with the terms set forth in correspondence dated May 26, 1988, by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The May 26, 1988, letter requires the construction of a drainage facility to intercept offsite storm runoffthat approaches the Project from the east. The letter states that the facility should be constructed as a permanent facility- not as a temporary facility pending development of the next upstream property as had been proposed by Project engineers in correspondence dated May 16, 1988. The letter also states that the facility is to be constructed "before development of the downstream area it is meant to protect." Finally, the letter states that the location, design, and design flow rates and sizes proposed by the developer in Figure 57 of Specific Plan 219 should be considered '.'conceptual." A copy of the May 26, 1988, Flood Control letter is attached as Exhibit "A," together with the prior correspondence dated April 6, 1988, and May 16, 1988, leading up to the May 26, 1988, letter. The correspondence in Exhibit "A" indicates that the developer of Specific Plan 219 attempted to limit the location and size of the necessary flood control facilities and to shift the responsibility for constructing portions of the permanent flood control facilities to the next upstream property. However, in its May 26, 1988, response letter, the County rejected that attempt and instead required that the necessary permanent facility be constructed as part of Specific Plan 219. The City adopted the May 26, 1998, letter as one of the conditions of approval of Specific Plan 219 in 1991. (Reference attached Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1, at Exhibit "B".) Specific Plan 219, as amended bythe terms of the May 26, 1988, Flood Contro'l letter, was the "Project" analyzed by EIR 235. EIR 235 imposed mitigatio~ measures on Specific Plan 219 prohibiting increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties, requlring that all flood-related haZards. must be adequately mitigated and requiring preparation of an in-depth study of the Temecula Creek flood plain. (Reference EIR 235, pp. 315-321 .) More importantly, the condition of approval and mitigation measures requiring the Newland to construct the flood control facilities as part of Specific Plan 219 still apply to the Project. There has been no subsequent action by the City eliminating or changing the condition of approval or mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219. In fact, to date, each time the City has approved amendments to Specific Plan 219, most recently in 1999, it has conditioned its approval on the pre-existing conditions, and has never released Newland of the responsibility to construct the flood control facilities. (Reference attached Conditions of Approval Nos. 50, 95, 96, 110, 120, 140, and 148 for Vesting Tentative Map No. 24182 (Amendment No. 3 - December 11/07/2001 16:29 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~005/067 JACKSON DRiP--ARCO & PECIt~iVPAUGH Planning Commission November 7, 2001 Page 4 8, 1992), Conditions of Approval Nos. 5, 20(g) & (h), 60, and 79 for Planning Application No. PA96-0258 (Vesting Tentative Map No. 24182 Revised - February 8, 199g), and Condition of Approval No. 7 for Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 - November 16, 1999) at Exhibit "C".)) Therefore, the legal responsibility for constructing the flood control facilities remains with the developers (Newland) of Specific Plan 219. III. TIlE DRAINAGE-RELATED CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSED ON SPECIFIC PLAN 219 HAVE NOT BEEN SATISFIF, I~ By filling and constructing in the natural drainage channel, the Project has created flood hazards to Corona Ranch that did not previously exist. The Project's alteration of the natural drainage also results in flood hazards to Butterfield Stager Road and Highway 79. (Reference 1996 Hydrology and Hydraulics Report for Paloma del Sol dated November 1996 by Keith Interuational, Inc.; and Flood Control letter dated September 23, 1996.) The temporary detention basin and drainage facilities in Butterfield Stage Road do not satisfy all drainage and flood control conditions imposed on Specific Plan 219. The drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures require the development of permanent facilities as part of Specific Plan 219 to intercept all offsite storm nmoff that approaches the Project from the east, and prohibits increased flood hazards to adjacent properties. The record is uncontradicted that the facilities in Butterfield Stage Road are inadequate to intercept all of the west-flowing storm waters. (Reference Flood Control letter dated September 23, 1996, and attached Minutes 0fthe November g, 1989, Assessment District meeting confirming additional drainage onto the Specific Plan 219 Project from the east, at Exhibit "D'.) Also note that the City has accepted Butterfield Stage Road into the City- maintained street system. (Reference City Council Resolution No. 95-30, at Exhibit "E".) The detention basin is only a temporary facility that is only required to remain in place until the permanent flood control facilities are constructed. It is not a "permanent" facility itself, as required by the conditions of approval stated in the May 26, 1988, letter. (Reference Exhibit [Vi FAILURE TO MITIGATE THE INCREASED FLOOD HAZARDS RESULTINC FROM DIVERTING 'I'HE NATURAL DRAINAGE COURSE IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE REQUIRING PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL Planning staff is recommending that an Addendum is an appropriate .environmental document for the planning applications explaining that "changes in project unpacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. (Reference Staff Report p. 5; See also Addendum p. 7). In particular for flooding impacts, the Addendum concludes that "the proposed project would not result in any new flood-related impacts the have not already been evaluated and approved for previous Specific Plan Amendments .... "(Reference Addendum p. 11). However, this 11/07/2001 16:29 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~006/067 J~-Ci~S01~ DEi~-ARC0 & PECKEI~pAUGH Planning Commission November 7, 2001 Page 5 conclusion runs counter to the actual events that have transpired since EIR 235 was originally certified by the County on September 6, 1988. In fact, to date, the Newland has failed to come into compliance with the development criteria and conditions placed on the Project. Instead, as proposed here, the City has allowed the Project to proceed on grounds that new approvals would not cause any a_dditional flood hazards to Corona Ranch and other adjoining properties. In essence, the City is illegally permitting the Project to proceed without enforcing the mitigation measures adopted for the Project. As mentioned earlier, Project grading has altered the drainage course that previously existed in the pre-Project condition. Since 1988, there have been significant changes in the topography of the area adjacent to the Project, including Butterfield Stage Road. The City has yet to analyze these significant changes in the circumstances under which the Project is to be carded out and mitigate the significant increased flood hazards. However, the record before the City shows that the Newland is responsible to mitigate flood hazards resulting from the Project. The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code sections 21000 etscq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. sections 15000 etseq.) require preparation of a subsequent EIR for a project when substantial changes occur to the .ckcumstances under which a project is to be undertaken, or new information shows that project unpacts will be substantially more severe. (Public Resoumes Code section 21166; 14 Cal. Code Regs. section 15162). Project grading and improvements to Butterfield Stage Road have effectively blocked drainage through the area, creating significantly increased flood hazards to adjacent properties than was previously identified in EIR 235. Accordingly, it is illegal for the Planning Commission to approve the current planning applications based on an Addendum to an outdated EIR. Particularly, where the Addendum incorrectly focuses on the impacts associated with the planning applications and fails to take into consideration the significant changes associated with the whole of the Project~ since its original certification. Over 13 years after the Project EIR was approged, no flood control facilities have been constructed to alleviate the flood hazards, contrary to assumptions made in Project design and the prior environmental impact analysis. To date, Newland has failed to come into compliance with the development criteria and conditions placed on the Project. Accordingly, if th.e Planning Commission chooses not to require the construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits as a condition of approval for the above referenced planning applications, then a subsequent EIR will need to be prepared first to analyze the increased ~A '"Project' means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment .... "14 Cal. Code of Regs. section 15378(a); See also 14 Cal. Code of Regs. section 15378(c) ("'project' does not mean each separate governmental approval"); 14 Cal. Code &Regs. section 15063(a)(I) (the lead agency must consider "[a]ll phases of project planning, implementation, and operation.") ' 11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P I£VINE ~007/067 JACKSOI~7 DE~CO ~ PECI~N'PAUGH Planning Commission November 7, 2001 Page 6 Project-related flood risks. The reliance on an Addendum as proposed by Planning staffwould violate CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. V. CONCLUSION On behalf of the Coronas, I urge the Planning Commission to Planning Commission enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219 by conditioning its approval of the above-referenced plarm/ng applications on the construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits. Otherwise, a subsequent EIR is required to analyze the Project's significant flood hazards and all action on the Project must be suspended until the flood control facilities are constructed. DWS/tms Enclosures 430903.3 Very truly yours, en W. Stroud CC: Stephen Corona (facsimile w/out encls., overnite express w/encls.) Peter Thorson, City Attorney (facsimile w/out encls., ovemite express w/encls.) 11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~008/067 EXHIBIT A 11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~] 009~067 'F ......,o,, I-''>°' / ~iveraide · Pi~MntnB Department County ~dmln~stcati~e Center ~lverside, Attention: Specific Flea non Goldman L=diea and Gentleaen: In our April 6, 1988 letter vc cxprea~e~ concern over de£i~l~n- cleo in'bbc Specl£1c Plan docu=cnt_ lhc6e problem~ have been largely qorreeted by the spplloant bhrough thc rovlalon o£ a por- tion of the tc~t bhat dealm with drainage elon~ ?aub~ Road and through the..:revialon, of Figure The chaago~ on FiGure 57 lno'ludc thc ~tcn~ion o£ two proposed ~tor~ dr~[na southerly to Tc=cc~la Creek, the addition o~ a large otorm drain along ?auto Road and a n~ul¥ proposed £aellit~ along Buttor£1eld Stage ~o=d at the aougheeet oorner o£ the proJcot. This 1~ d/a[n~ge s'i~d'e~'ure hoa'bcan propoocd aa a result o£ our co~enga on the earlier dre£t. It 1~ needed to Intercept a l~rgc ~aount o£ of?olte ~tora runo££ the~ appro~0he3 tho project £roa thc e~at. Its rcpreocntatlon on Figure 57 should be considered conceptual with regard to location and design ~nd rat:~ and ~lzoa ~hould be re'garded aa Tbi~ facility should be co~l~true~¢d ~ ~ p~rmancnt £aeilit¥ either ooolte or o£~lte b~£ore doYclopaent o£ the downotrea~ ~ro~ it ia meant to protect. ^o Iong a~ the te~t anfl..£1gure chongea and thane comae~t~ are made ~ park or thc £1nal document wc do not object to th~ appro¥- Very truly yours, KE~N£T~ L. EDWARDS.. ..% co: Robert Beln, Willle~ FrO3t & A~oclate~ 3)lK:bJp 8on£or Civil EnBlneer 11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~010/067 RIV£RSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CON?ROt AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT April $, 19~8 Riverside County Planning Del0artmea~ ~ount¥ Adm/nietra~/ve Center Riverside, Califon%ia A~tenti~l Specific Plan Se~tio~ ~n ~oldman Ladies an~ C~ntlsmanl Re~ Specific Plan No. 219 Devalou~nt Agre~nt No. 4 A ~ ~ter~se ~a[lels ~ =oases ~ ~d ~ a~a! plaoes ~g ~e The drainage basin mentioned in the last paragraph of Page 306 should ~e exam/ned, We believe ~hat ~hi, ~area actually is naturally trihutaz7 ~o the viein'~tM ,. oE t-~e ~A~med BUtterfield Stage Ik~d/De Portol. a ~=ad /nterseotic~ and should be dea!~ with. ~ts ia ~sed upon review of a~=ial ~al~m ~ating bec~ 39 years a~ .+-opo~_~raphlc mapping 49 year$. Thaee ma=ters should ~e ~ettled before this specific ~lan is approved. O~ a:m'~-act perscri ts ,7can Ea,.hu~,. t:e!el:hCne Very truly yours, Attn~ ~mry Burn~ll 2) ~%~oert Bein, William r Civil Engineer 11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 10/27/~9 15:5~ ~B 68~ 6~6 909 6~4 6966 ~011/067 PACE. 2/28 bert C'BcirL,CWilliamC'F ost c. ssociatcs PROFE$S)ONAL ENGINEERS, PLAN NERS & SURVEYOR~ May 16, 1988 JN 24084 Mr. John H. Kashuba Senior Civil Engineer Riverside County Flood Control and Mater Conservation District 1995 Market Street Riverside, CA 92502 Subject: Response to Comments on Specific Plan No. 219, Development Agreement No. 4, Vail Meadows Deer John: We here reviewed your letter dated April 6, 1988, regarding the Vall Meadows Specific Plan and the associated drainage plan. Baaed on your comments, we have addressed these specific items in the text end exhibits. The following is e summary of your .three major comments and the appropriate response/modification: 1. Comment- "No drainage area will be diverted from its natural triTutary dr&tnage course." This would not be the casa along the south portion of the project where three major diversions to the south are proposed. It appears that these diversions would be proper if flows were carried all the way to Temecula Creak. ~- Am a part of'the masterplan of drainage for the Vail' these drainage facilities will be extended from the northstde of Highway 79 to the flow-line of the proposed improvements for Temecula Creek. The plans for the proposed improvements to Temecula ¢~eek are being prepared by Rancho Pacific Engineering. The drainage areas under discussion currently enter Tamecula Creek, but slightly further downstream than the ultimate proposed location. The precise location is rather relative since the floodplain in the creek is rather wide. In addition, Figure 57 has been modified on Page 310 of the Specific Plan to indicate these modifications. A copy of the proposed modified master has been included for your review. (See colored Exhibit P.O SOX 19739 · $4725ALTON PARKWAY. IRVINE. CALIFORNIA 92718 * (?14) 472,9505 * FAX(rig) 472.8373 11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 10/27/99 15:55 909 684 6985 Mr. Oohn H. Kashuba May 16, 1988 Page 2 909 684 6986 ~012/067 JN 24084 Cq,,m~,,.~nt- A major watercourse parallels and crosses Pauba Road in several places along the north project boundary. This stream was not mentioned in the specific plan and shou]d be. ~- The catchment area under discussion ts the Pauba Ro~d watershed which begins near 8utterffeld Stage Road and flows in a westerly direction towards Margarita Road. The watershed tributary to Psuba Road has been masterplanned previously in our studies for the preparation of construction plans for Pauba Road as a part of Assessment District No. 159. The plans for the road and the associated drainage facilities are currently being checked by the R(verside Flood Control District staff. The stream course which parallels and even crosses the Pauba Road alignment has been relocated as a large diameter storm drain within the roadway and varies in size from a 84" RCP to a 120" RCP. Exhibit No. 57 indicating the mssterplanned drainage facilities has been updated to reflect the construction of this storm drain. A detailed hydrology map indicating the location of these facilities has also been included for your review. The text of the specific plan will be revised as follows: "The portion of the project which is not tributary to Tamecula Creek, dratns to the Murrieta Creek watershed. This represents the drainage area adjacent to Pauba Road, along the northerly boundary of the project. The existing watercourse parallels the proposed Pauba Road alignment and a storm drain is masterplanned to be located in Pauba Road. The storm drain ranges from a diameter to a 120" diameter concrete pipe and will be constructed as part of Assessment Dtstrtct No. 57. The proposed local storm drain facilities from the Vail Meadows area which are tributary to this watershed will be intercepted by this major storm drain within Pauba Road." Comments- The drainage basin mentioned in the last paragraph of Page 306 should be reexamined. We believe that this area actually is naturally tributary to the vicinity of the proposed 8utterfield Stage Road/De Portola Road intersection and should be dealt with. ~esponse- Review of the natural topography of the area indicates that the existing channel thalweg does follow an alignment very close to the future intersection o? De Portola and 8utterfield Stage Road. To prevent flooding at this location from the tributary offstta area, will require the construction of facilities offstte to intercept this drainage. It is assumed that the ultimate offstta flood control facilities will parallel Ds Pontola to the west and extend northerly into the offsite watershed, This offsite watershed drains an area of almost I190 acres and the extension of these ultimate drainage, facilities will be extended upstream from the current project by the next upstream development. However, portions of the ultimate system will be constructed with the Vail Meadows development. 11/07/2001 16:32 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 10/27/99 15;55 909 684 6986 ~013/067 Hr. John H. Kashuba May ]6, [988 Page 3 Adjacent to Butterfleld Stage Road an earthen trapezoidal channel will be constructed .to intercept the offsite flows since majority of the runoff will be in a overflow condition. Since the channel in this area is a wide flood plain, the trapezoidal channel will intercept any overflow prior to flooding Butterfteld Stage Road. This channel will extend to Temecula Creak and will require the construction of an ultimate box culvert 'at the Highway 79 crossing. The culvert required has been preliminarily sized as a double [4' x 8' RCB. The a~jacent development to Vail Meadows may elect in the futura to construct a concrete channel facility to replace the earthen trapezoidal channel depending on the proposed landuse ~lan. In addition, at this time, the overflow condition will be improved by the upstream watershed development. The improvements required with the Vail Meadows development are indicated on Exhibit C, attached, and Figure 57 of the Specific Plan will be updated to reflect these changes. An exhibit has been included which delineates this offsite drainage area tributary to this location. We feel these responses adequately address the comments which you had concerning the drainage plan for Veil Meadows. We would appreciate your timely approval of the drainage concept and indicate this with a written response to the Riverside County Planning Department. If possible, we would appreciate your response by May 2! because of the pending Planning Commission meeting. Should you have any questions regarding the drainage plan, please feel free to contact me at our office. Thank you again for working together to resolve these issues. Sincerely, ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST & ASSOCIATES ~enlor Director Civil Engineering amg Enclosures 11/07/2001 16:32 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE , . 10/27/99 15:56 989 684 6986 ~014/067 '. ~,loO,,~3,a2 ~.. ~ ; i ~-;~,"'~ ., IOIfsl~) ~ .. _. 0.~-~t~ ' ~--~ ~ 1.1~1~ ~ 8orm ~fm Drain Uno ~~ Vail Storm Drnin Infmstruoture ON 11/07/2001 16:33 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 10~27/95 15:56 ~0~ 68~ 5~85 OCT. 27 '99 (WED) 15:44 KRIECER & STEWART 909 684 6986 ~015/067 11/07/2001 16:34 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE , 10/~7/9~ 15:5~ 909 684 6986 909 684 6986 ~016/067 11/07/2001 16:35 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~017/067 EXHIBIT B 11/07~.~001 16:~5 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE cITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ~]018/067 Z)o.. ql-34. ,. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219. AMENDMENT NO. 1 Planninq Department 1. Specific PI'an No. 219, Amendmeht No. 1 shall consist of the'following: a. Exhibit "A".: Specific Plan Text Exhlbit"B": Spec{ftc Plan Conditions of Approval Exhibit"C": Specific Plan Dev~;Iopment Standards if any of the followln9 conditions of approval differ from the specific plan text or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall takF precedence. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of all City of Temecula ordinances including Ordinance Nos. 3148 and 1460 and state taws; and shall conform substantially with adopted Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 as filed in the office of the Planning Oepartmento unless otherwise amended. _No portion of the specificplan which...purport~_oJ- oroooses to chanqe, waive or modify any ordinance or other leqal requirement for the development shall 'be considered to be part of the adopted specific plan5 ~ e The project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the following agency letters and/or the requirements..se_t, forth by these agencies at the development stage: g. h. i. Road Department Flood Control ~ Fire Department Parks County Administrative Offices Water Agency Sewer Agency Temecula School District DeparLment of Health June Z, 1988 U=y 76 lqRR January 8. 1988 February 25, 1991 May 25, 1988 April 5. 1'988 . May 23, 1988 May 24, 1988 January 26. 1988 July 20, 1990 Impacts to the Temecula Union School District shall be mitigated at the development application s. tage in accordance with the DIs~I.c.t. policies In effect at th~ time of tra;-t submittal;' "': ~: ~ '.::~'" .,.::; t,on¥o~. --~.~/~..y.a.i.:~:,u.~..~; ..... .. ... ...:..., ,~., .:., .: · ':, . ;.' :;~.,.-e o~,~.'.'L.r4.~:,.~t,~,, ::~,- , STAFFRPT\SP219 13 11/07/2001 16:56 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~019/067 EXHIBIT C 11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~020/067 CITY OF TEMECULA COND{TIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No: 24182, Amendment No. 3, First EXtension of Time Project Description: To subdivide 136.2 acres into 443 Single Family Residential, 21 Open Space and 4 Multi-Family Residential Jots. Assessor's Parcel No.: 926-130-036 926-130-037 926-130-038 926-130-039 926-130-040 Approval Date: December 8, 1992 .Expiration Date: December 8, 1994 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, u~less modified by the conditions listed below.' A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. ' 2. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 3. Subdivision phasing shall be subject to Planning Departmeht Approval. 4. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be .prepared in ~onjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. The following notes shall be placed on the ECS: "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the Caliiornia institute of Technology, PaJomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy." "EIR No. 235 and an Addendum to this EIR was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department." 11/07/2001 16:$6 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~02i/067 Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shell be satisfied: If the project is th be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: 11) Techniques which will be utilized to prevent eroeion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. · (2) Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. (3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. (4) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No..663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat ConservatiOn Plan p~ior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the p~oject boundary until the developer or its successor's-ir~-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financir)g measures.. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars (9100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library development. With the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety a copy of the acoustical study prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and revised October 3, 1992 shall be submitted to ensure the implementation of the study to reduce ambient'interior noise levels to 45 Ldn and exterior noise levels to 65 Ldn. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval. 11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~022/067 7. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 24182, Amendment No. 3, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula wil~ promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim,'actJon, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter,'be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 8.. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to final map recordation of the tract maps. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas,- private roads, ~nd exterior of all buildings and parkways. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992}. 9. 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 ~aid mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 10. ' ' ' ' ~ (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). 11. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either {1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common areas and facilities. 12. Within forty-eight 148) hours of the approval of this project, the applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to .the County Clerk in the amount of Eight Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($875.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar 1~850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and .Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Twenty-Five ,Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of* Regulations 15094. If within such, forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Piann!ng Department the check required :.. 3 11/07/2001 16:37 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~023/067 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 13. 14, 15. 16, 17. 18. 25. 26. above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). A Neighborhood Entry Statement shall be constructed per Figure 37 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Streets G, H, S and the two future entrances to the 20.0 acre Very' High Density Residential parcels. BicYcle trails shall be constructed per Figure 6 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment· No. 3 along Street A, Class II and DePortola Road, Class I. · A Majqr Project Entry Statement shall be construc:ted per Figure 35 of Specific Plan No. 21 g, Amendment No. 3 for Lot 446. Minor Proiect Entry Statements shall be constructed per Figures 35 and 36 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for lots 452 and 460. Minor Community Entry Statemen[s shall be constructed per Figures 32 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for lots 458 and 454. ' A Landscaped Transition Area shall be constructed per Figure 13C of Specific Plan No. . 219, Amendment No. 3 for lot 450. This Landscaped Transition Area shall be incorporated into a 25 to 40 foot minimum building setback for the development of structures on lots 465,466,467 and 468 at the Plot Plan stage. Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure'2~B of Specific Plan No. 219, Arrlend. ment No. 3 for Meadows Parkway. Roadway andscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 25 of Specific Plan N(~o 219, Amendment No. 3 for State Highway 79. Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 23A of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Butterfield Stage Road. Roadway landscape treatment'shall be constructed per Figure 23B of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for DePortola Road. Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 23B of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Street A. The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) along Major Community Street Scenes including Meadows Parkway, DePortola Road and Butterfield Stage Road and State Highway 79 shall use Deciduous Accent Grove Trees, Evergreen Back. ground Grove Trees and Informal Street Tree Groupings identified on the plant palette per Section IV.C.l.b.2.a., b. and c. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. The LDZs along the Project Street Scene, Street A, shall use the plant palette per Section IV.C.I.c.1. of Specific Plan No. 219, ·Amendment No, 3. The landscap ng for lots 458, 446 and 45,4 shall use the Accent Trees on the plant palette in Section IV.C.3.d.1. and 2. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 11/07/2001 16:37 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~024/067 27, The plant palette for Evergreen Background Grove Trees par Section IV.C.l.d.4.a of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 and the plant palette for Deciduous Accent Grove Trees per Section lv,C.1 .b.2.a. shall be used for the landscape buffer zones in lot 450. 25. The Very High Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with Section IV.C.3.c.1 through 14 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No, 3. 29. Community Theme Solid Walls or Community Theme Tubular Steel Open Fence or a combination of the two shall be constructed per Figure 40 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amenciment No. 3; the finish and color of these walls shall be consistent with Section IV.C.2.b~2.e. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. These walls shall be constructed along Butterfield Stage Road, State. Highway 79, Meadows Parkway, Street A and DePortola Road. 30. Project Masonry Walls and Project.View Walls shall be constructed per Figure 41 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3; these walls shall be constructed along Streets G, H and S. 31. The Medium High Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with Section IV.C.3.c.1. through 14. of Specific I~lan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 32. The Medium Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with Section IV.C.3.d.1. through 7. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 33. The accent trees identified in Section IV.C,I.d.3. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 shall be used for the landscaping for Streets G, H and S. 34. The plant material palette identified in Section IV.C.l.e. of Specific Pla~ No. 219, Amendment No. 3 may be used in conjunction with all other specified plant palettes. 35. The seed mix for Turf Grass identified in Section IV.C.l.e of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 shall be used throughout the project. Comparable sod may be used instead of the seed mix. 36. ..... ,, ..... c- c.%', ....... cf the cito (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). 37. A performance bond and a one year maintenance bond shall be required for all landscaping installed except for landscaping within individual lots. The amount of this landscaping shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. This bond shall be secured after completion of the landscaping and prior to release of the dwelling units tied to the timing of the landscaped area. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16. 1992). 11/07/2001 16:38 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~025/067 38. Erosion control planting,shall COmmence as soon as slopes are completed on any portion of the site during and following grading operations. A performance bond shall be secured with the Planning Department prior to {ssuance of any grading permits to insure the installation of this landscaping. Cut slopes equal to or greater than five feet in vertical height and fill slopes equal to or greater than three (3) feet in vertical height shall be planted with a ground cover to protect the slope from erosion and instability. Slopes exceeding fifteen (15) feet in vertical height shall be planted with shrubs, spaced not more than ten (10) feet on center or trees spaced not to exceed twenty (20) feet on center or a combination of shrubs and trees at equivalent spacings, in addition to the ground cover. Other standards of erosion control shall be consistent with Ordinance No. 457.57. (Amended by Planning Commission on Noveml~er 16, 1992). 39. Irrigation for the project site shall be consistent with Section IV.C. 1 .j. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 40. Community Theme Walls may be substituted for Project Theme Walls at'the developers discretion. 41; Wood fencing shall only ,be allowed along the side yards and the rear yards of single family dwellings. Project Theme Walls shall be used along the side yards facing the street for corner lots. 42. The residential lot street tree requirements and front yard reqL~irements shall be consistent w th Section IV.C.3.a,1 .,2., and 3. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 43. All lighting within the project shall be consistent with Section IV.C.5 of Specific Plan' No. 219, Amendment No.' 3. 44. All future development on this site w/l{ require further review and approval by the City of Temecula. These developments shall be consistent with the Purpose and intent of the Architecture and Landscape Guidelines set forth in the Design Guidelines.of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 (Section IV). 45. All future development within this project shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance Standards adopted for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. 46. The amenities and standards identified in Section HI.A.7.a. and b. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for parks, recreation areas, activity nodes, private active participation opportunities, open space, greenbelt paseos and parkway paseos shall be used for developing these areas or as modified by the Development A. greement 92- 0013. 47. 48. Maintenance'end timing for completion of all open space areas shall be as identified in Development Agreement 92-0013 or shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3, if the Development Agreement is null and void, 'A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final M~p. 11/07/2001 16:58 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~026/067 49. A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map for review and approval The following needs to be included Jn these plans: A. Typical front yard landscaping for interior, corner and cul-de-sac lots. B. Typical slope iandscaping. C. Private and public park improvements and landscaping. D. . All open 'space area landscaping including, private and public common areas, 'private recreatior~al areas, paseos, equestrian trails, monuments and the Landscape Development Zones. E. All landscape plans shall identify the number and size of all plants, the type of i?rigation to be used, all hardscaping, fences and walls. F. ,The timing for installation of all landscaping, walls and trails shall be identified prior to approval of these plans. G. The plant heights at sensitive locations for traffic safety shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. H. ' The timing for submittal and approval of the construction landscape plans shall . be identified for all improvements withi~ this condition. I. A note shall be added to all conceptual landscape plans that all utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping. This equipment shall be identified on the construction landscape plans and shall be screened as specified on this condkion. J. The responsibility for installation of all landscaping and walls shall be identified. K. Ail private open space areas that will not be dedicated to the City as identified Jn the Developmen~ Agreement shall be developed as an integrated part of the ' open space lot that they are a part of and shall be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. L. Fifty (50} percent of all trees planted within the project shall be a minimum of .twenty four (24) inch box. The landscape plans proposed for each phase shatl ~ncorporate the fifty (50) percent mix of twenty four (24) inch box trees into the design. 50. M. A note shall be placed on the conceptual landscape plans that all trees shall be double staked and automatic irrigation shall be installed for ail landscaping. These provisions shall be incorporated into the construction plans. The development of this project and all subsequent developments within this project shall be Consistent with Specific Plan Np. 219, Amendment No. 3 and Planning Application No. 92-0013 (Development Agree~entL or any subsequent amendments. ..~.. 11/07/2001 16:35 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~027/067 51. If the Gnatcatcher is listed as an endangered species, proper stud(es and mitigation measures shall be necessary prior to issuance of grading perm(ts. These studies and mitigation measures shall be acceptable to Fish and Game and/or Fish and Wildlife. 52. Double-pane window treatment shall be required for second floor elevation windows in any two-story homes COnstructed on the lots identified in the Acoustical Study prepared by Wi(bar Smith Associates dated September 22, 1@92 and its supplement dated October 3, 1992. '53. A Private Active Participation Opportunity Area Shall be constructed for lots 465,466, 467 and 468. This area may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet-bars and kitchen facilities. This area shall be a minimum of 1.05 acres. 54. A Plot Plan shall be filed for the development of lots 465, 466, 467 and 468. :i-he individual developments within these lots shall be consistent with this plot plan. 55. Ail two-story residential structures shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the State Route 79 right-of-way (this condition applies to single family dwellings, only). 5,6. .Lots 80, 81, 239, 240, 275 and 276 (which have Side structure exposure) shall be limited to one-story residential dwellings unless the 40-foot setback requirement (identified in Condition No. 551 can be met during final site design. 57. The fo(lowing conditions shall apply to lots 465,466, 467 and' 468: A. Future' multi-family structures loCated on the site sheu~t shaJ! maintain a minimum 40-foot setback from the property line along State Route 79 and a minimum 30-foot setback from the property lines adjacent to Meadows Parkway and "A" Street. fAmended by Planning Commission on November 1992L 16, ' C. · Any future multi-family structures located within the 65 dBA noise level contour shall be constructed ~ ,,~,,k~ ...... ~ ...... ,-' .... ~c-w6. to maintain interior noise levels at 45 dBA or less (refer to Wilber Sm(th Associates Noise Study dated September 22, 1992 'and subsequent Study dated October 3, 19921. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). Any outdoor activity/recreation areas developed as part of the multi-family residential project shall be located in the center portion of the site Where ex'tar(or no(se levels would be below 65 dBA (refer to WiJber Smith Associates Noise Study dated September 22, 1992 and subsequent Study dated October 3, 1'992). OTHER AGENCIES 58. The applicant shall comply with the environmental h'ealth recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated October 6, 1992, a copy of which ls attached. 11/07/2001 16:39 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~028/067 59. The applicant shall comply with the flood COntrol recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood"Control District's letter dated October 22, 1992, a copy of which is attached. If the project J[es within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of TemecuJa Land Division Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.. 60. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated October 15, 1992, a copy of which is attached. 61. The applicant shall comply with. ~he recommendations outlined in the Department of Transporta'tion transmittal dated January 23, 1992, a copy of which is attached. 62. The applicant shall Comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal date January 21, 1992, a copy of which is attached. 63. The applicant shall Comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated January 21, 1992, a copy of which is attached. 64. The applicant shall.comply with the recommendation outlined in the Temecula Valley Unified School District transmittal dated May 7, 1992, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETy DEPARTMENT 65. All proposed Construction shall comply with the C,~lifornia Institute of Technology, PaJomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT · The following items are the City of Temecula. Community Services Department li'CSD) Conditions of Approval for this project and shal DAegven. cY. The cond.t,ons shah be complied with asbe cq.rnpleted at no cost to any Government e~opment Agreement All -uestion ,. set torth below, or as modified b s . referred to the r~_~,__ ' _~ . s regerom9 thetrue me=n~,,- ~,,~ ..... Y eparate ~'~-~,upment Service Division of TcSD ..... a ~,,,,a ~onaltmns shall be .Prior__to Recordation of Final_Ll.l.l.l.l.l.l~s) 66. Proposed Community park sites of less than three f3) acres are to be maintained by an established Home Owners Association fHOA), until Offered and accepted by the TCSD for maintenance purposes. IAmended by Planning Commission on November 16. 1992). ~ (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992L Ali proposed slopes, open space, and park land intended fo~ dedication to the TCSD for maintenance purposes shall b~ identified o~ the final map by numbered lots and indexed to identify said lot numbers as a proposed: TCSD maintenance area. 67. 68. g 11/07/2001 16:39 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~029/067 69. EXterior slopes (as defined as: those slopes Contiguous to public streets that have a width of 66' or wider), shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance purposes following compliance to existing City Standards and completion of an application process. All other slopes shall be maintained by an established Home Owners Association IHOA), . 70, Proposed Open space areas shall be maintained by an established Home Owners Association (HOA}. Open space areas of three (3~ acres or greater sC~e~ may be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance purposes and possible further recreational development, following Compliance to existing City standards and' compJetipn of an application process. [Amended by Planning Commission on NOvember 18, 1992). 71. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant or his assignee, shall offer for dedication parkland as identified in the Development Agreement. 72. All necessary documents to convey to the TCSD any required easements for parkway and/or slope maintenance as specified on the tentative map or in these Conditions of Approval shall be'submitted by the developer or his assignee prior to the recordation of final map. 73. Landscape conceptual drawings ' for project areas (project areas may consist of slopes, streetscape, medians, turf areas, recreational trails, parks, and etc. that are to be maintained by the TCSD) identified as TCSD maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of final map. 74. All areas identified for inclusion into the TCSD shall be reviewed by TCSD staff. Failure to submit said areas for staff review prior to recordation of final map w~ ma~, preclude their inclusion into the TCSD. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). ~m:c~=nca ~c .... . [Amended by Planning Commission November 16, 1992). on Prior to Issuance of Ce~ificate of Occupa~ 76. It shall be the developer's, the developer's successors or assignee responsibility to disclose the existence of the TCSD, its zones and zone fees to ali prospective purchasers at the same time they are given disclosure shall be made in a form acceptable the parcel's anal PubJic aepom Said to the TCSD. Proof of such disctosure, by means of a Signed receipt for same, shall be retained by the developer ar his successors/assignee and mede available to TCSD staff for their inspection in the Same manner as set forth in Section 2795.1 of the Regulations Of The Real Estate ~omm~ssioner. Failure to Comply sha[J prelude acceptance of proposed areas into TCSD. 11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~030/067 77. Prior to issuance of an~ certificates of OCCupancy, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. General 78. All landscape plans submitted for consideration shall be in conformance with CITY OF TEMECULA LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PLAN GUIDELINES AND SPECIFICATIONS. 79. The deyeloper, the developer's successors or assignee, shall be responsible for landscalJJng maintenance until such time as maintenance duties are accepted by the TCSD. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project: and shall be Completed at no cost to any GOvernment Agency. Al/previous conditions of approval shall remain in force except as Superseded or amended by the follOwing requirements. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer Correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all' existing and proposed easements, traveled Ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their cJrnission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS . 80. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prier to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right- °f-way, . 81. 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, 82. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted lathe Riverside County Flood Control District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permits. 83. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation Pians shall be Coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~031/067 84. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any s~Jbdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must COmply with the requirements of said section. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITs: 85. The final grading' plan shell be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. 66. AIl Jet drainage shall be directed to the driveway by. side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot, or other devices as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). ' Prior to issuance of a grading permit, developer must COmply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project ia Shown to be exempt., Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall receive written Clearance from the fei/owing agencies: · San Diego Regional Water Quality; · Riverside Counl~y Flood Control District; · Planning Department; · Department of Public Works; · CalTrans; · General Telephone; · Southern California Edison Company; and · Southern California Gas Company. A So/Is Report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and Submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check, The report shall address ail soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. An erosion Control plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval, Graded but undeveloped J~nd shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with Other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works, A flood mitigation charge shall be paid, The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee' rate multiplied by the area of new development, The charge is payable to the Flood Control D/strict pr or to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation chorea has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. ~ 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92, 11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~032/067 93, The developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any offsite work performed on Works. adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public A drainage study shall be Submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval The drainage study shall include, but not be J/mired to, the following criteria: . a. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect aJJ structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as'directed by the Department of Public Works. b. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any onsite or off.~ite drainage COurse. · :.t~.'. c. The location of existing and ·post development lO0-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. .~ - 95. The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of'all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the 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 sir - for drainage purposes, the subdivider ,s,,, e_e.t_c.a?acl.ty, or use of streets be prohibited the Department of Public Works. ~ ....wuvme aoequate facilities as approved by ~.-~ 96. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from darn'ages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e.. concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging ex[sting facilities or by securing a drainage easement. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property Owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A Copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement Shall be delineated on the grading plan. 98. An Encroachment Permit shall be required from Caltrans for any Work within their right- of-way. 99. A pe.rmit from Riverside County Flood Control District is required for Work within their right-of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 100. Al/necessary grading permit requirements shall have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 10i. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street'lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be ¢repared by a Registered Civil Engineer on ~4" x 36' mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (arid profiles on streets) shall show the 11/07/2001 16:41 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~033/067 103. 104, 105. location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. ' 102. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: 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 appJicabl.~ City of Temecula standards 207/207A and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be installed along the bublic streets adjoining the site in accordance with O~dinance 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Work~.' D. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City standard 400 and 401 E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyohd the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works, Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City standard 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. G. All reverse curves shall include a 100 foot minimum tangent section or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. H, All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. I. Landscaping shall be limited in th'e Corner cut-oil area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility, J, All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street.from the multi- family residential site shall be conveyed through:undersidewalk drains. The minimum centerline grade for streets shall be 0.50 percent or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives within the multi- family residential development shall be required for review and approval by the Department of Public Works. All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Tembcula standards and sh'all be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance With City Standard 207 and 208. 106. *All driveways shall be located a minimum of two {2) feetifrom the side property line. 11/07/2001 16:41 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~034/067 107. 111. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, Water, sewer, and cable ~ shall be provided for underground, with easements provide~ as required, and designed and constructed Jn accordance with City Codes and · · TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired itnh;hUet~'et~;~cV'ed, er' Telephone, cab,e 1 OB. ,~lJ utilities, except electrical lines ~ated 33ky or greater, shall be installed underground. 109. A construction area traffic control plan shall be designei by a r~gistered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street cJosur6~ and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. ' PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP: 170. The developer shall construct or post Security any enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public J~provements in conformance with applicable City Standards .and subject to approval by the Department of Public WorkS. A. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, c.urb and gutter,· sidewalks, drive approaches, ~treet lights, signing, traffic S~gnals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. t3. Storm drain facilities C. Landscaping Islopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic Water systems. F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 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; Riverside County Flood Control District; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; CalTrans; Parks and Recreation Department; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; and Southern California Gas Company _-.- 15 11/07/2001 16:41 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~035/067 If phasing of the map for Construction is proposed, legal a/I-weather access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from tl~e tract map boundary to a paved City maintained road. 113. Pedestrian access with sidewalks shall be provided ifrom the cul-de-sac terminus of streets."D", 'F", 'M", "N" and 'W" to the adjacentipublic street. 114. All road easements and/or street dedications shall ~e offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City acce~ts or abandons such offers. dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works.' 115. Streets "G", "H" and "S" sha~l be improved wilh 50 fe~t of asphaIt concrete pavement with a raised 10-foot wide median, or bonds for th~ street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in CCordaace with modified Ci~ Standard No. 104, Section A (70'/50'L 16. All remaining interior local streets shall be ~mproved wj 7, De Po~l~ ~oad and Street "A" ~hall be ~mproved wkh 38 feet of half ~treet improvement ~lus one 12-foot lane outs~d~ the me~ian, or b~nds for the street improvements may be posted, wkhin the dedioated right-of-way ~n acoo~danc~ with Cky Standard No, 101, (100'~6'L Meadows Par~way and Bu~e[field Stage Road sh~ll be improved with 43 feet of h~lf street ~mprovem~nt with a raised median, plu~ on~ 12~foot lane outside the media~ turn lane, or bonds for th~ street ~mprovements. m~y be pe~ted, withi~ a 110' dedioated right-of-way in accordance w~th C~ty Standard No, 100, H ~ 0'1869, State Highway 79 shall be improved with concrete cur~ and gU~er, asphalt concrete pavement, and any reconstruction or resurfacing of existing paving as determined by Caltrans W~thin a 71-foot half'width dedicated right-of-way per Caltrans le~er, dated January 23, 1992. In the event that the required ~mprovements for this development are not constructed by Assessment District No. 159 prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shal( construct or bond for all required improvements ' p~r applicable City Standards. All Assessment District No. 159 improvements im~edia'tely ad'ace be constructed prior to occupancy. T~e Developer n~ ~r the development shall ~hall n into a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula ~r constructiop of all offsite improvements necessary to serve the development. Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be constructed per the appropriate City Standards and as shown on the approved Tentative Map. .Left turn lanes shall be provided at all intersections on StrUt "A" and De Po~ola Road. 11 119. 120 121. 122. 11/07/2001 16:42 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~036/067 .~:. 123. 124. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer Shall, prior to SUbmittal of the final map for recordation, enter, into an agreement to Complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 7 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by 'the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to COmmencement of the appraisal. Vehicular'access shall be restricted on State Highway 79, Butterfield Stage Road, De Portola Road, Street "A' and Meadows Parkwayand ag noted on the final map with the exception of street intersections and two (2) entry points to Street "A' for the multi-family residential lots aa shown on the approved Tentative Map and as approved by the Department of Public Works. A signing and striping plan shall be designed ' approved by the Department of by a registered Civil Engineer and Public Works for State Highway 79, Butterfield Stage Road, De Portola Road, Street "A" and Meadows Parkway and shall be included in the street improvement plans. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Meadows Parkway at Street "A" and De Portola Road at Street "A" and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. Traffic signal Jnterconnection shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer to show 1-1/2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #3 pull boxes on 200 foot centers along the property fronting State Highway 79 and 8utterfieid Stage Road. This design shall be Shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works and Caltrans. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. Bus bays will be provided at al/ existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works, Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to ' meander through private property, the City Where sidewalks 125. .126. 127, 12~, 129. 130. 131. _" 17 ... 11/07/2001 16:42 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~037/067 132. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, ioint-use driveways, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. Ail offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the.final map. A note shali be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of bpiJdJngs and obstructions., 133. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECSI shall be prepared Jn Conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental conderns and shall'be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A COpy of the ECS shall be transmit-ted to the Planning Department for review and approval. 134. 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. 135. Prior to r~cordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department .of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as.mitJga6on towards traffic Signal ~mpacts. Should the deveJop~ 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~ 136. Prior to reqord ng the final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 137[ A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of PubJic Works for review and approval The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing COmpaction and site conditions. 138, 139. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan· All grading shall also be in conformance with the recommendations of the County Geologist, dated May 15, 1989. 1~/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~03S/067 PRIOR 140, 141. 142. ........... , foB. Th~ ' ~ . on November 16, 1992). (Amendedby Planning Commission TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES 0F OCCUPANCy: All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.~. ppvement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and ~treet lights on all inter/or.public ~treets. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. All 'traffic signals shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. 143. All traffic signal Jnterconnection shall be installed per the approved plan. 144. The subdivider shall provide 'stop" controls a~ the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 145. All landscaping shall be installed in the corner cut-off area of al/ intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 146. 147, 32 w de paved secondary access road for phased development shall be constructed within a recorded private road easement as approved by the Depa~ment of Public Works per City of Temecula Standard 106 160'/32'). Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works for pavement joins and transition coatings. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the Stats Standard Specifications. In the event that the required improvements for this development are not completed by Assessment District 159 prior to certification for occupancy, the Developer shall construct all required improvements. The Developer shall also provide an updated traffic analysis as directed by the Department of Public Works to determine the construction timing and the Developer's ere p ant of contribution toward any facilities not completed per the schedules of improvement, tables XV and xvi, for the Rancho Villages Assessment. The Developer Shall also enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula for the construction of any necessary improvemerits not completed by Assessment District 159 as determined by the approved traffic analysis. The following traffic signals shall be constructed as warranted as part of the reimbursement agreement at the following locations 19 11/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~039/067 B. C. D. E. F. State Highway 79 at the Interstate 15 ramps. State Highway 79 at Pala Road, State Highway 79 at Margarita Road, State Highway 79 at Meadows Parkway, State Highway 79 at Butterfield Stage Road, Sutterfield Stage Road at De PortoJa Road. 11/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~040/067 CITY OF TEMECLILA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA96-0258 I'Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182- Revised} ' Project Description Assessor*s PflrcbJ No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General 'Requirements The project consists' of a revised Vesting Tenta~ve Tract Map No. 24182 [the subdivision of 124.35 acres within creating 562 single fatally residential Jots and 31 open space lots)- Paloma. de/Sol Various February 2, 1998 To be determined by the Development Agreement The 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. The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and. hold harmless, the Cffy and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/er 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 ~eek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning Planning Application No. PA96-0258 {Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182- Revised.) which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000.e.t seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167}. City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any c/aim, action, or proceeding brought within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City fall to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. If subdivision phasing is proposed, the applicant shalt submit a phasing plan to the Planning Manager for approval. 11/07/200! i6:44 FAX 94e 752 0§97 JD&P IRVINE ~041/067 The tentative subdivision shall comply with all requirements of Specific Plan No. 219 and its amendments unless superseded by these conditions of approval. The tentative subdivision shall comply with al{ conditions of approval of the underlying Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182 (approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors), unless supe[sed_e~_ed, modified or deleted by these conditions of approval. - , _ Prior to Issuance of Grading Perm/ts 6. The appllcan~ shall comply with the provisions 0f Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 7. The applicant shall submit the following to the Planning Director for approvah a. A copy of the Final Map , b. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans c. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: "This propel~y is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. AIl proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655." d. The applicant shall ~ubmlt a copy of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrlction~ (CC&R's) for review and approval by the Planning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. Prior to Issuzance of BulJding Permits 8. The applicant shall submj~ a receipt or c/earance letter from the Temecu(a Valley . 'School District to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from Schoo/ Mitigation fees. . 9.' The applicant shall submit the following to the Planning Director for approval: a. Precise grading plans consistent With the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. b. The Temporary Use Permit appJicatioh for a Model Home Complex (if applicable) which includes the following: i. Site Plan with off-street parking 11/07/2001 16:44 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE .~ ~042/067 ii. Construction Landscape Plans ; iii. Fencing Plans iv. Building Elevations v. Floor Plans vi. Materials and Colors Board c. A Development Plan shall be Submitted and approved by the Planning Director for the housing product. 10. The appJlcant shall submit an acoustical analysis to the Planning Department for approval. "The analysis shall be submitted for any resldential construc*;~ --,- prior to the ~Ssuanca of ~,.;,.~. ..... ,,ojacent to arterial m~:-- a .... umg permit The analysis shall contain recommendations to ensure that noise levels do not exceed , ojur or secondary roadways. 65dBA for eXterior and 45dBA for interior nolse levels. 11. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however Solar equipment ~r any other energy saving devices shal~ be Permitted with Planning Director approval Prior to IssUance of OCcupancy Permits Front Yard and stope landscaping within individuaI lots shall be completed for inspect on. 13. All the Conditions of App'roval shall be COmp/Jet with to the Satisfaction of the Directors of Planning, Public Works, COmmunity Services and Building and Safety. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer et no cost to any GOvernment Agency. Genera/Requirements 15. 16. It Js understood that the Developer Correctly shows on the tentative map al/existing and proposed casements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior zo commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. , , 3 11/07/2001 16:44 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~043/067 20. 17. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 1B. Al{ improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be Coordinated for consistency w/th adjacent projects and existing improvements. contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard i>4" x 36" City of ' Temecula myiars. Prior to Approve).of the Final Map, unless other dmlng is Indicated, the Developer shall complete the folio'wing or have plans submitted and approved, subdlv{sJon improvement agreements executed and securities posted: . 19. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Wo~'ks, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: · San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board · Rancho California Water District · Eastern MunicJpa{ Water District ·Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District City of Temecu/a Fire Bureau * · Planning Department Department of Public Works · Riverside County Health Department Cable TV Franchis,e · CaJtrans · Commdnity Services District General Telephone · Southern California'Edison Company · Southern California Gas Company · Fish & Game · Army Corps of Engineers The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public a. improve Campanula Way {Major Highway Standards ~ 100' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right, of-way, installation of hair-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and s[riping, utilities lincluding but not limited to Water and sewer), 12' paintedmedJan. b. improve De Portols Road and Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width Street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, s}gning and striping, utilities (including but not 11/07/2001 16:45 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P [RV[NE ~044/067 21. limited to Water and sewerl, 12' raised landscaped median. c. Improve "E", "X" and ~C-C" (Collector Road Standards, 70' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way,· installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter; sidewalls, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities {including but not limited to water and sewer), 10' raised landscaped median.. .,{Local Road Standards, 60' R/W) to include dedication of ful~-width street 'right-of-way, 'installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). e. Plans for a traffic signal at the intersection of Meadows Parkway/Campanula Way_and De PortoJa Road/Campanula Way to include signal interconnect with the signal at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way. f. .All Street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per CaJ-Trans standards for transition to existing street sections. Jn the event, that Highway 79 South is not constructed by Assessment District No. 159 prior to the final map recordation, the Developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street improvement's, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities {incIpding but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, plus One 12 foot lane per modified City Standard No. IOOA (142' R/Wi. The improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy· In the event that Butterfield Stage Road is not constructed by Assessment District No· 15.9 prior to the"final map recordation, the Developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street . improvements, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, plus one 12 foot lane per modified City Standard No. 100 {1 ]'he improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. i. In the event that De PortoJa Road, Campanula Way and Meadows Parkway are not constructed by Assessment District No. 159 prior to the final map recordation, the Developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-hatf street improvements plus one 12 foot lane per modified C~ty Standard No. 101 {100/76). The improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be obse?ved in the design of the street improvement 5 JD&P IRVINE ~045/067 22. 23. '24. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over. A.C. paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable C ty Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in aCCordance with Ordinance No. 461.. Conc~:ete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be cpnstructed per the appropriate City Standards ans a shown on the approved tentative map. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate conti~uity of design with adjoining properties. 'g. h. i. i. ko Minimum centerline radii shall be in .accordance with City Standard No. 113, All reverse curves shall include a lO0-foot mlnJmum tangent section. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. Landscaping shall be i/m/ted in the corner cut-of~ area of all intersections and adjacent to drivew.ays to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable ~v shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not .exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. ' A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. Relinquish and waive right of access to and frc¢~ State Highway 79 South, Meadows Parkway, Campanula Way, De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road on the Final Map with the exception of street intersect OhS as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. Corner property line but off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian ' facilities shall be provided at all street' intersections in accordance with Riverside 11/07/2001 16:45 FAX 940 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~046/067 25. 26, 27. 28. 28. 30. 31. County Standard No. 805. 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. Pursuant t~ ,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 final map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS} shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shal! be on the ECS: a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. b. Special Study Zones. c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report. d. Archeological resources found on the site. The.Developer shall comply w th all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property in.terests, add if he or she should fai~ to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submlttal. of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at · the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement cf the appraisal. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic caJcuJatlons shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final ma~ or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water 7 11/07/2001 16:46 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~047/067 32. 33. 34. 36. 37. 38. 39. Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way, All utility systems including gas. electric, t'elephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall -be provided for underground, With easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and.the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 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. ,, Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Riverside Transit Authority and a's approved by th~ Department of Public Works. Pedestrian access with sidewalks shall ~e provided from the cul-de-sac terminus of street "G. G" t'o the adjacent public street. This development must enter into an agreement with the Cit~ for a "Trip Reduction Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilitiesl etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the 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 ~hall be contained within drainage easements and s.hown on the final map, A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of bu#d/ngs and obstruct/on&" If phasing of the map for construct/an is proposed, legal all-weather access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract boundary to a paved City maintained road. 40. An interim detention basin has been constructed on the southern portion of Phase 5 and the Final Phase of Tentative Tract 24182: The existing detention basin or an equivalent facil'Jty shall remain in place until such time that qpstream drainage facilities are constructed to convey offslte storm flows to an adequate outlet. Any revisions to the existing detention basin and appurtenant drainage facilities shall be approved by the City, Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 41. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from.the following agencies: · San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board 11/07/2001 18:45 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~045/067 42. 43. 45. 46. 47. · Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation DiStrict · Planning Department · Department of Public Works * Riverside County Health Department · Caltrans · Community Services District General TeJeDhone · Southern California Edison Company · Southern California Gas Company A Grading Plan ~hail be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or So~ls Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading Plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. A Geotechnica[ Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or eng~neerlng geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for J;quefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and J~quefaction. A Drainage Study shal/be prepared by a registered C/vii 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, publlc 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 verlfy~ng the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgradin~ or upslzing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. The Developer must comply with the requirements Of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDESI 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. 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. 11/07/2001 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~049/067 48. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other Jot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 49. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 50. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Depadment of Public Works for review arid approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for Iocatior{ and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report · addressing compaction and site conditions. 51. Grading of the subject preperty shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in.substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 52. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, end in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. PHor to JsSOance of Certificates of Occupancy 53. As deemed necessary by 'the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receivi~ written clearance from the following agencies: · Rancho California Water District · 'Eastern MunlcJpal ~Vater.District " Department of Public Works 54. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 55. All improvements shall be constructed and completed par the approved plaris and City standards to the satisfactio?] of the Director of Public Works. 56. The existing impr0vement~ shall be 'reviewed. Any ~ppurtenance 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. · BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 57. 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 ' Temecuia Municipal Code. ' 10 11/07/2001 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 9050/067 58. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 59. Provide electrical plan including load calcs and panel schedule, ~lurnbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 60. Prior to building permit iSSUance, approval must be obtained from the Water District, Sanitation District, PubJlc Works Department, Fire Department, Planning Department and Building Department, 61. Based on $'ubmitted documents, the OCCupancy classification of the Proposed use shall be R-3, U-l, 62. ' Truss calculations t.hat are stamped by the engineer of record, the truss manufacturers engineer, are required for p}an review submittal. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Community Services has reviewed the revised tentative map appJ~cat.ion and has the following conditions of approval: General Requirements: 63. The City's park dedication requirement (Quimby) shall be satisfied with the development- and dedication of a 5.0 acre neighborhood park in future Tract No. :)4188, as identified within the Paloma De/Sol Development Agreement, Addendum No. 1, and Planning Area 29A in Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 6. 64. All other.private park facilities, perimeter slopes and parkway landscaping, paseos, and open space areas shall be maintained by an established homeowners' association. 65. The developer shall comp{eta the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate fees prior to the acceptance of street lighting and landscaped medians into the respective TCSD maintenance programs. 66. It shall be the develope~:'s responsibility to provide written d~scJosure of t.he existence of the TCSD and/ts service lever rates and charges to all prospective Purchasers. FIRE DEPARTMENT The Fire Prevention Bureau requires the following fire protection measures to be provided in accordan'ce with the Uniform Fire Code and the City of Temecula Ordinances. {~7. Final fire and {ifa safety conditions WJI{ be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on 11/07/2001 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~051/067 69. 69. 70, 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. occupancy, use, Uniform Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code {UFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a mi'nimum fire riow for the remodel or construction of all residential buildings per UFC Appendix Ill. A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The minimum fire flow for one and two family dwellings less than 3,600 square feet shall be 1000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating.pressure. Dwellings in excess of 3,600 square feet shall not be less than that specified in Table A-III-A-1 of the UFC. (UFC 903.2, UFC Appendix Ill-A) Prior to construction, approved standard fire'hydrants i8~ x 4" x 2 ½" outletsJ'shall be located at each street intersection and be spaced ntt more than 500 feet apart, with no portion of any lot frontage further than 250 feet from a fire hydrant. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2 and Appendix Ill-B} The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 1,000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20' PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available prior to any combustible building material .being placed on an iodividua ot. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 & 902.2.2) Prior to construction, dead end road ways ~nd streets which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. IUFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the. Fire Prevention Bureau for review. Plans shall be' signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to thc Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 sec. 1-4.1) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of, Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations in accordance with City specifications. IUFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all residential dwellings shell display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the residence in such a position that the numbers are easily visible to approaching emergency vehicles. The numbers shall be located consistently on each dwelling throughout the development. The numerals shall be no less than four (4) inches in height and shall be contrasting in color to the background. {UFC 901.4,4 and Ord 95- 15) ~2 11/07/2001 16:48 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~052/067 OTHER AGENCIES 76~ The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated July 9, 1997, a copy of which is attached. 77. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated July 17, 1997, a copy of which is attached. .. 78. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined i~ the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS} transmittal dated July 17, 1997, a copy of which is attached. 79. The applicant shall comply.with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's transmittal dated July 22., 1997, a copy o1~ which is attached. 80. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the R~verside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 24, 1997, a copy of which is attached. have read, understand and accept the above Conditions of Approval. Applicant Name ]3 11/07/2001 16:48 FAX 946 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE 053/067 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive - PO Box 9033 - Temecula - California - 92589-90321 (909) 694-6400 - FAX (909) 694-6477 December 2, 1999 Ms. Michelle A. Staples Law Offices of Susan M. Trager 2100 S. E. Main Street, Suite 104 Irvine, CA 92614 SUBJECT: Dear Ms. Staples: City Council Denial of the Appeal by the Corona Ranch of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 2943 I) On November 9, 1999 the City of Temecula City Council denied the appeal of the above- referenced applications and upheld the Planning Commission approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431). However, in their consideration of the appeal, the City Council also approved Planning Application No. pA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol) with an addition to the Conditions of Approval that addressed the Corona's concern regarding drainage facilities. A copy of the final Conditions of Approval are included herein for your reference. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (909) 694-6400. Sincerely, Carole K. Donahoe, AICP Associate Planner Attachment: Final Conditions of Approval for P/anning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol) Cc: Del Sol Investment Co., LLC Newland Communities Attn: Allan L. Davis Attn: Dean Meyer 5051 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ron Parks, Department of Public Works Jerry Alegria, Department of Public Works Annie Bostre-Le, Department'ofPublic Works Anthony Elmo, Building Department Herman Parker, Temecula Community Services District 27393 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92591-4608 11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~054/067 F--XHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Re vised by the City Council, November 16, f 999 Planning Application No. PA99-0285 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 'Project Description: 'I:~ :~m'er~g ~Pecific'Plan N0. 2~9 (j~ai~ma ~;i sol) as folJ~:' land uses Within Planning Areas ~l,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and ~eadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area from 32.3 acres.to 35.0 acres; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area 6 from 36.3 to 34.3 acres; the division of Planning Area 6 into Planning Area 6A (22.3 acres, high density residential, 9-12 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 268 dwelling units) and Planning Area 6B (12 acres, very high density residential 13- 20 du/ac, with a maximum of 240 dwelling units), resulting in an overall reduction of units from 590 to 508 dwellings; the provision to develop an active, private, gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an update of Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. Approval Date: PLANNING DIVISION November 16, 1999 General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real propedy subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, empl'oyees, .consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in fudherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters ol~ the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in ~:egards to such defense. The applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No. 21.9 and its amendments unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval. The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall conform with Exhibit No. lB, "Paloma del Sol Specific P an, Amendment No. 7" dated October 11, 1999, or as amended by these conditions. 11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~095/067 4. The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 Zoning Standards shall conform with Exhibit No. 2A, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No. 7" dated October 11, 1999, or as amended by these conditions. .Within Thirty (30} Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the'. Amendment The ap~.c~ant shall submit the ame__nde__d. _Sp..~_c_ific _Plan text.to the_ Co~o_munity ............ -~ev~i~pm~n'i~ep-a~-2~]~n~in~*Di~']si~n] i~-a~o~'clance-~,it-h Conditions of Apl~roval and with requirements by the City Council. The applicant shall correct or modify the following: a. Page IV-85 b.2) a): The last sentence shall read: "A.minimum of 10% of the net acreage at the Home Depot site shall be landscaped." b. Remove all references to the Major and Minor Commercial Entry and Shopping Center Identification signs, which shall be included in the Villages Design Manual, submitted for review and approval by the Planning Manager prior to the issuance of permits. Priorto issuance of building permits for Parcel Map No. 29431, Parcels 6 and 7 (Planning ' Areas 6A and The Butteffield Stage Interceptor ultimate improvements shall be built, ortho City Council, following a public heating, determines that significant improvements have occurred in the negotiations for a reasonable compromise, at which time the Council has abthetity to issue building permits for Parcel Map No. 29431, Parcels 6 and 7 (Planning Areas 6A and 6B), consisting of 508 multi-family units. The City shall process the request for a public heating, if needed, as a "no fee"application. (Amended by the City Council, November 9, 1999 and modified by the City Council November 16, 1999). . By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be 'subject to Community Development Deparlment approval. Applicant Signature i? 11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~056/067 EXHIBIT D 11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 I I I JD&P IRVINE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Seocember 23, 1996 ~057/067 giT] I l I l I I I I l I i l Mr. Joseph Kiosk Director of Public Works/ City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Hr. Kicak: Re: Paseo del Sol - Hess or Rough Grading The Flood Control District has been aske~ to authorize the. mass/rough grading of all the tracts within the development known as Paseo del Sol, within the City of Temecula; speci?ically Tracts 2¢182, 2~183, 24184. 24185, 24186 and a portion of 24188. At this time, our District. is wrestling with the disposition'of' approximately 3000 cfs, tributary to the northeasterly corner of the'intersection of State lHighway.yg and BUtterfield 3tags Road. This ia the result of an omission from the infrastructure constructed with Assessment District 159. This flow was Platted to be intercepted upstream from Butterfield Stage Road and routed to Temecula Creek, across Highway 79, in an open, concrete lined channel facility. AS the City is likely aware, both State Highway 79 and autterfield Stage Road are destined to be (or are already) elevated with respect to the adjacent ground. If our understanding of this elevation differential is correct, this is going to result in 2 to 4 feet of porting in the area northeasterly from the intersection, with excess flowa topping both roadways and traveling westerly southwesterly toward Temecula Creek. Consideration must be given to the conditioqing of Tract 24182, and whether these County conditions.would require that.tract to solve the problem, orovideo the necessary facility had not been constructed by Assessment District 159. The engineer on ~roject is currently ~orking on alternatives to be considered in our search for resolution of .'this problem, and has indicated we may have Scmethin9 to work with Outing the week of Seotemoer 23, 1995. Providing the aPPlicant is willing to confine all graqing activity to the area northwesterly from a minimum 3OO-~oot w~oe adjacent State Highway 79. or from the FEHA mapped flood.dlain (th~s must be the City's call }, this D~strict 13as no ODJectlon to the City allowing gradlng, in aCcorOance with mass/rough grading ~3?~s submitted for the Oa]a~ce o~ Tract 24~2 and al~ ~ TracL$ 11/07/2001 16:50 FAX 949 752 0597 14:45 JD&P IRVINE ~058/067 ! t i Hr, JoseD~ ~.~,:ak -2- SeD~emDer 23, t996 Re; Paseo Del $o1 - Mass or Roug~ Graoln9 :hs: :he developer consiaer less than full improvement of MeaDows Parkway wlthin the abOve m~n~ione~ 3OD-foot w~Oe for larger) s~riD. O~, sufficient, culvert CaZ>SC~ty be Drovlded Peneach the Oarkwa¥ to allow flood flows to continue in a sou=hwesterl¥ d~re¢C~on; adjacen[ H~ghway 79. Provided tJae City chcoses ~n aD~rOximas, e 300- ~oot wide s~rip rat~er than the entire FEMA mapped flood Plain,' we would have no objection [0 the 'g~ade&Die- Port,on of Trac[ 2416~ being used as s~ockpi~e area for [he .fill mater~al necessary to complete all ~he Proposed .grading, once conditions ~arran~. . Additionally, i~ the =stri~' is chosen by the City. we would recommenO you ensure ~ourselves that all a~ropriate Permits are in hand, prior 1;o grading. The City must note that our review of' ell - the grad.~ng Proposals has yet to be completed; howevsr, we are comEortable thst those changes we would consider essential are of a nature that could be accomplished during the approximate 4-month long grading operation. ' [f there are any questions regarding this matter'. Please contact either Da]e Anderson st ~09/275-1268 or me at 909/275-1265. Very truly yours,. HOWARD L. DICKERSON Sen.lot Civil Engineer C: Keith International, Inc, Attn: Hr. Dsvid Shen Newland Associates Attn: Hr. James De,hamer HLD:slj 11/~7/2001 16:50 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IR¥INE Minutes of AD 159 Meeting dated November 8, 1989 (excerpts) .. . RWD .:./p iits. / ~love:~er 8, 1989 page :%hree A~cenC._IEe~ III -. Right Of Wa'St~ pat .< .ef~ Ran~work__~s Ho d/.';ussion. Pleas.. see attached Right of Way Status update. Ac~nc' r~e~ · ~~y~ 2S ~ IV - Status of Plans a~ Construction Dave HUDO. Ran6ac ~ubllc ,.. Tke $ ..~ -* Force Main is the crit'ical path item fOr'RVAD. 'P~t Schef..'~r reported tha.t he. has verbal agreements with Owners for .T' .. £e:,,er force main easements. Pic ~'.. .~ sewer is complete and paving now. '~ Merge. '.;a Bridge piles'to be placed in one week. S~g=e :eld Stag~ Road:- 600 acres east of BUtterfield Stage ._~ %'_~ere tho~ught, to drain in a souther - , ~.dr.%ir . ~.s actuall- onto ed o ?f)ff} ~.rect~on area needs to be up=reded n;u ~. ..a direction of'flow earlier on. An o_p_en channel will _. --~ ~=uau~= ~looo Control did be '-~ :loc! for that area which will be more-economically e:'f~c .~ :2or the Assessmenu District. · . .... cn was raised, regarding the 4 w~ek time period 1...Da.. · ketween the times the bids are received to the start cz c~,: .'cc¢ion (refer to "Project Status,, attachment). Ivan Te ....... :':.:plained the process as follows: 2'he bids are opened. ~ . Unit prices are checked. . Spread sheet prepared showing lowest bidder. · Form 11 (by 'Ivan Tennant) sent to the Board of Supervisors awarding contract to lowest bidder. (Developer funds have to be received by the County . kefore Form 1,1 can be sent to the Board for award of contract.)~ " ~ 5ond & insurahce req~irements must be received from c~ntractcr. Iw::: .. '2... that i~ is not possible to shorten this t' Pe"~°d . lme Pie=as,.. = .ttached "Project Status,, for details. ~]059/067 Exhibit C 11/~7/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~060/067 EXHIBIT E 11/07/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~061/067 RESOLUTION NO. 95-30 A RF~OLUTION OF ']'H~: CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA, CAI,WORNIA, ACCEPTING CERTAIN STI~,~.TS INTO 'rH~: Cl'r¥ MAINTAINED-STRF.~F SYSTEM 01UTTERFm. I.B STAGE ROAD FROM DE PORTOLA ROAD TO HIGHWAY 79 (S) AND DE I'ORTOLA ROAD FROM BUrl;l~Fn*5l} STAGE ROAD TO EASTERLY Tim. Cfl'l" COUNCIL OF THR CITY OF 'rEMr~J2UI~ DOES RESOLVE, DHrER.blINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: ..... , .... WHI~iRFa~, The Riverside County Board of Supervisors by Resolution No. 89-251 on June 13, 1989, accepted certain offers of dedications for public roads as recorded December 1975, as Instrument No. 151727 for po~gm;o~f~l~e Portola Road and Buttertield Stage Road. Said portions are ~hown on Parcel Map N0. 64.2.8, recorded in Book 20, Pages 70 through 73 of Parcel Maps. Acceptance of offers was fq~:,.,,v~, tlng purposes only and not into the County Road- Maintained System ..... WHERF_AS, Bedford Development Company, a California Corporation, dedicated Lot 'Q" (Buttorfi¢ld Stage Road) in Parcel Map No. 23432, flied in Book 159, at Pages 38-61 Inclusive of Parcel Maps, to public use for street and public utility purposes. The County Road Said Lot "Q" was accepted by the Riverside.~o)mty Surveyor and Road Commissioner on behalf of the Board of Supervisors for vesting pu~ses only and not into thc County Maintained-Road System. ;' ~ ':? ' Vw-I ~.RF_AS, The Toman Company,~f0mia Corporation, offered for dedication Lot ~D', (De Portola Road), in Tract Ho, 23.i2~5.,.--~.~...ffl. ~ed in Book 246, at Pages 81-85 Inclusive, of Ma ,. p.b c uso offer for public roa.d and public utility purposes. WITERF_AS, Kaufman and Br°ad:~ ~tDicgo, Inc., a California Corporation, offered for dedication LOt 'A", (De Portola Road)ilini2~ract No. 23125-3, flied in Book 252, at ]Pages 39-47 Inclusive, for public use for street apd,pgblic utility purposes. The Cit Council accepted said offer for public road and public utility p~oses. Riverside upon Incorporation, effecti~e'D~:e~ber 1, 1989; . 11/97/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~062/067 WHEREAS, Thc As~.~samen~ DiiEdt, No. 159 contracto~ has completed the public improvcments in accordance with thc plans~ specifications, and standards, and the Rancho California Water District ha~ issued the Notice of Acceptance for this ph~ of work; ~ ~AS, the Riverside Coumy Txanspomtion Depammcnt has requested that the City of Tcmccula accept the complc~d work for maintenance purposc~; W~ ~CEAS, the City concurs in thc sag~ -f~ctory complelion of the work and recommends the acceptance of the~e streets into thc City Maintained-Street System: NOW, THERk'IFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Tcmecula as follows: Section 1. That thc City of Temec~ula;aecePt into the City Maintained-Street System those stree~ offered and accepted by the ~9..u~. ty of Riverside, and offered and accepted by thc City Council, de,scribed in Exhibits 'A' an.d..,~B' attached hereto. Section 2. The City Clerk shall~ ~ [ .~::the adoption of this resolution and accept the streets and portions thereof, offer~ to .~!.,.d.:.a~p. ted by the County of Riverside for vcsling purposes only, and the City Council, into the City-maintained street system as described in Exhibits 'A' and 'B' attached hereto. ......' P.i~ED, APPROVED, AND ADOI'I~.I~, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular mceling he, ld on the 28th day of March, 1995. 11/07/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~063/067 STATE OF COUNTY OF RIVER$ID~ ss CITY OF TEIVI~ULA) I, lun¢ S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califom/a, do hereby ca'dry tim[: P-~o~ ~!ufion No. 95-30 ~ duly ~/regularly adopted by the Cky Council of the City of Temec~da at a regula~ meeting thereef he, id on the 28th day o£March, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUN~]~S: Lindemans, P~rh, Robem, Stone NOF_3: 0 COUNC/~IV~MBF-2'S:: None ABS]!N'T: 0 COUNC]~IViF_LM~F_RS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUN~]~RS: Mufioz 11/~7/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~064/067 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-30 Accepting those parcels dedicated to the public for public roads and/or streets and public utility purposes accepted for vesting purposes but not for road-maintained purposes by the County of Riverside, and those parcels dedicated to public use for street and public utility purposes and accepted by the City Council, all as indicated on Exhibit "B", into the City Maintained-Street System as described below: A. Those portions of Portola,Road and Butterfield Stage Road lying within the City Limits of the .City of Temecula, as described in Instrument No. 1517~2~,~.[e..corded December 5, 1975, and shown on Parcel Map N0~ _6,4.28, recorded in Book 20, Pages 70 through 73, of Parcel Map,.$_;nd as accepted for vesting purposes only by Riverside Counl~y.~es01ution No. 89-25i, all recorded in the office of the County Re,corder, Riverside County, California. B. Lot "Q" in Paine] Map.~o;:23432, filed in Book 159, at Pages 38-61 Inclusive, of Parce.I. Maps, said Lot 'Q' being accepted by the County of Riverside .fo~',¥esting purposes only· .'~.~ C. Being Lot "D" in Tract No. 23125-1, filed in Book 246, at Pages 81-85 Incluslve,.~f:,..Maps, in the office of the County Recorder, Riverside County, .California· D. Being Lot A' in T[a,ct.,~N0. 23125-3, filed in Book 252, at Pages 39-47 Inclusive', 0.!~"Maps, in the office of the County Recorder, Riverside Cou~: .california. 11/07/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~095/007 EXHIBIT 'B' TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-_.~ SUBJECT ACCEPTANCE- PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM AS INDICATED BELOW: ~c4L~ 11/~7/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE When Recorded ~Retura ml R~mcho California Water Dist~ct Post Or, ce Box 9017 Tcmecula, CA ~066/067 HOTICE OF ACCEPTANC~ NOTICE IS I-I~I~R¥ GIVEN BY RANCHO CALIFORNT. A WATI~RR DISTRICT, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, PURSUANTTO SECT/ON 1192.1 OF T[-i~ CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDUR~ THAT: L ' The project, A-~e.Umcnt Dbtrici*l~o. ~$9, Butt~rfleld Stage Road, l~Iighway 79 and De Portola Road-Fast, Phase 'l'**~r~ject No. DO484.), was accepted by the Rancho California Water Dislrfct on January 10, 1995; 2. The name of thc contractor is Utah Pacific; 3. Th: name of the su:ety u Safcco Insurance Company of America; 4. Thc dcsc~ption of the property 9~.~p. blic work or structur~ is: Street improvement, storm drain, grading, water ap.d sewer. RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DI$I'I~,ICT STATE OF CALIFORNT. A ~ John F. Hcnnigar General Manager COUNTy OF RIVEILSIDE} T am the Ocncrai Manager of the Ranch~: CaLifornia Water Di~tr/ct, a public corporation, and as such rn~lre '.h.L~ vc~ficat/on for and on behalf Of .~aid Rancho Califor~/a Water Distr/~t: I have read thc foregoing Notice of ACCeptance and know thc contents thcreot~ and the facu thc~c/n stated are true. I dccl~rc under penalty of perjury that ,~.e. foregoing/s ~ruc and correct. ~-~'~cutcd on ..Tanua:T 3 O ~!9S5 '.; at Tcmecula, California. .... .Tohn F. Hcn~ig~ ~ '.' . General Manager 11/~07/2001 16:53 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ,ACKNOWLEDGMENT ~067/067 - oP.O L De.~crlptlon of Attached Document '";:' :~ ':~' ' : , Signer Is Number of Pagea: DOcument Date: Signer(s) O~r ~ N~ Capac~(~ C~lm~ by Slgn~ Signe~s Na~: -~ ~ ARomey-in-Fa~ " ~ Guar~an or ~n~wa~r ~ ~e~ Signer Is Represent/rig: .t? * CL ~,o C-,~=-~ , ~,~.,'~ / ,~'-' Repreaenting: A'I-rACHMENT NO 12 SAM ALHADEFF LETFER - NOVEMBER 20, 2001 R:XS p A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc 23 ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP A LIMITED LIAffiLrTY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 43460 RIDGE PARK DRIVE, SUITE 270 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 MAIN TELEPHONE: (909) 699-7556 FACSIMILE: (909) 699-6191 Offices in San Diego and Ternecula, California November 20, 2001 Ms. Debbie Ubnoske Planning Director City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ~FF~,SLAWl .CO~ 9503.~001 Re-' Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Planning Application No. 01-0117 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 4 (collectively, the "Action") Dear Ms. Ubnoske: On November 7, 2001, Mr. Darren Stroud representing James and Mary Corona and the Corona Family oll ' ' ....... (c ecavely, the Coronas ) subn~tted a letter m opposmon to the above- referenced Action. While Mr. Stroud has spent a great deal of time of going through history, he has basically restated objections that were made to a pr/or application that was submitted by Newland for various changes to their Specific Plan. That application was submitted in 1999 and involved the following: Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol); Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement for the Villages ~ Pasco del Sol, Community Shopping Center); Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan - Appeal); and Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 -Appeal) (collectively, "Original Application"). C:~:)ata\Clicnts~qcwland\UBNOSK~E LTR I 1-20-Ol.doc Ms. Debbie Ubnoske November 20, 2001 Page 2 ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP As you can tell the Original Application dealt with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan together with certain other applications with regard to the development plan and a tentative parcel map. At that time, a person with Mr. Stroud's legal finn, Ms. Michele Staples, had filed extensive opposition to the Original Application suggesting the exact same arguments made by Mr. Stroud with regard to the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. A great deal of time was taken by the staffto review those issues and as a result on that application staff concluded "While staff agrees that the issue needs to be resolved, we do not feel that there is a nexus between the Butterfield Stage Interceptor Channel and the four cases before the Council. The Channel is proposed to be built through AD 159, and Newland Communities has no control over the timing of that process." The staff report goes on to indicate that the process is within the consideration of AD 159 and that "Newland had obligated their property through bonded indebtedness for the work but has no consol over the construction." It also pointed out that there was an interim detention basin coastmcted on property owned by Newland. That basin was to intercept any sheet flow across Butterfield Stage Road and to protect any downsta'eam properties fi.om flooding. Accordingly, we believe these issues to be the same as previously discussed and we believe that the staffanalysis of November 9, 1999 is as operative with regard to the Original Application as it would be concerning this application. Should you need any further additional information, please do not hesitate to give us a call. Sincerely, Samuel C. Alhadeffof Athadeff and Solar, LLP SCA:dll cc: William Curley, Esq. Mr. Matthew Harris ATrACHMENT NO 13 DARREL STROUD LE'I-rER - NOVEMBER 28, 2001 R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 24 JACKSOI~ D~L~R~O & PE0~;1VPAUGH FAX 949.752.0597 www.jdplaw.com November 28, 2001 28878 Dstroud~jdplaw.com (949) 851-7404 VIA FACSIMILE AND OVERN1TE EXPRESS Planning Commission City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attn: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5 Planning Application No. 01-0109- General Plan Amendment Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Planning Application No. 01-0117- Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 2418& Amendment No.4 Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners: We represent James and Mary Corona and the Corona family (collectively the "Coronas"). The Coronas own land at the northeast comer of the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79. The Coronas' land straddles the boundary between Riverside County ("County") and the City of Temecula ("City"), and is directly impacted by the on-going development activities associated with the Paloma Del Sol project ("Project"). The Coronas request that the following comments be included in the administrative record regarding the above referenced planning applications. The Coronas' November 7, 2001, letter to the Planning Commission regarding the above referenced amendments is incorporated herein. The Coronas request that the Plmming Commission enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan ("Specific Plan 219"), which is also part of the Project's design. Otherwise the Planning Commission will be in violation of both the Subdivision Map Act ("Map Act") (Government JACKSON DE~ARCO & PECKENPAUGH Planning Commission November 28, 2001 Page 2 Code section 66410, et seq.) and the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code sections 21000, et seq.). Furthermore, the City's failure to properly notice the Coronas of the November 28, 2001 Planning Commission Hearing violates the Coronas' due process rights. I. BACKGROUND Prior to the development of Specific Plan 219 and construction of Butterfield Stage Road improvements, storm water flowed to the north of the Coronas' land that is now included within County Assessment District No. 159 ("AD # 159"), across Butterfield Stage Road, and through the Specific Plan 219 property. As a result, when the County first approved Specific Plan 219, it imposed a condition on the Project requiring the developer to construct a flood control channel either on-site or off-site to intercept those flows. The County likewise imposed mitigation measures on the Project to prohibit increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties and require that all flood-related hazards must be adequately mitigated. (Reference EIR 235, pp. 315-321, incorporated by reference.) Subsequently, the City adopted the County's condition of approval for Specific Plan 219 that the developer construct the flood control facilities either on-site or off-site. The City first adopted the condition in 1991. However, instead of constructing the flood control facilities, the record indicates that the Newland Communities' ("Newland") predecessor included the facility on the "wish list" for facilities to be constructed with funding from the AD #159 supplemental assessment. Development of Specific Plan 219 has resulted in filling the natural drainage course that formerly flowed to the north of the Corona Ranch property within AD 159, across Butterfield Stage Road, through Specific Plan 219, to Temecula Creek. Butterfield Stage Road improvements were constructed by AD #159 to accommodate the development's alteration of the natural drainage pattern. Newland proceeded to fill and construct homes on land that once served as the drainage area for the upstream properties, including Corona Ranch. Those improvements now act as a dam blocking storm water that once flowed across Butterfield Stage Road and Specific Plan 219. A flood hazard has been created on that portion of the Coronas' land within AD #159 where none previously existed. The flood control facilities are necessary to mitigate the hazardous condition created on the Coronas' land by Newland's development of Specific Plan 219 and by the Butterfield Stage Road improvements. Importantly, Specific Plan 219 has never been amended to delete the facility from its master planned drainage facilities, nor have the conditions of approval or mitigation measures been amended to remove their requirements that the facility be constructed by Newland. Yet, Newland continues to develop the property without complying with the condition and mitigation measures that require it to construct the flood control facilities, further increasing the likelihood of flood-related hazards to the Coronas' property. Once again, Newland is requesting amendments to the Project without having constructed, or even committing to construct, the flood control facilities. Once again in violation JACKSON DEMARCO & PECKENPAUGH Planning Commission November 28, 2001 Page 3 of the Specific Plan 219's Project design, the existing conditions of approval, and mitigation measures, the Planning staff is recommending approval of the above referenced planning applications (e.g., amendments to the City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, and Vesting Tentative Map No. 24188) for the Project. However, the Coronas respectfully request that the City enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219. Otherwise, to avoid violating statutory and constitutional law, the Planning Commission must suspend all approvals for the Project, including the above-referenced planning applications, until after construction of the flood control facility necessary to mitigate project- related flooding hazards to the public roads and private property adjacent to the development, including the Coronas' property. II. FAILURE TO ENFORCE THE SPECIFIC PLAN 219'S DRAINAGE-RELATED FACILITIES AND DRAINAGE-RELATED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES VIOLATES THE MAP ACT, CEQA AND THE CONSTITUTION A. Newland's Applications Must be Denied Local agencies are prohibited from issuing any permit or granting any approval necessary to develop property which is in violation of the provisions of the Map Act or implementing local ordinances, if the local agency finds that the development of such real property is contrary to public health or the public safety. Government Code section 66499.34; See also Pratt v. Adams, 229 Cal. App.2d 602 (1964); Topanga Ass'n for Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles, 11 Cal.3rd 506 (1974). The longer that Newland fails to install the required flood control facilities after filling the natural drainage course, the greater the risk of public health and welfare impacts due to flooding. Accordingly, the City of Temecula must deny the requested amendments due to Newland's failure to comply with the drainage-related conditions of approval and mitigation measures. Additionally, under 14 Cal. Code of Regs. ("CEQA Guidelines") section 15126.4(a)(2), mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design. Here, the drainage-related mitigation measures have been incorporated into both the project design and conditions of approval. Yet, to date, Newland has failed to mitigate flooding hazards to adjacent private property created by its development activities, had to date mitigated flooding hazards created by its development activities by construction the flood control facilities. Therefore, Newland is in violation of its adopted mitigation measures for the Project. JACKSON DEI~IARCO & PECKENPAUGH Planning Commission November 28, 2001 Page 4 As provided in CEQA § 21168.9, a range of remedies is available for an agency's noncompliance with CEQA, including ordering the agency to bring its decision into compliance with CEQA, voiding the agency's approval, and suspending development of the project. Accordingly, as a result of Newland's failure to implement drainage-related mitigation measures, the City must deny the proposed amendments. The City Is in Violation of Map Act for Failure to Require Newland to Enter into an Agreement to Construct Flood Control Facilities Government Code section 66462(a) provides: "(a) If, at the time of approval of the final map by the legislative body, any public improvements required by the local agency pursuant to this division or local ordinance have not been completed and accepted in accordance with standards established by the local agency by ordinance applicable at the time of the approval or conditional approval of the tentative map, the legislative body, as' a condition precedent to the approval of the final map, shall require the subdivider to enter into one of the following agreements' specified by the local agency: (1) An agreement with the local agency upon mutually agreeable terms to thereafter complete the improvements at the subdivider's expense. (2) An agreement with the local agency to thereafter do either of the following: (A) Initiate and consummate proceedings under an appropriate special assessment act or the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act... for the financing and completion of all of the improvements. (B) If the improvements are not completed under a special assessment act or the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act... to complete the improvements at the subdivider's expense." (Emphasis added.) To date, the City has failed to require such an agreement for the construction of the flood control facilities, although the flood control facilities are part of the Specific Plan 219 design and is required pursuant to drainage-related conditions of approval and mitigation measures. According, the City must require such an agreement immediately or be in further violation of Government Code section 66462(a). JACKSON DEI~IARCO ,Ye PECKENrPAUGH Planning Commission November 28, 2001 Page 5 C. Newland Does Not Have Vested Rights to Proceed with the Project Newland only gains vested rights to proceed with the development under the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect on the date that the tentative map application was approved or conditionally approved. Government Code section 66498.1(b); See also City's Ordinance section 16.18.160. Because the drainage-related conditions of approval and mitigation measures were part of the tentative map approval process, Newland's vested rights in the development of the Project are contingent upon the construction of the flood control facilities. The City Cannot Adopt an Addendum under CEQA and Should Prepare an Subsequent EIR for these Amendments The Planning staff has recommended the approval of an Addendum as the appropriate environmental review for the proposed amendments. However, an agency may only prepare an addendum to a previously prepared EIR to make minor technical changes or additions to the EIR. CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a). Furthermore, an addendum to a previously certified EIR can only be prepared, provided that none of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines section 15162 have occurred (CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a)), which are: (1) there are no new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant impacts; (2) there are not any substantial changes which have occurred with respect to the circumstances surrounding the New Project; and (3) there is no new information of substantial importance. See also CEQA section 21166. If one of three conditions occur, the City must prepare a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. CEQA Guidelines sections 15162, 15163. Here there is overwhelming evidence before the Planning Commission the a Subsequent EIR must be prepared for the proposed amendments. Newland's failure to comply with the drainage-related project facilities, conditions of approval and mitigation measures constitutes substantial changes or major modifications to the Project. This non-compliance has resulted in unmitigated flooding hazards, which is a substantial increase in the severity of the Project's flood impacts than those analyzed in the original EIR. Additionally, Project-related flooding hazards have been made significantly more severe since the certification of the original EIR by the Project's filling and construction in the natural drainage, and by improvements to Butterfield Stage Road to accommodate the Project. These subsequent changes associated with the Project constitute significant changes and major modifications. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, these changes must be analyzed in a subsequent EIR before any further permits or other discretionary approvals are issued. Additionally, the proposed amendment to Specific Plan 219 would result in the relocation of Neighborhood/Commercial uses at the southwest comer of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Roads to the southwest corner of DePortola Road and Campanula Way. Accordingly, the 8-acres of medium high density residential uses in Planning Area 38, which is near the highly congested Home Depot, would be converted to Neighborhood/Commercial uses. This would JACKSON DEMARCO & PECKENPAUGH Planning Commission November 28, 2001 Page 6 result in an increase of commercial uses with associated potentially significant impacts (e.g., traffic, air quality, water quality, etc.) that must be analyzed in a Subsequent EIR. The City Failure to Properly Notice the Corona's Violates the Corona's Due Process Rights Neighboring owners must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard on a tentative map application, both as a matter of statutory right (Government Code section 66451.3) and as a matter of constitutional due process (Horn v. County of Ventura, 24 Cal. 3d 605,615 (1979)). In the processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval and filing of tentative, final and parcel maps and the modification thereof, local agencies are required to give notice of a public hearing pursuant to Government Code sections 65090 and 65091. Government Code sections 66451, 66451.3; See also City's Ordinance section 16.18.160. In particular, "[n]otice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to all owners of real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the real property that is the subject of the hearing." Government Code section 65091 (a)(3). The proposed amendment to Specific Plan 219 includes increasing the number of medium density residential acres in Planning Area 4 from 40 to 43.2 acres. This would increase the amount of development in Planning Area 4 of Specific Plan 219, which is directly adjacent to the Coronas' property. Yet, the Coronas and other adjacent property owner were never mailed a public notice as required pursuant to Government Code section 65091 (a)(3). Moreover, the City has violated its own ordinance regarding notification of the November 28, 2001 Planning Commission hearing. The City's Ordinance section 17.03.040(B)(2) provides that "[t]he notice shall be mailed first class and postage pre-paid.., to all persons whose names and addresses appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County of Riverside as owners of property within a distance of six hundred feet from the exterior boundaries of the site for which the application is filed." Additionally, City's Ordinance section 17.03.040(C)(1) provides that "[t]he property, which is the subject of the proposed development, shall be posted with informational signs that are four feet by four feet in size, located along each side of the property not more than three hundred feet apart, that fronts upon an improved public street, providing a description of the development request, the date, time, and location of the public hearing, and the location where further information can be obtained." None of these ordinances have been complied with by the City. The Coronas, and other property owners, have not received proper notice by mail even though their property is directly adjacent to and impacted by the proposed amendments. Furthermore, a notice was not posted on the comer of Highway 79 and Butterfield Stage Road, even though this area is affected by the proposed amendments. JACKSON DE~IARCO & PECKENPAUGH Plarming Commission November 28, 2001 Page 7 Case law is clear that where a land use decision will "exceptionally affect" a property owner or business user, the County must provide that person with notice and the opportunity to be heard. Horn, supra, 24 Cal. 3d at 615; Harris v. County of Riverside, 904 F. 2d 497 (9th Cir. 1990). Accordingly, the City has violated the Coronas' procedural due process rights by not providing the Coronas proper notice of the November 28, 2001 Planning Commission hearing. III. CONCLUSION On behalf of the Coronas, I urge the Planning Commission to deny the proposed amendments and suspend further development activity until the required flood control facilities are constructed. Otherwise, the Planning Commission will be in violation of both the Map Act and CEQA. At a minimum, the Hearing must be properly renoticed to avoid violating the Coronas due process rights and a subsequent EIR must be prepared. Very truly yours, ~D~arren W. Stroud DWS/tms 432929.1 Corona Family (facsimile, overnite express) Dennis Chiniaeff, Planning Commission Chairman (facsimile, overnite express) John Telesio, Planning Commission Co-Chairman (facsimile, overnite express) Ron Guerfiero, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, ovemite express) David Mathewson, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, overnite express) Mary Jane Olhasso, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, overnite express) Peter Thorson, City Attorney (facsimile, ovemite express) ATTACHMENT NO 14 SAM ALHADEFF LETI'ER - NOVEMBER 29, 2001 R:~S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc 25 ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 43460 RIDGE PARK DRIVE, SUITE 270 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 MAIN TELEPHONE: (909) 699-7556 FACSIMILE: (909) 699-6191 Offices in San Diego and Ternecula, California November 29, 2001 SAMUEL C. ALHADEFF SALHADEFF~ASLAWl .COM 9103.0001 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ms. Debbie Ubnoske Planning Director City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Re: m .or g 9 2001 Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 Planning Application No. 01-0117 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188, Amendment No. 4 (collectively, "Action") Dear Ms. Ubnoske: We want to thank you and your staff for working with us in the above-referenced applications. We appreciate the professional cooperation, patience and courtesy extended by every staff member, specifically Matthew Harris and Ron Parks in working through certain difficult issues. Last night I made reference to certain letters which I asked to be included within the record for the proceedings. First, I read from a letter dated February 17, 2000 from the County of Riverside to the Corona Ranch. A copy of that letter is attached. Please include this letter to be incorporated in the record. Second, I mentioned a series of letters that were referenced in the heatings that were held related to the Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 in Planning Applications as follows: PA99-0284 (Development Plan) PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment); and PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) There were a series of letters that I asked to be incorporated in the record last night from those particular planning actions and the proceedings that took place. The letters that I referenced were as follows: C:XData\Clients~qewland\UBNOS KE LTR 11-29-01 .doc Ms. Debbie Ubnoske November 29, 2001 Page 2 ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP 1. November 3, 1999 letter from Newland Communities to Carol K. Donahoe; 2. November 1, 1999 letter from Dennis O'Neil to Peter Thorson; 3. November 4, 1999 letter from Paul Thompson of Albert A. Webb & Associates assessment engineers for Assessment District 159 to Shawn Nelson; 4. November 4, 1999 letter from Richard T. Robotta of the Keith Companies to Dean Meyer; and 5. A compilation of reports and analyzes that were submitted to Carol Donahoe dated October 26, 1999. The above-referenced documents were the ones that I referred to and asked me made a part of the official record of these proceedings. For your convenience, I have attached the above- referenced letters with the exception of item no. 5, which was listed as attachment number 7 to the November 9, 1999 staff report. Samuel C~ of Alhadeff and Solar, LLP SCA:dll Enclosures MEMBER OF COMMERCIAL LAW AFFILIATES, INDEPENDENT BU$~NE$S AND LITIGATION ~Aw FIRM$ IN PRINCIPAL CITIES WOR~W/DE ~/24/2~00 16:02 FEB-Z4-OO THU 02:54 FM RIV COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTAlION AND I. AND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Transportation Department D~vld E. ~arnhart Februar7 17, 2000 Corona Ranch 33320 State Highway 79 Temecula, CA 92592 Attenffon: Steve Corona ' RE: E~utterfield East Intercepf,~r Sborm Drain Dear Mr. Corona: I am wd~ng this letter as a follow up to the December 10, 1999 meeting we had at the Flood Con~l District offi~s. The purpose ~ffiat m~ng was ~ d~s~ss ~e various a~temafives we ~udied for~e a~e~d East I~e~ptor S~ Dm~n Facili~. [ appreciated the oppo~ty.~ hear your ~ncems. and as'a msuJt, J gained a be~r undemanding ~ the hista~ su~und~g ~s pmj~ and the various al~matives. A~ached is a table ~a~ summafiz~ ~e ~e options we discussed. . ~~m. ~e auto.eld Interpret ~s ~ncluded as,an ASsessmen~ ~~c~l~ to be located at~e eastern ~s~sment D~s~c[ bounda~, ~ i~rcep~ the ~u~ dminaqe flows and pmv[Ee flood protect/on to BuS.eld S~- Ro~. Stste Route 79 South, and do~mam pmpe~ies. ~a original AD 159 ~nce~ Was~ct~'h channel at ~e ea~ounda~. 8~use ~u ~n p~pedy ups~eam of the AD ln~e~p~r al[gnm~ eas~ of the'AD bounda~, ~u requested we study ~er altem~ives. You am ~y ~ing all ~ ~r pm~y and. advised ~e In[e~eptar would.disrupt your fa~[ng ope~t~on. ~ your Jnpu~ we aged to analyze several other alternative. Let me summarize ~e ~o other opUans ~ discussed, which seemed p~en~atly feasible: Alternative No. 1 exam~ed ~e po~b~i~y of ~nst~'ng ~e In{er~or en ~he same alignment as the o~g~nal option (~e eastern AD 159 bounda~), but lo~r~ng ~he channe~ and ~nstruc~ing a box under ~ur pmpe~. Y~ expr~sed an openn~s to th~s o~on aS ~ong as 1) you could continue ~ur ~n~ opera,ohS un~n~er~d, and 2) ~he FIo~d Con~l Dist~ct ~u~d acce~ th~s option as a solution: The ntent ~s ~ provide four Fee~ of ~vec o~r ~he box, so you could ~nue ~ur Fa~ng ~er the top of the ~li~. Dudng our meeting. Flood Con~ D~tdc~ rep~sen~ves questioned ~e feasibility of th~s opt(on. F~ of all ~hey doub~ the t6bu~a~ flows can a~ua~ly be' pro~edy ~[Jec~d by the unde~und ~ox. S~nd~y, by towering the ~c~fi~ to pla~ it a080 Lcmoa Screu¢. Sth Floor · Ri,n:r~idc, C.a[iracnla 92501 - (909) 955-67aO P.O. lion 1090 - g~ct~ide, Cal;locnla 9250Z-1090 · FA,~ (909) 955-672[ ~j~?~4/~J~7~J t~:~J;~ r. J77r~3,35~' RR BPI-J[,Itl CO '1" I~''' P~:~GE. 07J; Mr. Steve Corona Februar,/17, 2000 Page 2 underground makes the s/ope of the box culveK too fiat and creates ongoing maintenance problems. Therefore. this oFt~on doesn't seem practical. The ether option we discussed was Alternative No. 5, a dual syst~;m with an open channel located aleng yeur eastedy Propert7 boundary I:o [ntercagt a majority of the drainage from the east, aleng with a smaller underground system at I~e eastern AD boundary t~ col,rec.[ the smaller flows from the norl~ and east. above Oe Portola Rosd and east to Calla Contento. You expressed your preference tar thi~ alternative. Under Alternative No. 5, all oi' your properCY wJj'! be fleed protected. The property you own outsfde the AD boundary would benef[~ under this alternative and w~uld therefore be required to pay/ts prOportionate share of the costs. You discussed your des[re to del'er any assessments on your property un~'~ yourfarming operation develops into some crther use. This would require some other party to advance your costs. While I understand yeur des/re, the Counb/doesn't have the financial car~actty or ability to advance fund your share. One way to reduce your costs is to dedicate the right-of~way ~eeded to construct the fadlify. Other thar~ that, I have not been able to come up with .any other cos[saving solu~;ons. wiilin t~re - ..- ._9- n~e Transgorfation Department ~s ~ cemm~end Alternative Ne. 5. However, t~ prOud we wi, ~writte, n _c o n c U ITB n c?_....._,. . =. Your c~opera[~on ~s needed b3 maJ<e ~he Intercepb~r a reality. I look forward to receiving your positive response so we can proceed in a cooperative manner. Please feel free b3 contact me if you l~ave any questions or requ re any add~tiona/information. Sincerely. George A. Johnson Deputy Director of Transportation GAJ:sa Supervisor Bob Buster Bob Krfeger Tony Cars-tens Oave 8arnhart Kelley Oonov3n F~ank Peairs I. I. November 3, 1999 Carol K. Donohoe, AICP Associate Planner CITY OF TEMECULA Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Paseo del Sol - Planning Applicatfon: PA99-0284 (Development Plan), PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431), PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment) and P~99-0283 (Development Agreement) Dear Carol: As. a follow up to the information forwarded to you.on October 26, 1999 and subsequent meetings ,with City Staff and City Attorney, we hereby submit the following correspondence in response tO the appeal filed by Corona Ranch: Letter from Dennis O'Neil to Peter Thorson dated November 1, 1999 stating our positions. i) The development of the Paseo del Sol commercial site and Specific Plan No. 7 will have no impact on upstream properties or their exposure to flood control hazards. ii) Newland has provided evidence of compliance with all drainage and flood control conditions. iii) There is no need to conduct any further environmental review or prepare any subsequent reports. Letter from Paul Thompson of Albert A. Webb Associates, Assessment Engineers for Assessment District 159 to Shawn Nelson dated November 1, 1999. i) This letter indicates there is an authorized "$2 2 million for de ' · agn and construction of the Interceptor Channel or a substitute facilitv' through AD 159. ii) In addition there is authorized but unissued bond capacity on the Paseo del Sol property. Carol Donohoe November 3, 1999 Page two Letter from Richard T. Robotta of The Keith Companies dated October 29, 1999 which summarizes the technical history of Specific Plan 219 (Vail Meadows) and EIR 235 as it relates to drainage issues. In summary: The Paseo del Sol project has met all the conditions placed on the project throughout the entitlement process and more specifically as it relates to drainage. · The Paseo del Sol project has constructed an interim detention basin and has been conditioned that the basin or equivaient facility shall remain in place until such time that upstream drainage facilities are constructed. There exists $2.2 million of authorized bonds through AD 159 for the design and construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. Newland Communities supports the use of authorized but unissued bond capacity on the Paseo del Sol property. There is no evidence to support the appeal of the pending applicat4ons nor need for any new conditions or the preparation of further environmental documentation. We thank the City Staff for their efforts and time spent on these matters. We are respectfully requesting that this correspondence, along with the compilation of reports and analyses as submitted to you under cover letter dated October 26, 1999, be filed with the City Clerk and made a part of the official record of the Cit~, Council relating to the subject planning applications and appeal. -- Very truly yours, NEWLAND COMMUNITIES, LLC Dean R. Meyer Director of Engineering & Development cc: Jim Delhamer DEAN DUNN-RANKIN CH^RLF~ S. EXON WILL~AM E. HALLE ANDRE'.'/K. HARTZELL HUGH HEWITr JOHN D. HUDSON HEWITT & McGUIRE, LLP A~rORNEYS AT LAW 9900 M^cARTHUR BOULEVARD, SUITE 1050 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 (949) 798-0500 · (949) 798-0511 (FAX) EMAIL: counsel~hewittmcguir¢.com WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: (949) 798-0734 EMAIL: doneil~hewiRmcguire.com MARK R. MCGUtRE DENNIS D. O'NEIL JAY F. PALCHIKOFF PAUL A. ROWE WILLIAM L. TWOMEY JOHN P, YEAGER November 1, 1999 Peter M. Thorson City Attorney City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Planning Application PA99-0284 (Development Plan), PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431), Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment) and Plannin~ Application No. PA99-0823 (Development A~reement) Dear Peter: Our law firm represents Newland Communities, the developer of the Paseo del Sol Master Planned Community. Newland has received notice that the owners of the Corona Ranch have appealed some or all of the applications referenced in this letter. The stated grounds for the appeal are: (i) "the applicant has failed to come into compliance with the development criteria and conditions placed on the project"; (ii) "the project itself is out of compliance with conditions o fits approval"; and (iii)"... the California Environmental Quality Act requires preparation of a subsequent EIR for a project, and precludes reliance on an addendum, when substantial changes otc.ur to. the circumstances under which a project is to be undertaken, or new information shows that project nnpacts will be substantially more severe." As they have in the past with prior Pasco del Sol Specific Plan Amendments, the Coronas contend that the construction of Butterfield Stage Road has effectively blocked drainage through this area, creating significantly increased flood hazards to upstream properties than was previously identified in the EIR for (Paloma) Paseo del Sol. Furthermore, they point out, a planned upstream storm water interceptor facility ("Butterfield Interceptor Channel") to mitigate this problem has not yet been constructed. However, even assuming the Coronas' contentions are correct, they have no bearing on compliance with prior land use entitlement conditions or whether a Supplemental EIR ("SEIR") should be prepared in connection with the pending planning applications. This is I l-01-99 ] 00194)0002 - S:~,I $2\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd Peter M. Thorson November 1, 1999 Page 2 ? [. L~ because the development of the Paseo del Sol commercial site and the Specific Plan No. 7 Development Plan ~vill have no impact on upstream properties or their exposure to flood control hazards. This follows from the fact that no storm water from the Paseo del Sol project is directed upstream. The approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and related development applications will have no physical consequences at ali on the property owned by the Coronas and there are absolutely no new significant adverse environmental effects to analyze in a SEIR. Simply stated, there is no nexus or relationship to the pending planning applications and drainage issues on Corona Ranch. AD 159 has provided many public improvements of regional significance in the South Temecula area. Thus, the construction of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79 South in 1993 was not intended to benefit solely one property owner, but rather to improve the overall traffic circulation of the region to the benefit of all people living in this end of town. The Corona Ranch is included within AD 157 and along with Paseo del Sol and other properties:have been assessed to pay for these regional public improvements. , ~ Butterfield Stage Road, which is already completed, and the Butterfield Interceptor Channel facility, which has not yet been constructed, are improvements under the control of the County of Riverside and/or Assessment District No. 159, not Newland Communities. EIR No. 241 was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisor when AD 159 was formed in 1988. Any issues the Coronas have regarding flood concerns should be directed to Assessment District No. 159 and the County. The Butterfleld Interceptor Channel is to be built to the east and upstream from the Paseo del Sol community and its purpose is to collect waters flowing from these undeveloped areas and divert them into Temecula Creek. Newland has been working diligently with both AD 159 and the County o fRiverside for over three years in an attempt to facilitate and accelerate the construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. The Coronas play a key role in the Butterfield Interceptor because they must agree on its location and the cost AD 159 will pay for their land. Newland will continue to cooperate with the County and the Coronas to insure this flood control channel is constructed. -- In the meantime, in satisfaction of the development conditions required by both Riverside County Flood Control and the City of Temecula's Public Works Department, Newland has constructed an approximately twenty acre interim detention basin at the northwest comer of Butterfleld Stage Road and Highway 79. South. This basin was designed and constructed pursuant to Riverside County Flood Control and City of Temecula review and approval. Further, the basin fully protects the Pasco del Sol community during rare storm events in which water may enter from areas to the east. To give you a sense of the rarity of the storm event that might cause water to enter the basin, you should know that during El Nifio o frecent years this twenty acre facility remained dry. 1-01-99 10019-00002 S:M 52\CORR\99 [ OOOOS.L TR. wpd Peter M. Thorson November 1, 1999 Page 3 On February 2, 1998, the Planning Commission approved revisions to Newland's Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24182 ("VTM 24812") and, based upon staff analysis, found the project to be in conformity with the previously certified Environmental Impact Report. The continued presence of the detention basin was assured in the conditions of approval for VTM 24182 to remain in place until upstream drainage facilities are installed to mitigate off-site flows. In general, CEQA limits later environmental review for subsequent land use .approvals to issues or impacts which were not addressed in prior environmental documentation. The intent of CEQA is to allow public agencies to rely on prior em~imnmental documentation, unless the project itself or other cimumstances have changed significantly since its adoption and these changes have a negative impact on the environment which cannot be mitigated. Under Public Resources Code Section 21166 (CEQA Section 21166) and Cal. Code of Regs. 15162 (CEQA Guideline Section 15162), a supplemental EIR is not necessary unless major revisions are required to the original EIR as a result off (a) substantial changes in the project which have an increased negative impact on the environment; (b) .substantial changes in the circumstances of the project which have an ~ncreased negative impact on the environment; or (c) new information which was not available when the original EIR was prepared which indicates that the project has a substantial adverse impact which cannot be mitigated. The CEQA statutes and guidelines are very clear on what the test is for requiring a supplemental EIR. Once an ELK has been prepared for a project, no further environmental review may be required unless one of these specified triggering events occur. A public agency's discretion to require a subsequent or supplemental ELK is very limited once an EIR has been prepared for a project. The statute is phrased in prohibitory language: An agency shall not require a supplemental EIR unless one of the statutory exceptions exist. The policy behind the statute is to avoid repeating the CEQA process when environmental review has been completed and the time for challenging that process has expired (Fund for Environmental Defense v. County of Orange (1988) 204 Cal. App. 3d 1538, Long Beach Savings and Loan Association v. Long Beach Redevelopm#nt Agency (1986) 188 Cal. App. 3d 249, Bowman v. City of Petaluma (I 986) 185 Cal. App. 3d 1065). CEQA Section 21166 is designed to provide a degree of certainty and finality once environmental review has been completed for a project. Even a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact does not require the preparation of a subsequent EIR if mitigation measures are adopted which reduce the impact to a level of . . _ S:L152\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd Peter M. Thorson November 1, 1999 Page 4 insignificance. (Laurel Heights Improvement Association of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of the University of California ("Laurel Heights I1") (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112.) Court cases uphold the presumption against the preparation of subsequent EIR. (Snarled Traffic Obstructs Progress v. City and County of San Francisco, 1999 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9211 .) If impacts resulting from changes to the project do not differ significantly from those described in the project EIR, a further EIR is not required (Bowman). A city may not, therefore, require a further E!R unless it finds, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one of the three exceptions to the~rule against requiring a further'EIR exists. In this case there is no evidence to support suct~ findings. All reasonable doubt will be decided in favor of the city (Laurel Heights). A city may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. CEQA Guideline Section 15164(b)(e). This Guideline reflects case law approving' use of an EIR addendum to determine whether a~subsequent or supplemental EIR might be required. In the Bowman case, the court upheld the City's use of an EIR addendum to evaluate changes to the project. The court held that using an addendum as a mechanism for determining whether a further EIR should be required was an appropriate way to fill in a procedural gap in CEQA and the Guidelines. Nothing in CEQA or the Guidelines requires that the city conduct an investigation to ferret out changes in cimumstances or new information. CEQA and the Guidelines do not mandate any specific procedure for cities to follow in determining whether a supplemental EIR is required. The Guidelines simply provide that a brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a supplemental EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an £IR, the city's required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. Newland has provided you with legally supportable evidence of compliance with all drainage and flood control conditions. The appellants have offered no evidence of noncompliance with the conditions of the project approval, any significant changed cimumstances, or new information which was not considered in the original project EIR as further reviewed in prior and the current Addendum. Finally, there is absolutely no connection between the planning · . 'S:\ [52\CO RR\99100008, LTR. wpd Peter M. Thorson November I, 1999 Page 5 applications currently pending before the City Council and storm drain issues impacting the Corona Ranch. Therefore, we submit there is no need in the case of the pending planning applications to consider adding new conditions or conduct further environmental documentation. DDO/mer cc: James M. Delhamer Mayor and Members of the City Council Very truly yours, Dennis D. O'Neil 114)1-99 100194)0002 -S:\ [$2\CORR\99100008. LTR.wjxt ~909) Fax ~909~ Nownnb~r 4, ! 999 W.O. 89-430g File No. 3851.08 I' Mr. ,~.nwn Nelson City Manag~ City afTeme~ula 43200 B~s Park Drive Temecula, CA 92.590 R~: Aaseasmeat Di;~'kt No. 159 - B~d East Int~ccptor Channel I am thc A~e&nncnt Division Manager with All~'t A. Webb Assoeiatcs, Assc~nn~nt F. agin~rs for Assesm~ent District No. 159 (A. D. 159"). I am providing the following information to assist the City of Ta'aceula Lu uada'~nai~ the baakl~d ag the Butmfielfl East Inm~eptnr Charnel (thc "lmerccptnr Channel") and to b~ip to idcnt/fF potential funding for its construction. A. D. 159 was originally forrr~ in 1998 to fired certain regional public i,,,p, ovemen~ and ot_h~ infrastructure within the District Boundaries. In 1991, a ~upglamet~ dia~ct v~a formed to ~ the funds available f~r ti~ ~o~t of tl~ original A.D. 159 improvcmenm, and to add new District improvemema such as th~ Intcrceplor Channel. Approxi~ely $2~ million was specifically ident/fied by the supplemental district as nec~ssap/ for the ctcsign ',md commmfion of thc Inmrccptor Ch~-,~l This $22 million was assesscd to four of the propon'y owners within the Disuic~ a~d spread to these owners baseat on bcnelit received and alloca~ ~n acreage. Consequemly, Pase~ del .%1 received about i2% of the amessmenl with lira remaining thnm owners receiving abouI 11~%. MENT I SPECIAL TAX CONSULTII~G · WA l ~ RESOURCFc~ I~G~lg.~.ING At this date, tl~rc is ~uthofiz~l but'ur, issued bond capacity on th~ Pasco del Sol property toml/ng a0proxim.t~ly $4,9 million. Under Assessment Distr/et law. authorized bonds can only be released by the agency '~nis~in§ thc District and any actual ass~srnem debt issu~ a~ a protx:~y r~mains an obligation of the property until paid. Further, a~ A.~easmem District may build/mpmvements ou~de of its bounCe/cs if thos~ impmv~rn~ts ~r~ to th,' benm~t of properties w~tMn thc District. In on going meetings with Riverside County offi6',fls, N~wland Communities indi~,ll~ that th~-y would support u~hlg a portion of' the authorized but unissued bond capacity on its property to provide funds in cst:ess of th~ authorized $2.2 million for d~jgrl ~,~d constrm:tion of th~ Interceptor Channel or a substimt~ facility such as a detention brain. ' I u'usr this information has bcan helpful to you snd I am available to answer any questions you may have. Please free to cai/me at (909) 781-6190. PT/is Sinccrdy, ALBERT A. W~BB ASSOCLATES Paul Thompson November 4, 1999 Mr. Dean Meyer NEWLAND COMMUNITIES 27393 Ynez Road, Suite 253 Temecula CA 92591 Re: Paseo del Sol: Appeal of P.A. 99-0283, 99-0284, 99-0285, 99-0286 Butterfield Stage Road at Highway 79 Drainage Issues Dear Mr. Meyer: The Keith Companies has been informed that the aforementioned planning applications for the commercial development within Pase. o del Sol near Higl~way 79 and Margarita Road have been appealed by the Corona Ranch owners. Further, it is our understanding that the appeal is based on issues involving compliance with development cdteda and conditions as they relate to flooding concerns at the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79 approximately 1 mile to the east upstream of the referenced applications. It is the intent of this correspondence to define the development criteda and conditions as they relate to drainage for Paseo del Sol (formerly Vail Meadows) by relating the history of the drainage approvals and thereby show compliance with said development cdteda and conditions. In 1988, the Engineer of Work for Vail Meadows, Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct engaged in correspondence dated Apdl 6, 1988; May 16, 1988; and May 26, 1988 which discuss and developed the master plan of drainage for the Vail Meadows project. As a part of the approved master plan of drainage a large offsite basin immediately to the east (approx. 1190 acres) was identified as a part of the Vail Meadows approval (refer to attachment 1,2 and 3). The offsite basin's drainage was mitigated by the construction of twin 120-inch culverts, which exist today in Butterfield Stage Road and eastedy in DePortola Road. Also in 1988, Assessment District 159, which constructed many substantial regbnal facilities in the south Temecula area, was approved and its E.I.R. No. 241 was certified. This E.I.R. and the associated A.D. 159 documents identified a large basin (approx. 2239 acres) further to the east which would require the construction of a channel. This channel known as the Butterfield Interceptor Channel diverts flows upstream of Butterfield Stage Road to the south towards Temecula Creek. As you know, A.D. 159 has provided many public improvements of regional significance in the south Temecula area including Butter[ield Stage Road, Highway 79 and Temecula Creek. However, the Inland Empire Division 22690 Cactua Avenue. Suite 300 Moreno Valley California 92553-9024 t: 909.653.0234 t: 909,653,5308 www.keithco,com · Page~2 construction of the Butterfield interceptor channel was never accomplished by the A.D. In 1996, when Newland Communities purchased the Paseo del sol project, The Keith Companies discovered that the Butterfield interceptor channel had not been constructed. W~ Newland wanting to move forward with the development of Paseo del Sol and evidence that the construction of the interceptor channel improvements were subject to delay, intedm flood mitigation aitematives were identified and approved on the Newland property to protect it and potentially other downstream properties from flooding. Ultimately an intedm detention facility was designed and constructed pursuant to Riverside County Flood Control and City of Temecula reviewand approval. (see attachments 4, 5, 6, and 7). On February 2, 1998 the City of Temecula Planning Commission approved revisions to Newland's Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24182 (VTM 24182) and confirmed the continued presence of the intedm detention facility with Condition 27 stating that "... the basin or an equivalent facility shall remain in place until such time that upstream drainage facilities are constructed..." ( see attachment 8). In conclusion, 'and in our opiniofl evidenced by the aforementioned approvals, Newland is in compliance with all development criteria and conditions particularly as they relate to flooding or drainage issues at Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79. Should you have any questions regarding this subject, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, THE KEITH COMPANIES, INC. Richard T. Robotta, P.E. President-Inland Empire Division RTR:ml Enclosures cc: Mr. James Delhamer APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council a USan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services nuary 8, 2002 SUBJECT: Selection of City Council Committee Assignments RECOMMENDATION: 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: Commission Liaison (One Member) Community Services Commission Old Town Local Review Board Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee Planning Commission Public/Traffic Safety Commission Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Advisory Committees: ,Advisory Committees (Two Members) Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee Finance Committee Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee Library Task Force Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee Public Works/Facilities Committee Agenda Reports/Committee Assignments 2002 1 3. Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following external committees: Representative Assi.qnments (External Organizations) City of Murrieta Liaison County General Plan Update Committee - RCIP (attend meetings) French Valley Airport Committee League of Calif Congress - 2002 Voting Delegates Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee (attend meetings) Murrieta Creek Advisory Board National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2002 Voting Delegate Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Transit Agency Representative Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors Trails Master Plan Development Committee WRCOG Representative Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Council Subcommittees: Council Subcommittees Animal Shelter Subcommittee Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee City's General Plan Update Committee Development Overlay Subcommittee Electrical Needs Ad Hoc Subcommittee Homeless Programs & Services Subcommittee Lennar Project Subcommittee Rancho Community Church Subcommittee Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee SAF-T NET Subcommittee Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee Water Park Subcommittee Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Committee 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. These members will serve through Calendar Year 2002. Attached for your convenience is a list of the Committee Assignments for 2001. ATDACHMENTS: 2001 Committee Assignments List Agenda Reports/Committee Assignments 2002 2 TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL 2001 Committee Assiqnments Last Change at Meeting of 11/27/01 Commission Liaison (One Member) Community Services Commission Old Town Local Review Board Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee Planning Commission Public/Traffic Safety Commission Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Stone Pratt Roberts Naggar Roberts Roberts, Comerchero Advisory Committees (Two Members) Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee * Finance Committee * Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee * Library Task Force Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee Public Works/Facilities Committee * * These meetings must be noticed at least 72 hours in advance. Naggar, Stone Roberts, Comerchero Naggar, Stone Roberts, Naggar Roberts, Stone Comerohero, Pratt Roberts, Stone Representative Assiqnments (External Organizations) City of Murrieta Liaison County General Plan Update Committee - RCIP (attend meetings) French Valley Airport Committee League of Calif Congress - Voting Delegates Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee (attend meetings) Murrieta Creek Advisory Board National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2001 Voting Delegate Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Transit Agency Representative State Lobbyist Ad Hoc Advisory Group Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors Trails Master Plan Development Committee WRCOG Representative Council Subcommittees Animal Shelter Subcommittee Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee City's General Plan Update Committee (To be deleted upon formation Of the General Plan Steering Committee) Development Overlay Subcommittee Electrical Needs Ad Hoc Subcommittee Homeless Programs & Services Subcommittee Lennar Project Subcommittee Rancho Community Church Subcommittee (Naggar alternate) Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee SAF-T NET Subcommittee (also Connerton) Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee Water Park Subcommittee Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Committee Lists\City Council Committee Assignments for 2001 Comerchero, Roberts Comemhero Naggar, Pratt Comemhero, (Alternate Roberts) Naggar Pratt, (Alternate Stone) Comerchero, (Alternate Roberts) Naggar Roberts, (Alternate Comemhero) Comemhero, (Alternate Pratt) Naggar, Stone Roberts Naggar Roberts Naggar, Roberts Comerchero, Roberts Comerchero, Naggar Comemhero, Naggar Comerchero, Naggar Naggar, Pratt Roberts, Pratt Roberts Roberts, Comerchero Stone Stone, Comerchero Comerchero, Stone Naggar, Comerchero Naggar, Roberts ITEM 15 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 8, 2002 Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointments PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: Appoint two applicants to serve on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for full three-year terms through October 10, 2004. BACKGROUN D: The terms of Commissioner Maryann Edwards and Commissioner Darryl Connerton expired on October 10, 2002. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling a Commission vacancy by advertising the opening in two different local publications. When the deadline was reached for receiving applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Roberts and Councilmember Comerchero for review and recommendation. Mayor Roberts has recommended the reappointment of Commissioner Connerton and the appointment of Mark Wedel. Councilmember Comerchero has recommended the reappointment of Commissioner Connerton and the appointment of Don Jones. All applicants are registered voters and live within the city limits of Temecula. These terms are through October 10, 2004. Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of December 18, 2001. ATTACHMENTS: Eighteen (18) Copies of Applications for Appointment. Agenda Reports/Appointment to Traffic Commission 1 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Apphcatlon For orooer cohsideratiori~ roi must c~irreiitl~ · C'it'fof Tem6c~iia and ~i Registered' V~i~r in thi~ Ciiy'of'T~rfie~ii~' .. · . ' ,, . · ., '.' /', ,. ~, ::, .... , , ,/,. . · .:'.¥ :,:: , Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services'~' Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident .b'. ~.,q~'. Are you a City Registered Voter? NAME: /,,~zx.,t"5'S~' ADDRESS: ~//~,,,~c~'.~ ~. PHONE: ~'/?~ DAYTIME ~, -- OCCUPATION: EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: . ~'~.,4'¥'~.'~.-~ L~.'¢...~'~-.J.~ -- -- /' " ~~;~,¢~/ / ~, / ~"~-, , ~ [~~'/~ I EMPLOYER~DDRESS..~ ~/1~ E-MAIL I Educational Backgroun~Degr~es: List any City or County Board, Commi~ee or Commission on which you have sewed and the year(s) of --se~ice: ~o~ List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to se~e on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessa~.) I understand_ that_ any or a~inforrn.ati.on. - on this form may be ~crifiedo ! consent to the release of thzs mformati~n for pubhc mfoa,xzation purposes. Signature: ~ ' ~--~/ ~ ~ Date: / Please ret~m to; C/tV Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Ma# to; P.O. Box 9033, Temecu]a, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE To Whom It May Concern: I am right for the position because I want to make Temecula the safest city in the nation. ! am a new resident and therefore have seen some areas in need of immediate attention. I promise to honor and serve the city and represent it well by working together with all factions as a team member should I be chosen for this position. Sincerely, Vemessa Airman City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Fgr proper cons~derahon; yofi must currently fie a res'!dent,of the, city of Temecula and fi R~gist~red V0ier in th'~'of Teniecui,i - Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services XX Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ? Are you a City Registered Voter? Y e s NAME: DARRELL L. CONNERTON ADDRESS: 31618 Corte Rosario DAYTIME PHONE: 693-1 994 EMPLOYER NAME: DLC CONSULTTNG OCCUPATION: CONSULTANT Temeculat CA 92592 EVENING PHONE: 693-9103 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 31 61 8 Co rte Rosa ri o E.MAIL d l c37@aol .corn Educational Background/Degrees: High School, Schools associated with const'ruction I hold a California Contractors "B" License List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of se~ice: Chairmen, Lincoln Club of Southwest Riverside County, Presently Treasurer, Republican Central Committee, Riverside County, Member of The State Republican Central Committee List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community se~ice): International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) American Society of Professional Estimators (ASPE) State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I wish to continue to serve on the Public Traffic Safety Commission to continue to help solve some of the existing traffic problems and through forward planning, possibly make recommendations to minimize future problems. I feel I am qualified because of problem solving methods used during my construction ex~e r i ence.. . I understand, th.~/. ~ny or all ,nformation/>O~ th,s form may be verified. I consent to the release of th~s/i~f~rn~a~o~ j_l~ub~tic/~orrnation purposes. Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OFt) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application For: pr'bv~r cohsideration; y6~'must Oiri-ently be ~Y~ide~i'.oi'th'~ ' ' :~.C~IV~,~ City of Tem~cula and a Re~ist~r~dTVoier in thc Cit;y:o, f TemeCuia' ':~C'~ Please Check One: Gj.j.~ CL~.~$ __ Planning __ Community Services '~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~ ~ Are you a City Registered Voter? "¢~5 NAME: ~'-¢ ~'-~-~' ~(.-~G',~ ~ OCCUPATION: ~¢~'~1 ADDRESS: ~t~3 C~L'~ ~1 l~~ov~ DAYTIME PHONE:(~O~) ~ ~' ~5 O0 EVENING PHONE:L~ o EMPLOYER ADDRESS: ~ ~,~c~ I~O E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: ~-/a,~C~O~i:~. ('-¥~i,~-~ 1~'"/i List any City or County Board, Commi~ee or Commission on which you have se~ed and the year(s) of se~ice: List any organizations~to which you belong (p. mfessional, technical, community service): ¢ ~,¢' ~, :~ ~ ,hi~ ~o~ &V~ ~ ~ou%e,ew ~ou .e ,u~,~o, &~ ,o~,a.' State wny y~ wisn [o serve on C~ ' ~ I~'~ T ~eLo~ . ~ Oc ~ Please be specific.(You may aEach a separate sheet of paper if necessaw.) I understand, th.a/~ny o.r ~T~form.ati.on on th!s form may be verified. I consent to the r~lease of thls l~/%atl~ f.~pubhc mformahon purposes. · Signature: ~.k.~ ~/~_~ Date: ~ '-''~ ~-O I__ Please return to: City CTerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE Scott Eggum 41833 Carleton Way Temecula, California 92590 City of Temecula: I have been a resident of Temecula for 21 years. I have seen the city grow from a small town to a maturing city with many challenges ahead. The traffic in the city has increased dramatically over the past 5-10 years. ! have experienced the traffic problems and have watched as the city has solved many of its traffic situations. I believe the City of Temecula has done a great job and I look forward to being a pan of the solution. As an employee of Rancho California Water District, I have been involved in traffic control and safety issues for the past 10 years. My job requires many safety issues to be addressed, particularly fire suppression and prevention. I am currently first response emergency call out Team Leader for one of four teams. My job requires blue print and map interpretation and an understanding of engineering practices. I enjoy my job and look forward to making improvements at work sites and different facilities. I believe my long standing in the community and my experience from the Water District makes me an excellent choice to serve on the Traffic & Safety Commission of the City of Temecula. Sincerely, ~ Scott Eggum City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application FOr: PrOper c'onsiderationi'yi~u must cdrreilt,l,3~, be~:,~egide'at:of!~e: ~ . 'il ' i~itS; of Tem6ciila and 'fi'R'i~t~iSt~r'ed:V'0i~r Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 'c<~' ~ Public Traffic Safety Are you a City Registered Voter? ,~'~,~ DAYTIME PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: (~0~),) ~_~ 0~/2~' EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Commi~ee or Commission on which you have se~ed and the year(s) of se~ice: - ' ' List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, communi~ se~ice): State why you wish to se~e on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessa~.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Szgnatur ,e~~- / ~'~~~-f~~ Date: /-~' ~- ~// PIeaso roturn ~ erk'sO#loe, 43200 Business Park Dnvo (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temeoula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 wvvw.cityoftemecula org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application For proper conside~tion, you must currently be a re'~ident of the City of Temecula ald a Registersd Voter in the City o~ Temecula Please Check One: __ Planning ~ Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 1.5 Are you a City Registered Voter? yes NAME: Mark Garcie ADDRESS: 40529 Calle Medusa Temecula Ca 92591 OCCUPATION: ~ire CapTain DAYTIME PHONE: 619-545-6679 (Fire Station) EMPLOYER NAME: Federal Fire Department EVENING PHONE: 909-308-1347 San Diego EMPLOYER ADDRESS: Bldg. 28 Pacific Hwy San Diego ca 92138-1226 E-MAIL mardrjc@ifpa911.org Educational Background/Degrees: CSFM Firefighter/EMT, Fire officer, Fire intmctor Fire management List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Involved Jn local government & politics within the city of Downey for 5 years, including running for political office. List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): International Asso.of Firefighters international Firefighters & Police Officers Asso. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) Based on my career back ground in professional public safety (firefighter), and experience as a fire captain 9directing and managing emergency services and funds), including integrated working conditions with police agencies, I feel that I can bdng knowedge and understand of both the views of professional emergency sedvce members and the general (taxpaying-voting) public, as well as be able to understand both the labor and management views on vadous issues. I understand that any o~all infor~}'iation ~,~ this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public info rmat~,~,~p/~os~./ /// Please/r/~u1~- City Clerk'. s Office, 43200 Business Park Ddve (909) 694-6444 (OR) /' / MaiJto: P.OBoxg033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ~ Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application Forp~op(~r ¢o'nsideration; yo'~"mf~st cfir~i~tly be'~;r~iaer~i;Oftlii~ ;' k q city of Ti~me. cUla a~d fi ReCJst~r:e.d V~ii~r in. i~h'6'.~it~-of'T~emegi~la- :,:, :" Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services × Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 9 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: Jama.~ F.. fJim) Horn ADDRESS: 31467 Sonoma Lane OCCUPATION: Retired USG/Consultant DAYTIME PHONE: 694-0291 EMPLOYER NAME: Self EVENING PHONE: 694-0291 EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAIL EducationaI Background/Degrees: Masters Studies (not completed) Public Admin. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Crohn's Research Foundation, State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Pleasebespecific.(YoumayaRachaseparatesheetofpaperifnecessaw.) Z want to serve on this commission because I can make a valuable constribution to this community. I am service and people oriented, and have a concern for the community and its people. I canre and I work to get things done. I understand, th. at ar~y~or all information on this fo~m may be verified. I consent to the release of th,s Inborn. for¢~tion purposes. Please r~rn to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) ~ ; Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application l~or proper cohsideration; y6~J 'mU~t chrr~ht!Y be ~ ~:~'ident of'the ;:1 City o~ Temecula and a Registe'r'ed'v~?er inthe City of'TemeChlh ~ -' Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services / Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident / ! Are you a City Registered Voter? NAME: ~ ~'~% OCCUPATION: ADDRESS: '~XC~,-~[ ~_.~/t~l~.lO ~(~ T~~ DAYTIME PHONE: ~-~ ~ EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: ~O~/~ ~~ ~ ~/~ EMPLOYER ADDRESS: T~dc~cn. ~ ~2 s-5o E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this fo~m may be verified. I consent to the release of this info~n~on for public information purposes. Signature://~ff.~ff'~ Date: //'~.~-0,/ P/ease re~ur~o: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE Don Jones Public Traffic Safety Commission Application (cont.) I have always been interested in public service. As my application highlights, my college education was centered on public administration. I have been very involved with local high school volunteer projects, including leading a parent task force that rose in excess of $100,000.00 towards the completion of Puma Stadium at Chaparral High School. I currently serve as the president of the Chaparral High School Education Foundation, which is a non-profit foundation set up to raise funds for scholarships and special student projects. This past November 1 ran for a seat on the governing board of the Temecula Valley Unified School District. While my effort was unsuccessful, I am proud to have earned the endorsement of both the Temecula Valley Teachers Association as well as that of The Californian. My family and I have been residents of Temecula for nearly 11 years and residents of the greater Temecula Valley for over 16 years. 1 am keenly aware of the issues that confront traffic safety and am eager to serve in a capacity that allows me to put my talents to use and help mitigate some of the challenges. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoffemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application .'. ;; 1.Fo.r, prol~rconsideration,.yOumu~c~l~b~reSldentOftl~:~?:i:' . .. *' 'cItyofTernecuJa ~n? a Re~ist~ V~rln:the C~'y?fTeme~.. I~' ';~' : :" '[ Please Check One: ~'-~Planning ~'--'~ Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident _--12__ Are you a City Registered Voter? yes NAME: ROBERT J. LOPSHIRE OCCUPATION: SALES & MARKETING ADDRE~: 27419 SENNA CT. TEMECCULA, CA 92591 DAYTIME PHONE: 699-9040 EMPLOYER NAME: NA EVENING PHONE: NA EMPLOYER ADDRESS: NA E-MAIL NA Educational Background/Degrees: SEE ENCLOSURE List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: SEE ENCLOSURE List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): SEE ENCLOSURE State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) SEE ENCLOSURE I understand that any or all infor .rnation on this form may be vedfled. I consent to the release of this information for public informat on-I~rJ3OS~. Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694.-6444 (OR,) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline Name: Robert J. Lopshire Address: 27419 Senna Ct. Temecula, CA 92591 Phone: 909-699-9040 Years resident of Temecula: 12 years Occupation: Sales and Marketing 20yrs. Educational Background/Degrees: Bachelor of Science Business Marketing - CSULB 1981 Associate of Arts Liberal Arts - OCC 1977 Community Service: Temecula Valley Council PTA Vice President - Legislation 2001 to present Vice President - Community Concerns 1999-01 Temecula Chamber of Commerce - PTA Representative 1999-01 TVUSD Even Start - PTA Representative 1999-01 TVUSD Healthy Start - PTA Representative 1999-01 Nicolas Valley Elementary PTA Legislative Chairman 1999 - present I s~ Vice President 1998 - 99 President 1996-1998 Make-A-Wish Foundation, Orange County Chapter Parent Advisory Committee 2000 Temecola Valley Unified School District Traffic Committee 2000 - 01 Dress Code Committee 1999 Temecula Valley National Little League Assistant Coach 2001 Temecula Valley Soccer Association Assistant Coach 1997 West Coast Spring Manufacturers Association Associate Board Member 1998 Personal Statement: I have lived in Temecula for twelve years and ! feel ] know the cities strengths and weaknesses fairly well. With my personal and professional background ! believe 1 have the leadership and discernment to advise the city council on the tough decisions that need to be made over the course of the next several years. I have addressed the city council, planning, and the traffic commission on numerous occasions over the years. I rallied the cities support to pay 1/3 of the cost for a sidewalk for the children of Nicolas Valley Elementary School. I have supplied local newspapers information of unsafe situations around Temecula. I have organized lectures in the community for parents who have children with ADHD and special needs. I have also organized speakers to address the mode of operation of child molesters and how to keep our children safe. Recently, I presented the school board with the idea of naming our latest elementary school after an early pioneer of Temecula, Isabel Barnett. I have been married to my wife Christie for sixteen years and have fathered five children. My convictions are selfish in nature, because I want Temecula to remain safe not only for all our citizens, but for my children's children as well. Sincerely,, Robert J. Lopshire City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Applicotion For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident _.J_l ~-~--_ Are you a City Registered Voter? O~,M~ ..o.~: _~_9_9_ :_~ ~ 9~ ~ ....... EW.,N~ .HO.~= ~_~5_ :__~_7_~_:_1 ~_~_~ EMPLOYER NAME: __~_~_~~ ~~ .......................... EMPLOYER ADDRESS: _~_~_~_~__~ - ~-~i~-Q~ ~32~_~_~6_~_~__~_~A~, E-MAIL ~J~_g_~ g~ ~ & Q~_~_~ ........................... List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (Yo, u may at[ach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) /--,',,z, I understand that ~~mation on this form may be verified. I consent to the release ~ this info~ation for Signature: ~ ~____~ ~ Date' / / ~ / --~ / Please return to: Ci~ Cle~'s Offi~, 43200 Business Pa~ Drive (909) 694-~44 (OR) Mair to: P.O. Box 9033, ~emecula. CA 92589-9033 PJease be aware of the adve~i~d deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftem ecula.org (909) 694-6444 RECEIVED / SEP 2 1 2001 CITY CLERKS DEPT. Commission Appointment Application For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula aid a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula Please Check One: ~'~ Planning ~-~ Community Services ~-~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 8 Are you a City Registered Voter?. NAME: Carole L. Musgrove ADDRESS: 32010 Via Cordoba, Temecula CA 92592 OCCUPATION: Retired Deputy Shedff (S.D) DAYTIME PHONE: 909 695-2660 EMPLOYER NAME: N/A EVENING PHONE: Same EMPLOYER ADDRESS: N/A E-MAIL cmusgrove @ nctimes.net Educational Background/Degrees: San Diego County Deputy Sheriff for 11 years, attended basic and intermediate traffic course and DUI training, worked patrol for 6-1/2 years. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: None. List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Leader of Girl Scout Brownie troop 607, Temecula. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessaPJ.) Since retiring in 1999, I have had an interest in traffic and safety related issues concerning Temecula. I have lived on Via Cordoba since 1993, and have been a witness to the traffic problems on that street, as well as other areas of Temecula. My schedule is flexible and I choose not to hold down a full time job so that I am available for my two daughters, one Jn first and one in second grade. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public inforrnati~/: purpq....ses. ~/']~/,,V'.y~¢~¢_ Signature: ~//.~.~ ~ Date: C~ [C/ . (~[ Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Ddve (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Comm ssmn App Ofh t n Application Jl Fpr proper cpi~s,deratiorii yqu ~.?t e, drrent!y be ~,r'eSide.'nLof ~th~ '. · )1 City of TemecUla anti a Rel~iste'ri~d'Vo!~r in th~ Cit~, orTeme 6ia : 1 Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident \ (¢ ~ Public Traffic Safety . . Are you a City Registered Voter? V~ NAME: ~-"~.- ~/~ I'"LC'.-~~' OCCUPATION: '~,~=="~ ADDRESS:~C~t-'( (~t&H40 ~"_¢d-&~D-.~ '~:¢..~::::3; DAYTIME PHONE: I~ ~.'/t~'11,~-'1',~.;~..,~, EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: O...4~L~t~'OCJ4~A ~¢,¢,M,.~J¢,'~' ~-x-f'&CH_- EMPLOYER ADDRESS: ~e,,.T_-.c, f4S, ~,.E./ J--~ ~i',,1G~-r,~ E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: ~-t.~ (7.r.~L~ _ .j~5-5'o6~ ~,--E. ~--~-6 ~ List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be spe.cific, fYou ~a¥ attach a sep..,arate sheet of pa(~er if necessary.) . I urffierstand that any or all in'formation on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this in~ormati/~n for public information purposes. /~ /Y Signature: )%' ~a~"-~'~ Date: }~_/t o t~i Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula Please Che~k One: __ Planning __ Communi~j Services ~ Public Tr~ic Salty Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident / 2 _ Are you a City Registered Voter? ...~" J' ADDRESS: ~/~ DAYTIME PHONE: OCCUPATION: AOe~/~.~/ /'~"//Y,'~//('/'/g~"'~' EVENING PHONE: Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I uneem~nd that any or all info~afion on ~is fo~ may ~ vedfi~, I consent to fie relea~ of ~is info~ation for public Informa~on pu~, Please return to: Ci~ Cle~'s Offi~, 43200 Business Pa~ Ddve (909) 6~d~d (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box ~33, Teme~la, CA 92~9-9033 Please ~ aware of ~e adve~s~ deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 For proper consideration you must currently be a resident of the I City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula I P/ease Check One: [~-'~Planning __ Community Services ~Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident__~__~___ Are you a City Registered Voter?~ Educational Background/Degrees: ~,, List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which y2u belong (professional, technical, comm, unity service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessa.ry.) · ~ '/ understand that any or all information on,is form ~a~ be vexed. I consent to the release of this information for Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, ~A 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advedised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Serv!ces --g/ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ./ Are you a City Registered Voter? ~'~ NAME: ~"~,~-,e,'~Z D ,,f"c','~'~'/~--/(~' OCCUPATION: ADDRESS: .,~z/~, ~ 5- /:.// ~ A/ Z. ,~I A/ ~ /:.= ~ ~,,~ . ,. /'--~,,~7 ~' ~ Z//. DAYTIME PHONE:/ EMPLOYER NAME: EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: j~e ~ ~ r~ ,r ~ ~ ~ ~ List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. S,gnature..,/L~ff ~.__ ~ _ -- . .... · · ,~.~ .'/ ~-~-'~ · Date' //- ~ '7- ~ £ Please return to: ~ity Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE 44065 Highlander Dr. · Temecula, California 92592 · (909) 699-6855 E-Mail: peninhand2u @yahoo.corn Honorable Members of the Temecula City Council: My application for appointment to the Public Traffic Safety Commission is attached. As you can see from the information provided below, I am a retired lawyer with an extensive background in public safety. Since my retirement in 1989, I have limited my involvement in matters of the law to the occasional consultation, and have focused primarily on writing and playing golf. I have completed one novel and have started several others; and while I find this activity personally rewarding, the desire to be of some service to the public has remained a strong drive within me. Upon moving to Temecula in November, 2000 my wife and I noted the exceptionally positive spirit in the City as well as the competence of its management. This is a rare and inspiring thing, and I have thought on occasion that if opportunity presented, I would like to contribute in some way to such an organization. I believe that an appointment to the Public Traffic Safety Commission would fulfill that desire, and at the same time allow the City to benefit from my many years of experience in the justice system of California. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND High School: Central Union High School in E1 Centro, California in 1959. College: Imperial Valley College 1959 to 1960 San Diego State University 1960 to 1963 (Business Management) San Diego City College 1963 (Sheriff's Training Academy) California Probation Officer's Academy 1964 University of Southern California 1972 & 1973 (Paralegal program) Western State University 1980 to 1982 (Awarded BS in law degree) Western State University 1982 to 1984 (Awarded Juris Doctor degree) EMPLOYMENT: E1 Cajon Police Department (Patrolman) Imperial County Probation Dept. (Probation Officer) (Juvenile Court Traffic Referee) Sutherland & Gerber, P.C. 1963 to 1964 1964 to 1972 1968 to 1972 1972 to 1989 My duties with the Sutherland & Gerber law firm evolved over time from business management to case evaluation, trial preparation and appeal. I developed considerable expertise in accident investigation, highway safety design, crop damage, water law, insurance law, and the appellate and extraordinary writ process. PRIOR PUBLIC SERVICE APPOINTMENTS; Juvenile Court Referee, Imperial County 1968 - 1972 Foreman, Imperial County Grand Jury 1977 - 1978 SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: I have previously belonged to a number of local service and professional organizations in Imperial County, but at the present belong to none in Temecula. CHARACTER REFERENCES: Ronald Bradley 34348 Villa Canada Temecula, California (909) 693 0036 92591 James O'Grady 43926 Larino Ct. Temecula, CA 92591 (909) 303 2232 Lowell F. Sutherland, Esq Neil Gerber, Esq 1443 W. Main Street 1443 W. Main Street E1 Centro, CA 92243 E1 Centro, CA 92243 (760) 353 4444 (760) 353 4444 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityottemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application ~gr.pr~p~r consideration; y6u must currently be ~,;r~er~]de~i °f~th'e'' City of Tem~cula and a RegistVred Voter in. .th~ City of Temecfija Please Check One: __ Planning __ Community Services ~L/ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~'~- Are you a City Registered Voter? ~' OCCUP^T.O.: ADDRESS: .~/~0~ C.~/~t~/ t"~'"~/-~ DAYTIME PHONE: ~'~ -~- ~ EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: '~--~/~-~- '~'-~/~-7~ g/'~jd~ EMPLOYER ADDRESS:-~-~ ~'~'~-4¢~ G. ~ /~? E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: '-~. ~'~.~, ~'. /'5- y List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organization~ to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Please rett~n to: City Clerks Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (0~) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE November 29, 2001 City Clerk City of Ternecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA. 92589-9033 Re: Application to Public / Traffic Safety Commission My family first visited Temecula Valley in the mid seventies. On our many trips bom Phoenix to Los Angeles, we would always take the long route to visit this beautiful valley. We remember when the area was known as Rancho California and traffic was directed by white gloved traffic managers! We moved to Southern California in the early eighties, and because I was in the wine indusuy, Temecula became a favorite destination. Regretfully, my travel demands required that I live closer to an airport, so we move first to Anaheim and then Corona. In the spring of 1999, when ] established my own business, we relocated to Temecula and are proud to finally call Temecula our home. In fact, this year I was the first Temecula citizen to proudly fly the City of Temecula Flag at my home~ (see The Californian, August 29, 2000, and The Press Enterprise, August 30, 2000). I have seen the city grow over 25+ years, and my goal with this application is to be an active citizen in Temecula's future. I believe that Temecula has challenges that only active participation by its citizens can address, and working together, solve. The safety of its citizens is the number one responsibility of any government, not just for its current population, but the safety of future citizens as well. That requires effective planning, forecasting, budgeting and an open mind for change. All of which I have had in my management positions with Inglenook, Robert Mondavi, Trefethen and Lockwood Wineries. I bring maturity, (I am 51 years old) and real life experiences f~om living in larger cities and extensive travel. I offer commitment and enthusiasm to the commission and City of Temecula. I want to be an active participant in the City of Temecula; this is our home and our future. Sincerely, (909) 587-2675 198 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application ' l;;~.r' proper consideration'; yb'~i'must currently be ~Y~'idehi,of'the ~.. (~ty of Temecula and a Registered Voter in th6 City of TemeChla Please Check One: Planning __ Community Services /~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~, Are you a City Registered Voter? tf;~ NAME: ~ ~ V.,. ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE: '-/G6 GO~ 3,"f3~ EVENING PHONE: q0~ (¢<[~ z,l¢Ot'l' EMPLOYER NAME: T,.c5~¢ i'H-,,~.~t,4A~..£U"~CC, L. ~; EMPLOYER ADDRESS: Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which, you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this~inforn~a.ti~n for public information purposes. Signature:[~'~I.-~{~/~[)~X,._\A,~(_~¢,_ Date: ~.'T ~--P Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE 27 September 2001 City Clerk City of Temecula Temecula, California Dear Sirs and Madams, Attached please find my application.. l am interested in serving on the City of Temecula's Traffic Commission. ! have been at Commission meetings on three different occasions in lhe past year and have witnessed a variety of issues being brought before the Commission. The experience showed me three areas where I could make a significant contribution: l am a good teacher. Much of the citizen frustration I have witnessed at Traffic Commission meetings has its origins in the fact that the current Commission members are not necessarily always good teachers. They do not effectively teach the citizenry the rules and restraints within which the Commission must operate. Education would go a long way to mitigate citizen frustration. I am knowledgeable about the Vehicle Code. One reason, ] suspect, that the Commission does not effectively educate is because it is not necessarily well educated in this regard itself. A strong background makes for strong teaching. Strong teaching makes for good relationships. 3. I am a compassionate listener. Lislening, hearing, and then teaching are all essential to effective communication and must occur in that order. Listening is my strong suit. I am energized and fresh. It is clear that not all Commission members currently possess the enthusiasm that I'm sure they had when first appointed. Those qualities are essential if one is to serve effectively. 5. ] am a good communicator. Simply ask any of the members of the Commission in front of whom I've appeared. Sincerely, Mark K. Wedel, MD, JD 41522 Temeku Drive Temecula, Ca 92591 CURRICULUM VITAE MARK K. WEDEL, MD, JD, FACP, FCCP, FCCM 41522 Temeku Drive Temecula, California 92591 EDUCATION: JD, cum laude, May 1994, Western State University School of Law, San Diego, California. Law Review member, spring 1992; Law Review author, fall, 1993 MD, summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, class rank 2/97, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, 1972 DA, summa cum laude, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, Indiana, 1968 BOARD CERTIFICATION: Board certified in Internal Medicine Board certified in Pulmonary Medicine Board certified in Sleep Disorders Medicine Board certified in Critical Care Medicine 1975 1976 1984 1987 WORK EXPERIENCE: 2001 - present: 1995- 2001: 1987-2001: 1987-1995 1976-1987: -Executive Director, Clinical Development, Isis Pharmaceuticals -Director of Medical Affairs, Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. -Director, Pulmonary Therapeutics, Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. -Consultant, US Department of Justice, Health Care Fraud Division -Attending Intensivist, Division of Chest and Critical Care Medicine, Scripps Clinic & Research Foundation -Medical Director, Medical/Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Green Hospital of the Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation -Head, Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Park-Nicollet Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN; Director, Respiratory Care Services, Methodist Hospital, Minneapolis, MN ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: Author of 29 professional publications, 2 law review articles; member, 12 professional societies; Am Jut Contracts I, 1991; Am Jur Contracts II, 1991; Honors, Legal Bibliography, 1991; Honors, Arbitration, 1993; Honors, Trial Practice, 1994; Member, American Arbitration Association, 1993. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www. cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Applica tion For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City oI Temecula P/ease Check One: Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident I'~_ Are you a City Registered Voter? ,/~ ¢ NAME: "~0oo~o-"~ ~ ~o~c.t~ OCCUPATION: C.:,,~l~l,~-'zce- -~.,~,~e,~' DAYTIMEPHONE: ~ Z G -5-5~ ,~qo ~ ~_/'F EMPLOYER NAME: /~o~c_ _~C. EVENING PHONE: fo? ~'~' ~4)(;~/ EMPLOYER ADDRESS: ~-/'~5~ ~, mo~e,c .,3¢~_ A~US-~ C,3 ~"1 7 o ~ E.MAIL ~bi~l,',t~e\ld¢ ~ ~OL., Co'~ Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for pu bllc ,nformatio;~r~/~s. ),,)// Signature: ~ Y/-~, . Date: ///~o/¢, Pleas .~urn to: City Clerk s Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advedised deadline I wish to serve on the Public Traffic Safety Conm~ission to provide service to my coixanunity and to be afforded an opportunity to become intimately involved in the process of local government in an advisory capacity, which comes without the entrapment of politics. ] seek this position for the sake of service alone. ] do not view it, or seek the position, as a stepping stone into politics. As 1 have stated, it presents a unique opportunity for an %rdinary citizen" to become involved in government. If selected, 1 would not seek a second telTn, but rather yield to other neighbors who have the desire to serve and may of/er unique insight beneficial to our community. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 (wm~i~ia~ ~i~tm~t 4~#itatia~ · Cty of TemecU a and a Reg Ster~d Vot,e?in the City of Temecu a * ~' | t I ~ .... ' ~,:',:.' .-' -~.~ ~ :,.~. ' "~:1 SEP 27 2001 P/ease Check One: C~Y CLERKS DEPT. ~Planning ~--~ Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 1 3 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: ARTHUR E. YORKE OCCUPATION: RETIRED ADDRESS: 30087 Corte San Luis DAYTIME PHONE: _ 6 7 6 =L'ZCL6 EMPLOYER NAME: EVENING PHONE: same EMPLOYER ADDRESS: - E4~AIL aj anart @aol. com Educational Background/Degrees: HIGH SCHOOL List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: OLD TOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE 3 years List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INLAND VALLEY State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verffied. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Signature= ~,~/_..~ ~ ~ ........ Date: ~_~_.~_ _~'_ _~.~ Piease return to: City Clerld~J Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline Public Safety and Traffic I believe that traffic concerns are a vital part of daily life in Temecula. As I drive around town I see opportunities to improve the flow of traffic. With the present world situation, I believe it is imperative that our city has an emergency response plan. Prior to retirement I worked for General Telephone as a Traffic Engineering Supervisor with the responsibilities of sizing inter office trunking, telephone numbers and digital office software databases. While not exactly the same as moving cars around the principles of moving phone calls around the country do have a correlation. I believe I can offer a fresh outlook on the challenge of traffic in this wonderful city of ours.