Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
100802 CC Agenda
In 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 AGENDA TEMECL:LA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE OCTOBER 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 1 '1:00 P.M. 6:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the city Council/Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with City Atto:'ney 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) City of Temecula v. Riverside County (French Valley/Tucalotta Hills Associates); and 2) City of Temecula v. Riverside County (Domenigoni-Barton). 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. 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: Mayor Ron Roberts Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2002-05 Resolution: No. 2002-83 Tiffany and Natalie V;~a Pastor Ed Garcia of Community Christian Fellowship Mayor Pro Tem Stone Comerchero, Ndggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts R:~Agenda\100802 1 PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Fire Prevention Week Proclamation Race for the Cure Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENTS 2 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. ClTY COUNClLREPORTS 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 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 13, 2002; 2.2 Approve the minutes of August 27, 2002. R:~Agenda\100802 2 3 Resolution Approvin.q 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 4 5 6 City Treasurer's Report RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of August 31,2002. Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for John WarnedSantia,qo Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrolo,qy Study - Proiect No. PW02-07 - continued from the meeting of September 24, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 in an amount not to exceed $8,215.00 to the Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. to provide additional design services for the John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District Improvement - Hydrology Study - Project No. PW02-07 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event in Old Town (located at Old Town Front Street, between Moreno Road and Second Street, and other related streets) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA FALL ROD RUN 2002 EVENT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT 7 Authorize Temporary Partial Street Closures for the Race for the Cure Event on October 20, 2002, in the Promenade Mall area (iocated near Marqarita Road, Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Solana Way) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\100802 3 RESOLUTION NO. 02- 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 20, 2002, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT 8 9 10 Parcel Map No. 30468 (located southeast of State Route 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 30468 in conformance with the conditions of approval. Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract for the Pala Road Phase I Improvements - Proiect No. PW99-11 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Accept the Pala Road Phase I Improvements - Project No. PW99-11 - as complete; 9.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 9.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Consideration of ioininq other California Cities in filing an Amicus Curiae Brief in the California Supreme Court in Support of the City of Burbank in the Invocation Case (Rubin v. City of Burbank) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Authorization to join with other California cities in the filing an amicus curiae brief (friend of the court brief) in support of the City of Burbank's position in the case of Rubin v. City of Burbank challenging the content of invocations given at the beginning of City Council meetings and authorize the City Attorney to file the necessary documents with the court. 11 Vandalism Reward for Norm Reeves 9-11 Memorial Monument (placed on the agenda at the request of Councilman Comerchero) RECOMMENDATION: 11,1 Authorize a $2,500.00 matching award for information leading to the arrest of those responsible for vandalizing Norm Reeves 9-11 Memorial Monument; 11.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\100802 4 12 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF A REWARD FUND FOR PERSONS WHO FURNISH INFORMATION LEADING TO THE ARREST AND CONVICTION OF THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VANDALISM TO THE REEVES 9-11 MEMORIAL Resotution of Support for Proposition No. 47 (Placed on the agenda at the request of Mayor Roberts) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING PROPOSITION NO. 47 - THE KINDERGARTEN-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2002 13 Second Readinq of Ordinance No. 02-04 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMF..CULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. R:~Agenda\100802 5 RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:'~Agenda\100802 6 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2002-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2002-09 Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 24, 2002. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OFDIRECTORS'REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, October 22, 2002, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\100802 7 I TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2002-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2002-09 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts, Comerchero PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two {2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 24, 2002. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, October 22, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\100802 8 RECONVENETEMECULA 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. 14 Villa,qes of Temecula General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138), Change of Zone (PA00- 0139), Development Plan (PA00-0140), and Tentative Parcel Map (PA00-0152) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 14.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013, AND 014, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. R:~Agenda\100802 9 15 General 14.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO.02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA00- 0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,014. 14.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL ! OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013, AND 014. 14.5 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- 0186) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0152 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29140 SUBDIVIDING THE SITE 'FROM 3 LOTS INTO 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013, AND 014. Plan Amendment: 2000-2005 HousinR Element (Plannin.q Application No. 99- RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\100802 10 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADOPTING THE 2000-2005 HOUSING ELEMENT (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0186) COUNCIL BUSINESS 16 Development Review Process RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Authorize staff to approve the following recommendations: · Identify, provide training, and implement a method of project tracking; · Create an appointment process for application intake; · Create City CEQA Guidelines to allow for a greater number of exemptions; · Revisit the Development Code's Approval Authority Matrix to possibly allow more projects to be considered at a Director's Hearing as opposed to the Planning Commission. 17 Authorization of additional staff time (requested to be placed on the agenda by Councilman Pratt.) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Provide direction for additional staff time to conduct further research on monorail system. 18 Resolution supportinq California Buildinq Officials RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFFICIALS RECOMMENDATION TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION FOR THE ADOPTION OF A COMBINATION OF BUILDING RELATED CODES 19 Introduction of an Ordinance Amendinq the Uniform Buildinq Code RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: R:~,genda\100802 11 19.2 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODES, 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRARIVE CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WEFARE 20 An Urqency Ordinance amendinq the California Fire Code RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\100802 12 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SE3-1'ING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION, ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE 20.2 Adopt an Urgency Ordinance entitled: URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. 20.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE TIlE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\100802 13 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS © ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 13, 2002 After the Closed Session that convened at 5:30 P.M., the City Council convened in Open Session at 7:01 P.M., on Tuesday, August 13, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmembers: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts Ceuncilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Johnathan Santos, Jr. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Ted Miller of Crossroads. ALLEGIANCE The flag ceremony was presented by Cub Scout Pack No. 301. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Good Neighbor Award - David and Denise Guinn Mayor Roberts presented the Good Neighbor Award to Mr. and Mrs. Guinn, who, in turn, accepted the award and expressed their appreciation to the City Council for its recognition. Safety-T (Rape Crisis Center) On behalf of the City, Mayor Roberts accepted the Circle of Safety Partnership Sponsor Award which was presented by Dr. Francis. My Community - Our Earth Proiect- GIS - John DeGanqe and James Bauman Briefly commenting on this project, GIS Administrator DeGange introduced James Bauman, a 13-year old student at Linfield School, who, in turn, reviewed his project as it relates to the sustainable development study of the Santa Margarita Watershed; noted that his project was selected for exhibition at the World Summit of Sustainable Development in South Africa in September; thanked GIS Administrator DeGange for his support as well as those efforts of the Temecula Valley Museum staff; and presented to the City a poster, reflecting the facts of his project. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Having traveled around the country, Mrs. Patricia Birdsall, 41590 Avenida Barca, commented on a newspaper article from Florida in which the Temecula Film Council was recognized and advised of a traffic camera system used to regulate/change traffic signals from a master control panel. R:\Minutes\081302 1 B. Mr. Chuck Washington, 31205 Kahwea Road, Board Member of the Theatre Foundation and Chairman of the Theatre Foundation Fundraiser, thanked the City Council for its suppod and invited the City Council, staff, and public to the upcoming performance by Fab Four in Old Town and commented on the Foundation's efforts to achieve the one million dollar fundraising goal. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Commenting on the City's continuing efforts to eliminate red light abusers, Councilman Comerchero noted that the Police Department has done an excellent job with regard to the matter but encouraged the imposition of additional enforcement, apprising the public that if red lights are run, fines will be imposed. Having attended Congressman Issa's Transportation Advisory Committee meeting with Mayor Roberts, Councilman Comerchero apprised the public of efforts which could possibly provide half of the necessary funds to construct the Date/Cherry Interchange. Mr. Comerchero relayed his delight with Mrs. Birdsall (former Mayor) attending the meeting. B. Mayor Pr~ Tem Stone as well noted his delight with seeing Mrs. Birdsall. Having attended a Mass Transit Subcommittee meeting with Councilman Pratt, Mayor Pro Tem Stone referenced Mr. Pratt's comprehensive monorail route for the City of Temecula and noted that the matter would be explored in more detail. Advising that the Open Space Subcommittee (comprised of Mayor Pro Tern Stone and Councilman Naggar) had met, Mayor Pro Tern Stone noted that discussions included the creation of an Open Space Acquisition Program, resident involvement, and ways to expedite the acquisition of open space. C. Councilman Naggar echoed his fellow colleagues' comments and, as well, welcomed Mrs. Birdsall to the City Council meeting; concurred with comments made by Mr. Stone with regard to the Open Space Subcommittee meeting; and encouraged the community to join a Neighborhood Watch Program. D. Councilman Pratt welcomed Mrs. Birdsall to the meeting; advised that a public hearing for the Butterfield Stage Corridor has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center and on Thursday, August 29, 2002, at the Murrieta City Council Chamber. With regard to the acquisition of open space, Mr. Pratt suggested considering the property located on Margarita Road at the southeast corner of Solana Way. E. In response to Councilman Pratt's comment, Mayor Roberts clarified that Butterfield Stage Road, in the City's General Plan, has been designated as a City arterial road and that the Riverside County Transportation Committee had unanimously voted to not designate the road as a preferred route. Mayor Roberts encouraged public participation at the upcoming meetings with regard to this matter. R:\Minutes\081302 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 Approval of Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of June 25, 2002. 3 Resolution Approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 02-68 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 June 30, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 2002. 5 City Council Meetinq Schedule - September 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Direct the City Clerk to re-schedule the September 10, 2002 City Council Meeting to September 17, 2002, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. 6 Riverside County Library Contract Amendment No. 5 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve Amendment No. 5 to the agreement to provide library services (additional staff). 6.2 Authorize the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $150,000 to fund the Temecula Library Volunteer Coordinator half-time position and to subsidize funding to maintain the Senior Reference Librarian and Reference Librarian positions for fiscal year 2002-03. R:\Minutes\081302 3 7 Arts Council of Temecula Valley Special Events Community Grant Aqreement RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve a Special Events Community Grant Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Arts Council of Temecula Valley in the amount of $34,000. (Pulled for separate discussion; see page 6.) 8 Review of City Conflict of Interest Code RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CITY'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE · 9 Subdivision Improvement Aqreement and Bonds for TM 29639 Harveston Offsite Improvements -Winchester Road Widening at Mar,qarita Road RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Accept the Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the offsite improvements required of the Harveston Project Developer, Lennar Communities; 9.2 Accept the Subdivision Faithful Ped'ormance and Labor and Materials Bond as security for the improvements and as a source for claims against labor and materials, respectively; 9.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. 10 Temporary Street Closure of Main Street between Old Town Front Street and the Murrieta Creek Brid,qe for the inaugural event Temecula Onstaqe scheduled for August 31, 2002 and Deleqate Authority to Issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND MURRIETA CREEK BRIDGE FOR THE INAUGURAL EVENT TEMECULA ONSTAGE SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 31, 2002 AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC R:\Minutes\081302 4 WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES (Mayor Pro Tem Stone abstained with regard to this item.) EVENTS 11 First Street Extension Environmental Miti,qation - Proiect No. PW01-08 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Reject all bids received on June 6, 2002 for the First Street Extension Environmental Mitigation, Project No. PW01-08. (Mayor Pro Tern Stone abstained with regard to this item.) 12 Award of Construction Contract for the Mercantile Buildinq Seismic Retrofit Proiect, Proiect No. PW01-20 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Award a construction contract for the Mercantile Building Seismic Retrofit Project, Project No. PW01-20 to 2H Construction, Inc. in the amount of $332,467.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 12.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $49,870.05, which is equal to 15% of the contract amount; 12.3 Approve an appropriate in the amount of $155,000.00 from the Redevelopment Agency bond proceeds. (Mayor Pro Tem Stone abstained with regard to this item.) 13 Resolution of Support - AB 415 (Runner) Emer,qency Alert System RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING AB415(RUNNER) WHICH WOULD CREATE A STATEWIDE PLAN TO USE THE EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM AS "AMBER ALERTS" TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF KIDNAPPINGS 14 Contract for Cost of Service (User Fee) Study and Development impact Fee Study recommendation: 14.1 Approve the agreement with Maximus (formerly David M. Griffith & Associates) to conduct a cost of service (user fee) and development impact fee analysis in an amount of $60,000; 14.2 Approve a contingency of 10% in an amount not to exceed $6,000. R:\Minutes\081302 5 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 6 and 8 - 14 (Item No. 7 was pulled for separate discussion; see page 6.) The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Pro Tern Stone who abstained with regard to Item Nos. 10, 11, and 12. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7 PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION 7. Ads Council of Temecula Valley Special Events Community Grant Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve a Special Events Community Grant Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Ads Council of Temecula Valley in the amount of $34,000. Although in full support of the Community Grant Agreement, Mayor Pro Tern Stone requested that the Riverside Philharmonic Orchestra be asked, if available, to perform this year. Realizing that their performance could possibly exceed the requested amount, Mr. Stone requested that additional funds be approved to ensure the performance of the Riverside Philharmonic Orchestra. Concurring with Mayor Pro Tern Stone's comment, Councilman Comerchero suggested to approve the grant agreement in the amount of $34,000 and granting the City Manager the authority to expend an additional $7,500, if necessary, to secure a performance from the Riverside Philharmonic Orchestra. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation and to authorize the City Manager to expend an additional $7,500 to secure, if available, a performance from the Riverside Philharmonic Orchestra. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:34 P M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, the Temecula Public Financing Authority, and the Winchester Hills Financing Authority and, after a shod recess, the City Council Meeting resumed will regular business at 7:42 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 15 Villages of Temecula - General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138); Chanqe of Zone (PA00- 0139); Development Plan (PA00-0140); Tentative Parcel Map No (PA00-0152) (Continued from the meeting of June 25, 2002) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Continue the public hearing to the meeting of September 17, 2002. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Stone moved to continue this public hearing to the City Council meeting of September 17, 2002. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\Minutes\081302 6 COUNCIL BUSINESS 16 Formation of Temecula/Murrieta Subcommittee RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Appoint two members to serve on the joint Temecula/Murrieta Subcommittee. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to appoint Mayor Roberts and Councilman Comerchero to the Temecula/Murrieta Subcommittee. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 17 Presentation and Update on Me,qan's Law RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Receive and file report. For the viewing public, Police Chief Domenoe provided an update as to the progress made by the City and the Police Department in releasing information pursuant to Megan's Law; clarified the information that would be available through the Megan's Law database; advised that the database will be accessible to the public, at the Old Town Storefront, within the next 30 days; thanked and commended the Webmaster as well the GIS Administrator for their efforts associated with this project; and advised that the City currently has 35 sex offenders. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone, Police Chief Domenoe advised that the Department has and will continue to follow the law to the maximum potential; that State Law does not allow the Police Department to complete quarterly reviews of the offenders; and that a sex offender is required to register on a yearly basis for life with the Police Department. Although not representing the Sheriff's Department, City Attorney Thorson concurred with Police Chief Domenoe's comments as to the City's restrictions, by State law, as it relates to the dissemination of information. For Councilman Comerchero, Police Chief Domenoe further clarified the information that will be available through the County database, noting that an individual would not be able to attain the actual address of a sex offender. In response to Councilman Naggar, Police Chief Domenoe noted that once an individual were to obtain information from the database, this information may not be used to harass, annoy, or bother an offender but may be used to educate others about the location of the offender. Councilman Naggar thanked Police Chief Domenoe for the update. Concurring with Police Chief Domenoe's comments as to the use of the information, City Attorney Thorson suggested that anyone who is interested in disseminating information about an offender contact the Attorney General for specifics. Councilman Pratt encouraged those individuals with computers to assist those individuals without computers to ensure the information may disseminated. R:\Minutes\081302 7 Referencing other states' websites, Mr. Rick Reiss, 43602 Modena Drive, relayed his dismay with this State's restrictions to provide more detailed information on the database and, therefore, urged the changing of State law. Councilman Naggar requested the adoption of a resolution, advocating placing the database on the internet in order to make it more readily accessible to the public. Concurring with Councilman Naggar's request, Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested the adoption of a City resolution, appealing to the State to change existing laws, and to forward that resolution to all Riverside County cities through the California League of Cities. City Manager Nelson as well recommended that the resolution be forwarded to local State representatives. Mr. Doug McAllister, 27478 Enterprise Circle, applauded the City on its foresight and effort with regard to the Website and echoed Mr. Reiss' comments to expand the available information. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to receive and file the report. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Councilman Naggar, echoed by City Manager Nelson, thanked the City Council for its support and commended Police Chief Domenoe, Webmaster Comerchero, and GIS Administrator DeGange for their associated efforts. 18 Ninety-Day Emergency Traffic Plan (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilman Pratt) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Oral Presentation by Councilman Pratt. As per written material, Councilman Pratt provided an overview of this item (of record), commenting on his intent to save the lives of Temecula citizens by developing their awareness to obey the traffic laws. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With regard to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson noted that City Council provided direction to certain items but that there were no reportable actions under the Brown Act. R:\Minutes\081302 8 ADJOURNMENT At $:30 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday August 27, 2002, at 6:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Bus[ness Park Drive, Temecu[a, California. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\081302 9 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 27, 2002 After the Closed Session that convened at 5:30 P.M., the City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, August 27, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmembers: Comercherol Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Sarah Cravens. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Chuck Perry of Calvary Chapel of Temecula. ALLEGIANCE The flag ceremony was presented by Councilman Comerchero. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Award of Valor to Gloria Dixon and Lisa Jensen Awards of Valor were presented to Gloria Dixon, Lisa Jensen, and Forrest Turner by Mayor Robeds. Appreciating the recognition, Ms. Dixon commended the City on the emergency services it provides its residents. Certificates of Achievement to the Temecula-Murrieta Soccer Club for attaininq the State Championship Mayor Roberts presented Certificates of Achievement to those soccer players present and advised that for those not present, the certificates would be forwarded. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Mr. Thomas Stultz, 32076 Corte Soledad, apprised the City Council of a health and safety concern with regard to individuals crossing Murrieta Creek and requested that the existing chain link fence on the north side of the Chaparral building be extended. Mayor Roberts noted that the Police Department and the Public Works Department would follow up on his concern. B. Mr. Will Rodgers, 32124 Corte Carmona, addressed the Municipal Utility issue. R:\Minutes\082702 1 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Councilman Naggar encouraged the public to join or start a Neighborhood Watch Program and requested that the Public Traffic Safety Commission evaluate the potential of overseeing and expanding the program. B In order for the residents to be a part of the traffic solution, Councilman Pratt encouraged the residents to share the ride, to obey the traffic laws, and to support public transit. C. In remembrance of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, Mayor Roberts informed the public that the City will be holding a remembrance ceremony at the Duck Pond, at 6:30 P.M.; that at the ceremony, a statue (entitled Singing in the Rain) that has been dedicated by the City's Sister City, Leidschendam-Voorburg, will be unveiled; and that Leidschendam- Voorburg constituents will be in attendance. D. Commenting on the importance of CPR training, Mayor Pro Tem Stone encouraged those individuals interested to be trained to contact the Fire Department for more information. E. Desirous of expanding the Neighborhood Watch Program, Councilman Comerchero commented on the difficulties of individuals volunteering for a leadership position and suggested that information with regard to this program be posted on the City's Website. 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 Approval of Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of July 9, 2002; 2.2 Approve the minutes of July 17, 2002. 3 Resolution Approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:\Minutes\082702 2 4 Appropriation of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Funds RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve expenditure of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Funds and local match funds in the amount of $143,329.00 for the purchase of police equipment. 5 Support of Chanqes to California Meqan's Law RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING CHANGES TO MEGAN'S LAW TO ALLOW FOR GREATER PUBLIC INFORMATION ABOUT REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE RESIDENTS OF CALIFORNIA IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES OF THE STATES OF ARIZONA AND TEXAS (Pulled for separate discussion; see pages 4-5.) 6 License Agreement for the S.A.F.E. Program RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the License Agreement between the City of Temecula and S.A.F.E. Program for use of office space at the Temecula Community Center. 7 Award of Construction Contract for the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2002-2003 -Project No. PW02-04 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Award a construction contract for the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2002-2003 to All American Asphalt in the amount of $169,16900 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 7.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,916.90 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 8 Parcel Map No. 30504 (located north of State Highway 79 South, west of Meadows Parkway, and south of Campanula Way) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 30504 in conformance with the conditions of approval. R:\Minutes\082702 3 9 Right-of-Way Easement for corner cutback at the southeast corner of the intersection of Puiol Street and Sixth Street RECOMMENDATION: ~.1 Accept the corner cutback area at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pujol Street and Sixth Street as described in Exhibit A and shown in Exhibit B. 10 Acquisition Aqreement between the City of Temecula and Swedish American Corporation RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve and execute in substantially the form attached hereto, the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions between the City of Temecula and Swedish American Corporation, a Nevada Corporation, for the acquisition of certain real property in the amount of $58,908.00; 10.2 Direct the City Clerk to record the document; 10.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-74 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT DEEDS OR GRANTS CONVEYING ANY INTEREST IN OR EASEMENT UPON REAL ESTATE AS PERMITTED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27281 MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 4 and 6 - 10 (Item No. 5 was pulled for separate discussion; see pages 4-5.) The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. $ PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION 5. Support of Chanqes to California Meqan's Law RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 02-73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING CHANGES TO MEGAN'S LAW TO ALLOW FOR GREATER PUBLIC INFORMATION ABOUT REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE RESIDENTS OF CALIFORNIA IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES OF THE STATES OF ARIZONA AND TEXAS Reiterating his previously made comments, Mr. Rick Reiss, 43602 Modena Drive, relayed his desires to change State law to ensure easier public access with regard to sex offenders; advised that other States p[ovide on-line access to such information; noted that he has sent R:\Minutes\082702 4 information with regard to his desires to Assemblyman Hollingsworth; and requested that when the County database is made available to the public at the Old Town Storefront Police Station, that extended hours be provided (weekends/evenings). Councilman Naggar echoed Mr. Reiss' request, for extended hours to ensure accessibility of the information to the City's commuters. If the proposed resolution were adopted, City Manager Nelson noted that it would be presented to the Western Riverside Council of Governments as well as the local State legislators and the League of California Cities. Serving on the Public Safety Policing Committee of the League of California Cities, Mayor Rober[s noted that he would present the resolution at the next meeting. Serving on the Executive Committee of the Western Riverside Council of Governments, Councilman Comerchero as well noted that he would present the resolution at the next meeting. MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to adopt the resolution. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:31 P M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and the City Council Meeting resumed will regular business at 7:33 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 11 Planninq Application No. 99-0451 (General Plan Amendment from Open Space to Highway Tourist Commercial) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve the General Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from Open Space to Highway Tourist Commercial; 11.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEME~ULA APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR A LOCATION ON RANCHO HIGHLANDS DRIVE, IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP NO. 944-330-0'19 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0451) Supplemental Material (of record) was submitted to the City Council, es per City Attorney Thorson, reflecting the amendment to Sect[on 3 of the proposed resolution. Reviewing the staff report (of record), Planning Director Ubnoske noted the following: · That staff initiated the General Plan Amendment · That a park and ride would cost approximately $5,000 to $8,000 per parking space, dependent on lighting and landscaping R:\Minutes\082702 5 · That there are no plans to locate a park and ride site at this particular area but that a proposed site, which would accommodate 100-120 parking spaces, has been designated on SR 79 South · That the property of discussion includes 1.4 acres · That owner of the property has been paying commercial assessments · That the language in the Specific Plan refers to an alternative transportation plan which may be a park and ride site or a contribution; that the language of the Plan as it relates to responsibility and timing mechanism is vague · That the condition for a park and ride was in the Specific Plan; that the County 'allowed the map to be recorded; that once the map was recorded, it was difficult to determine a prorated charge of the responsibility for the park and ride site; that the responsibility now appears to fall on this one particular property owner; that the. responsibility should fall on the entire development. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Stone, Councilman Naggar commented on how the Council/Commission Subcommittee derived at the mitigation fee of $15,000, noting the following: · That the County-approved Specific Plan reflected a park and ride site but that no provisions were put in place for site; that the Specific Plan was built prior to City incorporation · That the owner of the property will be the last owner to develop his property in the Specific Plan · That the owner has been paying assessments for commercial property not open space · That the General Plan Amendment would bring the Specific Plan into conformance with the City's General Plan. Councilman Naggar noted that, in his opinion, the other property owners in the Specific Plan should bear the cost of constructing a park and ride site. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone, City Attorney Thorson noted that current zoning on the property is unclear and, therefore, he would recommend to proceed with the suggested action. If the City were to amend the entitlements of the properly, which would, in turn, enrich the value of the property, Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that the City must ensure that the citizens receive their share in way of public transportation (park and ride site) and that more than $15,000 in mitigation fees would be necessary. At this time, Mayor Roberts opened the public hearing. Mr. Anthony Polo, P.O. Box 2497, Temecula, representing the owner of the property of discussion, stated the following: · That the current owner had bought the property in 1998 · That the owner had received a letter from the Planning Department indicating that the property of discussion was zoned for a hotel · That the owner has been paying commercial assessments · That the amendment was initiated by staff and not the property owner. City Attorney Thorson advised that staff had made a decision, based on the ambiguities in the General Plan, that the property of discussion is commercial property. R:\Minutes\082702 6 Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided additional information as to the zoning of this particular parcel. Mr. Polo advised that the owner has voiced no objection to paying the requested mitigation fee of $15,000 for the park and ride site and is aware that most of the existing properties did not contribute to the park and ride site. At this time, Mayor Roberts closed the public hearing. Councilman Pratt noted that the property of discussion is very visible from the freeway and would, therefore, suggest an icon, advertising the City of Temecula. Reiterating that the County had not efficiently developed the Specific Plan, Councilman Comerchero noted that it would not be fair that the owner of this 1.4 acre parcel be left with the responsibility to bear the expense to construct a park and ride site - a requirement that was originally imposed on th.e entire 85-acre Specific Plan. Mr. Comerchero commended the Subcommittee on resolving a difficult situation. Because of the ambiguities in the General Plan, Mayor Pro Tern Stone noted that owner should not be penalized and relayed his support of the Subcommittee's recommendation. MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to support staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. COUNCIL BUSINESS 12 Update on research related to formation of Municipal Utility RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Receive and file this background report. The Electrical Subcommittee members (Councilmembers Naggar & Comerchero) will provide their perspective and recommendations on this information. Councilman Naggar provided an overview of the efforts undertaken, by the Electrical Subcommittee (comprised of Councilman Comerchero and Councilman Naggar), to explore the City's feasibility to form a Municipal Utility, noting the following: That such a formation would not include a power generation station/transmission lines; that it would relate to distribution only · That the Subcommittee is entertaining/evaluating the implementation of a public utility for new construction and new industrial/commercial That the distribution of electricity would provide revenue to the City · That a number of cities are preserving its rights to form a Municipal Utility by creating a Municipal Utility shell. Concurring with Councilman Naggar's comments, Councilman Comerchero confirmed that the Subcommittee is in the exploration stages of this process and noted his concurrence with the formation of a Municipal Utility shell which may be accomplished at no cost and no commitment by the City. R:\Minutes\082702 7 Mr. Robert Lopez, representing Southern California Edison (SCE), 26100 Menifee Road, Romoland, thanked staff for its continued communication with regard to this issue; encouraged the City Council to seek an individual third party to review the study/evaluation of forming a Municipal Utility; and advised that SCE rates are expected to substantially decrease by the end of 2003 because of the collection of debt incurred during the years of 2000/01. In response to comments by the City Council, Mr. Lopez responded as follows: · That the general market continues to be volatile · That the cost of reliability of the system should be considered as should interconnection costs to the City That although it would be SCE's desire to retain its customers, SCE will continue to educate, to assist, and to provide necessary information to the City and its citizens as it relates to the formation/operation of an electrical utility and would be willing to meet with consultants/subcommittee/third party to further address the issues. Councilman Naggar noted that if the City were to form a Municipal Utility, it would have a financial loss to SCE. Mr. Naggar requested that the matter of forming a Municipal Utility shell be agendized for an October City Council meeting to discuss and evaluate along with authorizing the appropriation of monies to hire an independent third party. Although concurring with the overall concept as well as the formation of a Municipal Utility shell, Councilman Comerchero relayed his hesitation, at this point in time, to authorize expenditures of monies to hire an independent third party, suggesting that such authorization be considered after the October meeting. Councilman Naggar relayed his concurrence with Councilman Comerchero's comments. Mayor Roberts relayed his support of forming a Municipal Utility shell but relayed his reluctancy, at this point in time, to authorize expenditure of monies on a feasibility study. Mr. Roberts requested that a copy of the feasibility study from the City of Chino be forwarded to the City Council and that staff follow the progress made by the City of San Marcos with regard to this issue. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to receive and file the report. The motion was seconded by Councilman .Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No comments, CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With regard to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson noted that there were no reportable actions under the Brown Act. R:\Minutes\082702 8 ADJOURNMENT At $:25 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday September 17, 2002, at 7:00 P.M, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Ron Robeds, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\082702 9 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 $1,936,065.69. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 8th day of October, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R2Resos2002_/Resos 02- I STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 02- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of October, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- 2 II 09/18/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01/00/00 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 09/26/02 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 10/08J02 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 192 193 194 210 261 28O 3OO 32O 33O 34O 390 GENERAL FUND RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNFrY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL rMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND REDEVELOPMENT AG ENCY-CIP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS ' SUPPORT SERVICES TCSD DEBT SVC 100 165 190 192 193 194 280 300 320 330 34O GENERAL FUND RDA-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REDEVELOPMENT AG ENCY-ClP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: PREPARED B.~ADA '~O~N K E R~,/~C~C (~J NT IN~/, o'( p EC IA LIST SHAWN NELSON, CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS $ 650,950.26 282,962.89 $ 1,936,065.69 444,642.4O 22,491.52 84,035.95 62.46 19,708.15 462.96 307,033.00 311,818.69 986,42 26,817.24 5,677.96 8,166.05 420~200.00 4,820 35 54,215.50 73.04 627.61 2,0S3.07 953.26 9,327.94 2.169.95 5.700.89 1,653,102.80 282,962.89 $ 1r936r065.69 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING ,~ TRUE AND CORRECT. II apChkLst Final Check List 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor DeecripUon Page: I Amount Paid Check Total 40 9/16/2002 003228 U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL AS TCSD COPS Debt Svc payment 79303 9/12/2002 005365 BALLY VINEYARD & WINERY iN Rfmhmnts;Sister Cities event:9/11/02 79304 9/16/2002 79305 9/18/2002 79306 9/1 6/2002 79307 9/16/2002 005409 ALLEN, MARGARET 79308 9/16/2002 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES 79309 9/18/2002 79310 9/16/2002 79311 9/18/2002 004446 AMERICAN SOClETY OF CIVIL 79312 9/18/2002 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 79313 9/16/2002 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY 79314 9/16/2002 79315 9/16/2002 79316 9/16/2002 004386 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 79317 9/18/2002 004262 B[O-TOX LABORATORIES 79318 9/18/2002 005400 BLOCK, DEBORAH 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRINTI Summer/Fell Softball Awards 004973 ABACHERLI, LINDI TCSD instructor earnings 001916 ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATES 01/02 annual admin CFD 88-12 Credit:Invoice exceeds P.O. agrmnt Reimb:2002 CAM Conf:7/25-29 Excursion bus svc:Brunswick Bowl Excursion bus svc:Skata City 003789 AMERICAN BUSINESS FORMS Certificates of occupancy forms 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI StatewideConf:10/6-9:Hogan/Hazen ASCE membrshp:Clement Jimenez 2 Acosta tamp help PPE 06/31/02 Acosta temp help PPE 06/24/02 . Arreola tamp help PPE 08/31 Info Sys Dept Uniform Shirts 005401 ASHE, KELLY Refund: Level 3 Swim Lessons 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA Membership:Brian Clements 1478114 Radios with headsets for 9/11 Event DUI/Drug/Alcohol Screening Srvcs DUI/Drug/Alcohol Screening Srvcs Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Training 420,200.00 420,200.00 3,576.78 3,576.78 129.84 129.84 410.00 410.00 1,500.00 -500.00 1,000.00 22.00 22.00 320.80 320.80 641.60 199.34 199.34 ,, 760.00 760.00 210.00 210.00 1,182.00 1,182.00 93.60 2,457.60 296,31 296.31 35.00 35.00 44.00 44.00 188.57 188.57 30.80 1,497.70 135.00 135.00 Pe, ge:!. apChkLet Final Check List Page: 2 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79319 9/18/2002 003817 BLUE RIDGE MEDICAL 79320 9/18/2002 003126 BOOMGAARDEN, DENNIS 79321 9/18/2002 005402 BRUMMER, CAROLYN (Continued) Description Amount Paid Paramedic squad supplies TCSD instructor earnings Refund: Toddler Swim Lessons 284.70 518.00 25.00 79322 9/18/2002 004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROUP 7 Task Chaira for City Manager's 79323 9/18/2002 004451 CA AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARM A Fire Alarm Test Sem:10/7-10:Cummin[ Inter Fire Alarm Sem:l 1/5-7:Cumming 79324 9/18/2002 005408 CAL STATE FOSTER PARENT A Refund: Security Deposit MS01-3516 79325 9/18/2002 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES I Insurance policy for police motomycle 79326 9/18/2002 004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT Fingerprints info for new ee recruitmen 79327 9/18/2002 005384 CALIFORNIA BAGEL BAKEF~Y & Refrshmnt:2002 Gift Giving Campaign 79328 9/18/2002 Misc. Welding Supplies: PW 79329 9/18/2002 REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 79330 9/18/2002 Refmhmnts:CETAP Corridor Mtg 9/5 Refrshmnt: Fire Prevention working I 79331 9/18/2002 2 bcoks:Grant writing class 79332 9/18/2002 City Hall canopy cleaning 79333 9/18/2002 Reimb:CACE Annual Sem:9/4-8/02 79334 9/18/2002 005218 COMBE, ROCHELLE Refund: Toddler Swim Lessons 79335 9/18/2002 001193 COMP U $ A INC Misc Computer supplies:info sys Misc Computer supplies:Info sys 79336 9/18/2002 004811 COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPOR 4 Compaq IPaq computem 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 005404 CAMPION, WILLIAM 002534 CATERERS CAFE 005385 CLARK TRAINING CENTER 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA 005410 COLE, TOM 1,777.23 560.00 385.00 100.00 464.00 210.00 209.00 66.18 100.00 43.83 11.88 56.00 45.00 37.73 25.00 188.38 63.96 2,318.78 Check Total 284.70 518.00 25.00 1,777.23 945.00 100.00 464.00 210.00 209.00 66.18 100.00 55.71 56.00 45.00 37.73 25.00 252.34 2,318.78 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 69116/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79337 9/18/2002 005399 COMPTON, LISA (Continued) Description Amount Paid Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Trai~ing 135.00 Check Total 135.00 79338 9/18/2002 005398 CROUCH, BLowY Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Tm 135.00 135.00 79339 9/18/2002 003625 DAVIS, JOHN 79340 9/18/2002 003006 DEVVlTTCUSTOM PAIN;TING TCSD instructor eamings Res imprv prgm:Eckhardt, B. 280,00 1,844.00 280.00 1,844.00 79341 9/18/2002 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI Fuel for city vehicles: PW 814.24 814.24 79342 9/18/2002 79343 9/18/2002 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 002390 EASTERN MUNICIPALWATER E Ebon temp help PPE 09/06/02 TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN Obmann temp help PPE 09/06/02 Martinez temp help PPE 09/06/02 TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN Cammarata temp help PPE 09/06/02 Bragg temp help PPE 09/06/02 Rosa temp help PPE 09/06/02 95366-02 Diego Dr Ldscp meter 2,264.80 2,057.76 1,657.04 1,176.00 1,159.45 943.11 863.10 559.65 484.80 .10,680.91 484.80 79344 9/16/2002 79345 6/16/2002 79346 9/16/2002 79347 9/18/2002 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC 005052 EMCOR SERVICE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 003174 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE Inforum gold upgrade:Pdt Mgt Inforum gold upgrade:Exp Reimb Inforum gold upgrade: Prjt Mgt Inforum gold upgrade:Form setup Hvac repairs:City Hall H.V.A.C. repair @ Children's Museum Jan-Aug Idscp impr:Vineyards May Idscp impr:Rancho Cai Sports Pr Aug Idscp impr: Paseo Park May-Aug Idscp impr:Butterfield Park Aug Idscp impr:Ovefland Aug Idscp impr: Preece & Ynez Aug Idscp impr:Vail Ranch Feb-Sept Idscp impr:Winchester Crk P Aug Idscp impr: P.D.S. Stn 21 May Idscp impr:Winchester Creek Aug Idscp [mpr: Main Line Repairs 1 yr subscription:Firehouse Magazine 1,437.50 1,202.76 937.50 312.50 124.89 65.00 1,521.00 560.00 385.31 375.00 169.91 149.35 134.97 120.00 95.42 75.00 63.66 28.97 3,890.26 189.89 3,649.52 28.97 79348 9/16/2002 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED ( Pre-employment physicals 160.00 160.00 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 79349 ' 9/18/2002 003281 FOREMOST FIRE PROMOTION Public ed materials:Fire prevention 79350 9/18/2O02 79351 9/18/2002 79352 9/18/2002 79353 9/18/2002 79354 9/18/2002 004178 FREEDOM SIGNS 003946 G T ENTERTAINMENT 003531 GATE~VAY 005405 GILLILAND, ROBIN Fac Imp Prog-House of Jerky Deduction: BCSE-404757 Announcer svcs - Summer concert se EE computer purchase prgm:J.Jaime Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Trn 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS Office Supplies: City Manager Office Supplies: TCSD Office Supplies: Bldg&Safety Office Supplies: Fire Stn Office Supplies: Human resoume Office Supplies: Info Sys Office Supplies: Records Mgmt Office Supplies: Eco Devel 79355 9/18/2002 003640 GRAYNER ENGINEERING 79356 9/18/2002 002174 GROUP I PRODUCTIONS 79357 9/18/2002 005386 GUSKY, GRETCHEN 79358 9/18/2002 002372 HARMON, JUDY Consultant Svces: Children's Museum Video Tape:instructions for Pool Equip Refund: Music-Instant Piano TCSD instructor earnings 79359 9/18/2002 001573 INLAND EMPIRETOURISM COU Luncheon:Tourism mtg:10/03 79360 9/18/2002 79361 9/18/2002 79362 9/18/2002 79363 9/18/2002 79364 9/18/2002 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals 003266 IRON MOUNTAIN OFFSITE 005397 JEMISON, CAMELLA 000203 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 005396 JOHNSON, CATHERINE R~cords mgmt microfilm storage unit Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Training Recruitment ad:Principal Engineer Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Training Amount Paid 651.60 2,357.62 -28.00 250.00 1,980.44 135.00 693.86 616.97 569.84 498.73 235.36 204.77 197.27 172.59 2,523.04 1,500.00 25.00 365.60 25.00 228.86 158.75 135.00 82.80 50.00 Check Total 651.60 2,332.62 250.00 1,980.44 135.00 3,189.39 2,523.04 1,500.00 25.00 365.60 25.00 228.86 158.75 135.00 82.80 50.00 Page~ apChkLst 09/18/2082 2:17:01PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79365 9/18/2002 003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO 79366 9/18/2002 000820 KRW&ASSOCIATES 79367 9/18/2002 005407 KAISER, GLENN 79368 9/18/2002 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description Amount Paid Broadcasting svcs for Summer Nights July-Sept Engineering Plan Check Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Training Film/Music Bannem clean/storage Credit:Billed for 60 banners only sent 79369 9/18/2002 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICES Harhngton temp help PPE 09/01/02 B 79370 9/18/2002 79371 9/18/2002 79372 9/18/2002 79373 9/18/2002 79374 9/18/2002 79375 9/18/2002 79376 9/18/2002 79377 9/18/2002 79378 9/18/2002 79379 9/18/2002 79380 9/18/2002 79381 9/18/2002 79382 9/18/2002 000206 KINKOS INC 004413 KLAMATH BAY 001091 KEYSER MARSTON'ASSOCIAT Consulting svcs:CBH review & Analys Stationery paper/misc supplies Various Crime Prevention Supplies: Various Crime Prevention Supplies:Po Various Crime Prevention Supplies:Po 004377 L O LYNCH WELLS & PUMP, IN New C[mulation Pump for Duck Pond 004905 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMOR Aug 02 human resoume legal svcs 004087 LOWE'S 005387 LYNCH, R.A. Misc hardware supplies:TCSD Refund: Aquatics-Lifeguard Tm 004013 M & M REFRIG., HEATING & A/C emerg repair on freezer @ Stn 84 005389 MAHER, JACKIE 004141 MAINTEX Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Tm Various parks custodian supplies 004929 MARK FISHER COMPANY, THE AD DESIGN FOR INLAND EMPIRE V 005390 MARLEY, PATRIClA Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Trn 002693 MATROS, ANDREA TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 500.00 4,500.00 135.00 1,631.55 -263.99 1,080.00 583.13 42.99 748.46 698.45 637.43 4,945.00 384.00 141.94 135.00 150.00 135.00 342.11 659.00 135.00 345.60 Page: 5 Check Total 500.00 4,500.00 135.00 1,367.56 1,080.00 583.13 42.99 2,084.34 4,945.00 384.00 141.94 135.00 150.00 135,00 342.11 659,00 135.00 345,60 Page5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79383 9/18/2002 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS 79384 9/18/2002 79385 9/18/2002 79386 9/18/2002 79387 9/18/2002 79388 9/18/2002 79389 9/18/2002 79390 9/18/2002 79391 9/18/2002 79392 9/18/2002 79393 9/18/2002 79394 9/18/2002 79395 9/18/2002 79396 9/18/2002 79397 9/18/2002 79398 9/18/2002 79399 9/18/2002 794OO 9/18/2002 (Continued) Description Sept Hot Summer Nights Campaign S Reimbursement expense for June ad Reimbumement expense for July ad 004144 MINAGAR&ASSOCIATES, INC. dsgnsvc:intelligenttranssysdeploymr Photo Enfomement Feasibilty Study 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUIP Vail Ranch Park standard grills 001892 MOBILE MODULAR 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 005388 NOLL, KIMBERLY 9/2/02-10/2/02 modular rental:Stn 92 parts & supplies for PW vehicles Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Trn 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS EE computer loan prgm:J. Diaz 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office Supplies for Finance Dept. 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 001619 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER I 002256 P & D CONSULTANTS INC 004520 PAINT CONNECTION, THE 000733 PARTY PZAZZ 002652 PAT & OSCARS RESTAURANT City vehicle maint/mpa[r svcs City vehicle maint/repair svcs AUG:RECRUITMENT ADS:HR AUG TEMP BLDG INSPECTORS:JEN Res Imprv Prgm: Hills 175 Chairs Rental for 9/11 Event Tax, gratuities, delivery charges 004790 PETER D BRANDOW & ASSOCI dsgn svcs:SR 79S Sidewalk Credit:Administrative Charges 000249 PE.I IYCASH Pettycash reimbursement 005075 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPL Uniforms:TCSD Maint Crews 000981 R H F INC repair/maint P.D. radar equipment Amount Paid 2,136.69 375.00 375.00 7,033.00 4,022.00 440.49 777.95 16.14 135.00 1,106.58 64.82 169.64 29.19 918.24 15,359.20 1,495.00 230.79 666.11 9,264.90 -344.15 254.23 285.45 188.23 Check Total 2,886.69 11,055.00 440.49 7'/7.g6 16.14 135.00 1,106.58 64.82 198.83 918.24 15,359.20 1,495.00 230.79 666.11 8,920.75 254.23 285.45 188.23 Pages apChkl-st Final Check List Page: 7 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM City of Temecula · Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 79401 9/18/2002 004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY Ret.w/h pmt#4:Marg. Rd. Imprv:99-01 79402 9/18/2002 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK ASS Oct-Dec bus. prk assoc, dues:Diaz Oct-Dec bus. prk assoc, dues:C.H. 79403 9/18/2002 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH City vehicle detailing services City vehicle detailing svs & fuel usage City vehicle detailing services City vehicle detailing services City vehicle detailing services City vehicle detailing services 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Dupl. Blueprints:Traff Monitor Sys 005383 RANCHO SPRINGS MEDICAL C FY 02/03 SAFE-T Sponsorship 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI Var. Parks equipment rantal PW Maint equipment rentals 000266 RIGHTWAY 9/09-10/06 equip rental - Riverton Pi( 9/09-10/06 equip rental - Veteran's Pk 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RECOF Aug 2002 Aperture cards duplicates 005406 RIVERSIDE CO TRAIN OFF. ASS Grant writing class:G.Adams/J.Neuma 004773 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFFS July 2002 booking fees 001048 ROSAS CANTINA RESTAURAN Refreshments:Dutch Dignitary visit:9 79404 9/18/2002 79405 9/18/2002 79406 9/18/2002 79407 9/18/2002 79408 9/18/2002 79409 9/18/2002 79410 9/18/2002 79411 9/18/2002 79412 9/18/2002 79413 9/18/2002 79414 9/18/2002 79415 9/18/2002 79416 9/18/2002 79417 9/1'8/2002 005393 ROSE, CHERYL 005107 RUSSELL, ELIZABETH 001942 S C SIGNS 005227 SAN DIEGO CO OF THE DA Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Trn Refund:Level 3 Swim Lessons Jul 2002 public ntc signs:City Clerk Aug 2002 public ntc signs:City Clerk Deduction: BCSE-404757 000793 SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO Scantron maint agmnt 10/1/02-9/30/03 003917 SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY Cfd 88-12 reimbursement Amount Paid 9,134.79 1,813.72 1,319.07 121.40 63.56 32.00 30.00 16.00 16.00 190.90 15,000.00 82.98 26.94 70.89 54.39 9.45 60.09 6,844.80 79.62 135.00 25.00 195.00 65.00 25.00 712.00 30,384.21 Check Total 9,134.79 3,132.79 278.98 190.90 15,000.00 109.92 125.28 9.45 60.90 6,844.80 79.62 135.00 25.00 260.00 25.00 712.00 30,384.21 Page~ apChkLst 09/18/2002 2:17:01PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79418 9/18/2002 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 79419 9/18/2002 79420 9/18/2002 79421 9/18/2002 79422 9/18/2002 79423 9/18/2002 79424 9/18/2002 79425 9/18/2002 79426 9/18/2002 79427 9/18/2002 005392 SMART, ERIN 000537 SO CALtF EDISON 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description Recreation class supplies - High Hope Supplies for teen council Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Tm Aug 2-00-397-5059 various mtrs Credit:Late fee on disputed charges various City facilities gas meters Sept 095-167-7907-2 Stn 84 004247 STERICYCLE INC 005391 STONE, SANDRA 000574 SUPERTONER 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL 000305 TARGET STORE 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR(~ Pest control svcs:Stn 84 Pest Control Srvcs: City Hall MEDICAL WASTE COLLECTION Refund:Aquatics-Lifeguard Tm HP Printer St~pplies Aug dsgn svcs:R.C. Bridge Widening Misc. supplies for Sister City Prgm Recreation Supplies for CRC 79428 9/18/2002 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER ~ Luncheon mtg:UCR Chancellor:10/23 79429 9/18/2002 000306 TEMECULAVALLEY PIPE & SU CRC plumbing supplies 79430 9/18/2002 004274 TEMECULAVALLEY SECURITY. Park sites locksmith services 79431 9/18/2002 003862 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR. Sep-Novelevinspection/Sepphone 79432 9/18/2002 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC D.J. services for teen dance:7/27 D.J. services for band jam:8/09/02 Repair JBL monitors @ CRC 79433 9/18/2002 004261 VERiZONCALIFORNIA SEPT XXX-5072 GENERAL USAGE SEPT XXX-1941 GENERAL USAGE 79434 9/18/2002 004200 VERIZON WIRELESS LLC 9/15-12/14/02 Pager svcs:Stone 79435 9/18/2002 0013z~2 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC Various parks maintenance supplies Amount Paid 200.65 82.18 135.00 5,084.76 -20.62 883.90 82.43 80.00 56.00 135.00 194.98 1,748.36 90.47 40.56 30.00 543.79 83.22 840.00 350.00 150.00 100.00 6,300.12 56.06 68.37 410.20 Page: 8 Check Total 282.83 135.00 5,064.14 966.33 136.00 60.43 135.00 194.98 1,748.36 131.03 30.00 543.79 83.22 840.00 600.00 6,356.18 68.37 410.20 Page3 apChkLst 09118/2602 2:17:01PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79436 9/18/2002 79437 9/18/2002 79438 9/18/2002 79439 9/18/2002 79440 9/18/2002 005357 WHILDIN, LAURA 79441 9/18/2002 000570 WIMBERLY, VALERIE 79442 9/18/2002 003607 XPECT FIRST AID 79443 9/18/2002 004211 YEE, FRANK 79444 9/18/2002 000348 ZIGLER, GAlL 003063 WEAVER PACIFIC PUBLICATI Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description AD:Anaheim Convention/Visitors Mag. Summer/Winter Pocket Guide 005394 WERYGO, JOHN Refund:Parking Cit# 45831 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS I NC Citywide Tree Trimming Maint Svcs 004555 WHERE ORANGE COUNTY MA Ad for Where Magazine Refund:Hawaiian Dance Teen Begin Reimb:Permits Plus Tm:3/18-22/02 Reimb:Permits Plus Conf:4/8-12/02 City Hall first aid kit supplies raiss, ck#67834:harddrive data storag Reimb:9/11 Sister Cities ceremony ~ount Paid 9,956.25 6,000.00 325.00 541.50 11,040.00 25.62 420.66 199.40 4.69 120.00 139.27 Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: Page: 9 Check Total 15,956.25 325.00 541.50 11,040.00 25.62 620.06 4.69 120.00 139.27 650,950.26 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List 06/26/2002 3:01:51PM City o! Temecrda Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid 79446 9/26/2002 79447 9/26/2002 79448 9/26/2002 79449 9/26/2002 79450 9/26/2002 004148 AT&T 000745 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 004918 AW DIRECTINC 005450 ABARCA, JORGE 003304 ADAMS ADVERTISING INC 41 9/26/2002 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) Employees fed pr taxes 42 9/26/2002 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) Employees state pr taxes 43 9/26/2002 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREME Employees state retirement Long distance svcs: P.D. Cellular phone svcs:police Medic sqd supplies:Fire Refund: Security Deposit rental of billboard in Old Town Temecu Billboard rental:Old Town Temecula Old Town Billboard Change Outs 79451 9/26/2002 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES Excursion bus svc:Sistar City Exct~rsion bus svc: Brunswick Bowl 79452 9/26/2002 005037 AMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTH I Aug Prgss:Citywide slurry Seal 79453 6/26/2002 001375 AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION Membership:Doug Armstrong 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI Membership; GaryThemhill 79454 9/26/2002 79455 9/26/2002 79456 9/26/2002 79457 9/26/2002 004446 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL 002696 ANIMAL AMBASSADORS, INC 000101 APPLEONE, INC. Membership: Dave Hogan Membership:Knute Noland Membership: Thomsley, Thomas Membership: Rick Rush Membership: Greg Buffer Family Fun Night Entertainment 9/20 Acosta tamp help PPE 09/07 Kau tamp help PPE 09/07 Kau temp help PPE 06/31 McMichael tamp help PPE 09/07 54,392.92 12,364.90 44,278.78 169.08 202.42 243.39 100.00 2,165.00 2,082.50 450.00 526.32 320.80 33,656.22 125.00 444.00 380.00 214.00 195.00 186.00 215.00 250.00 945.60 416.00 104.00 54.21 Page: I Check Total 54,392.92 12,364.90 44,278.78 169.08 202.42 243.39 100.00 4,697.50 847.12 33,656.22 125.00 1,416.00 215.00 250.00 1,519.81 Page:l apChkt.st Final Check List 09/26/2002 3:01:51 PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79458 9/26/2002 001561 ARCH WIRELESS 79459 9/26/2002 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY 79460 9/26/2002 004855 BABER, GABRIELE (Continued) Description Amount Paid Sept-Dec paging/rental svcs Activewear inventory:Team Pace TCSD instructor eemings 886.85 474.00 374.40 79461 79462 9/26/2002 79463 9/26/2002 79464 9/26/2002 79465 9/26/2002 79466 9/26/2002 79467 9/26/2002 79468 9/26/2002 79469 9/26/2002 79470 9/26/2002 9/26/2002 005365 BALLY VINEYARD & WINERY IN Refreshments:Sister City Reception 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV Install monument @Tem Duck Pond R & R curb/gutter/plate:Old Twn Add't svcs to instatl Monument 004176 BROADWlNGTELECOMMUNIC,~ Longdistance&internetsvcs 001178 C M S BUSINESS FORMS INC Citations:Code Enfomement Warning Notices:Code Enfomement 000901 C P R S DISTRICT XI Aging Con f:Adkisson: 11/'7-16/02 000154 C S M F O Application fee:Operating Budget 001054 CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS Building Inspector Recruitment ad 004580 CALIF COMMERCIAL POOLS,IN CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR C 004629 CALIF COMMERICAL POOLS-ES Ret,to escrow:chaparral pool 004248 CALIF DEPTOFJUSTICE/ACCT Drug/Alcohol screening svcs:police Credit:Incorrectly bill one case 79471 9/26/2002 000152 CALIF PARKS & RECREATION S Membership: Candice Adkisson-Flohr 79472 9/26/2002 001374 CALIF SECRETARY OF STATE Exam fee:Michaela Ballreich 79473 9/26/2002 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY Helium tanks refilI:TCSD 79474 9/26/2002 005314 CAROLINA EMBLEM COMPANY Volunteer Uniform Patches:Tern Polic 79475 9/26/2002 002534 CATERERS CAFE Refreshments:Sister City visitors 310.79 7,103.00 5,854.00 926.33 1,195.00 1,120.52 680.01 185.00 100.00 108.00 27,405.24 867.58 770.00 -35.00 125.00 40.00 33.10 335.00 Page: 2 Check Total 886.85 474.00 374.40 310.79 13,883.33 1,195.00 1,800.53 185.00 100.00 108.00 27,405.24 867.58 · 735.OO 125,00 40,00 33.10 335.00 153.35 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List 09/26/2002 3:01:51PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor (Continued) Description 79476 9/26/2002 004837 CHERRY VALLEY FEED & PET E Food & Supplies:Police K-9 79477 9/26/2002 000137 CHEVRON U S A 79478 9/26/2002 79479 9/26/2002 79480 9/26/2002 79481 9/26/2002 79482 9/26/2002 79483 9/26/2002 79484 9/26/2002 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 79485 9/26/2002 002571 CONCHOLA, BARBARA 79486 9/26/2002 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE 005373 CHINIAEFF, DENNIS 003735 CINGULAR WIRELESS (EQUIP 005447 CLEMENTS, BRIAN 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI 001193 COMP U S A INC Fuel expense for city vehicle:Police/C Reimb:Planner's Institute:3/20-22 Misc PCS Phone Equipment Reimb:lCBO Certification Employees Charities contributions M[sc Computer supplies:Info Sys Misc Computer supplies:Info sys 004811 COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPOR PcCardexppack:lnfoSys security/fire alarm monitoring:Elect security/fire alarm repaim:City Hall DJ for MPSC Annivemary Party Yr 9 payment per OPA 79487 9/26/2002 003739 COTTON BELAND ASSOCIATE Update the City's general plan 79488 9/26/2002 002413 DALEY & HEFT July-Aug legal svcs:HR 79489 9/26/2002 004569 DAVID TAUSSlG & ASSOCIATE Special tax Butterfield Stage Rd CFD 79490 9/26/2002 004450 DENNIS A HIBBERT PLUMBING Install refrigerator ice machines:Stn 92 79491 9/26/2002 000684 DIEHL EVANS & COMPANY LLP Audit Svcs: City's financial statement 79492 9/26/2002 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Naaseh-Shahrytemp help PPE 09/06 McCoy temp help PPE 09/06 McClanahan temp help PPE 09/06 Rosales tamp help PPE 09/06 Kanigowski temp help PPE 09/06 Amount Paid 59.80 174.67 68.45 29.29 110.00 141.50 132.50 37.44 219.81 1,569.00 58.00 100.00 300,000.00 7,232.70 540.54 870.62 3,078.00 4,650.00 5,846.25 2,574.61 2,410.72 1,343.83 1,242.67 Page: 3 Check Total 59.80 174.67 68.45 29.29 110.00 141.50 169.94 219.81 1,627.00 100.00 300,000.00 7,232.70 540.54 870.62 3,078.00 4,650.00 13,418.08 Page3 apChkLst 09/26/2002 3:01:51 PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79493 9/26/2002 002712 ECONOMIC&POLITICALINC 79494 9/26/2002 003223 EDAW INC Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description Update Comm profile:Eco Devel Biological svc:Long Canyon Basin Credit: Gasoline reimb not included in 79495 9/26/2002 005453 EDWARDS, ALYCE Refund: Dance-Ballroom 79496 9/26/2002 003665 EMERITUS COMMUNICATIONS Aug long distance phone 79497 9/26/2002 002438 ENGEN CORPORATION Geotech Material Testing :Vail Ranch 79498 9/26/2002 005115 ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR INC Van Rental for Week of 9/8-9/15 79499 9/26/2002 79500 9/26/2002 79501 9/26/2002 002939 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS R Map Objects Consulting S~cs 000164 ESGIL CORPORATION B&S plan check svcs 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERING Employee Luncheon on 9-26-02 Refreshments:Park tours TCSD Sister City Reception 9/10 Refreshments:9-11 events @ City Hall Refreshments:Council Closed Session 003959 EVERETT & EVERETt PAINTI Res Impr prgm: De La Torre, A. 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE Aug Idscp impr:Overland 004464 EXXONMOBILCARDSERVICES Fuel expense for City vehicles:Police/ 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC Express mail services Express mail services Express mail services 001511 FIELDMANROLAPP&ASSOCIA PROFESSIONALFINANClALADVlS 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 79502 9/26/2002 79503 9/26/2002 79504 9/26/2002 79505 9/26/2002 79506 9/26/2002 79507 9/26/2002 Butterfield CFD Amend 1 xx-5288 Jones:Conf/Prof Mtgs xx-2576 Nelson:Conf/Prof Mtgs )0(-0902 O'Grady:Conf/Prof Mtgs x~-3083 Naggar:Conf/Pref Mtgs x~-4117 Hughes:Prof Mtgs Amount Paid 12,500.00 1,392.25 -47.63 20.00 569.74 977.50 757.69 74.50 8,209.82 1,892.36 560.62 370.12 312.48 249.76 1,435.00 109.30 175.25 317.51 154.29 108.69 3,737.30 2,028.50 1,098.40 667.25 618.00 542.12 36.76 Page: 4 Check Total 12,500.00 1,344.62 20.00 569.74 977.50 757.69 74.50 8,209.82 3,385.34 1,435.00 109.30 175.25 580.49 5,765.80 2,962.53 Page~ apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 09/26/2002 3:01:51PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date 79508 9/26/2002 (Continued) Vendor Description 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED ( Pre-employment physicals Amount Paid 365.00 18,900.00 63.90 370.81 800.00 17.24 16.16 1,123.25 4.84 8,700.00 27.00 1,200.00 2,400.00 810.00 761.66 173.31 137.52 25.00 6,147.63 2,425.00 1,100.00 2,000.00 702.24 79510 79511 79512 9/26/2002 79513 9/26/2002 79514 9/26/2002 79515 9/26/2002 79516 9/26/2002 79517 9/26/2002 79518 9/26/2002 9/28/2002 004944 FULLCOURT PRESS 004949 GARAGE DOOR SERVICES 002528 GLASS BLASTERS INC 79509 9/26/2002 004239 FISHER MERRIMAN SEHGALY~ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN:OLD TOW 9/26/2002 001989 FOX NETWORK SYSTEMS INC Misc Computer Supplies:Info sys Custom printed note pads:Finance Res Imp Prog:ldle, Luz New employee glass mugs New employee glass mugs 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS Cash Handling Bags w/Locks:TCSD Office Supplies:Planning 003640 GRAYNER ENGINEERING 005452 GRAZIANI, JOSEPH 002174 GROUP 1 PRODUCTIONS Structural Support Svc:Memantile Bid Refund: Exemise-Yoga for today Video Preduction:"Summer 2002' TCS 000520 H D L COREN & CONE INC -PRC Property Tax Consulting Srvcs 79519 9/26/2002 004053 HABITAT WEST INC Planting & monitoring LONG CYN DETENTION BASIN:MAI 79520 9/26/2002 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC Hardwaresupplies:FireDept Hardware supplies:Smart Prgm 79521 9/26/2002 005451 HOWELL, JAMEELA Refund: Music-Music for Toddlers 79522 9/26/2002 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUST 45 Retirement contributions 79523 9/26/2002 004942 INFOTOX INC Consultant svcs;Mercantile Building 79524 9/26/2002 005449 INLAND EMPIRE FIRE EXPLORE Explorer academy:Fire Dept 79525 9/26/2002 001517 INTEGRATED INSIGHTS DBA: H Team Builiding For Planning Dept Employee Assistance Program Check Total 365.00 18,900.00 63.90 370.81 800.00 33.40 1,128.09 8,700.00 27.00 1,200.00 2,400.00 1,571.66 310.83 25.00 6,147.63 2,425.00 1,100.00 2,702.24 Page5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 09/26/2002 3:01:51PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79526 9/26/2002 79527 9/26/2002 79528 9/26/2002 79529 9/26/2002 79530 9/26/2002 79531 9/26/2002 79532 9/26/2002 79533 9/26/2002 79534 9/26/2002 79535 9/26/2002 79536 9/26/2002 79537 9/26/2002 79538 9/26/2002 79539 9/26/2002 79540 9/26/2002 79541 9/26/2002 79542 9/26/2002 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I (Continued) Description Pool sanitizing chemicals 002776 INTOUCH AMERICA Aug cellular svcs:Sr Van Aug cellular svcs:City Van 005454 ISLAMIC CENTER OF TEMECUL Refund: Security Deposit 003986 KEVIN COZAD & ASSOCIATES I Design sound wall on Pala Road Design:Comm Theater wtr/Sewer Plan 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOClAT Consullting svcs:Education facility 000206 KINKOS INC Stationery paper/misc supplies 001719 LPAINC Doc for Library grant application 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor eamings TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor earnings 004087 LOWE'S Res impr prgm: Burke (Materials) Res impr prgm:Burke (Doora) Res impr prgm: Burke (Windows) Res impr prgm: Burke, (Exterior Paint) 004087 LOWE'S Misc hardware supplies:TCSD 005455 LOYCE, SUSAN Refund: Security Deposit 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER tamp help w/e 9/15 Dankworth temp help w/e 8/18 & 9/8 Savage Amount Paid 005457 MCBRIDE, JIM 004208 MILANOS Reimb:Team BIdg Seminar:9/19 Refreshments:PW staff devel mtg 004534 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES Sept EOC satellite stn phone svcs 001988 MUZAK INC Oct music broadcast:Old Town 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS misc vehicle parts & supplies 271.31 30.31 27.27 35.00 9,041.22 5,350.00 936.40 82.29 7,157.50 208.00 208.00 160.00 66.00 2,045.43 1,482.32 511.27 506.08 42.11 40.00 439.89 156.20 112.91 303.75 69.00 59.50 8.86 Check Total 271.31 57.58 35.00 14,391.22 936.40 82.29 7,157.50 642.00 4,545.10 42.11 40.00 596.09 112.91 303.75 69.00 59.50 8.86 Page~ apChkLst 69/26/2002 3:01:51PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79543 9/26/2002 79544 9/26/2002 79545 9/25/2002 79546 9/26/2002 79547 9/26/2002 79548 9/26/2002 79549 9/26/2002 79550 9/26/2002 79551 9/26/2002 79552 9/26/2002 79553 9/26/2002 79554 9/26/2002 79555 9/26/2002 79556 9/26/2002 79557 9/26/2002 79558 9/26/2002 79559 9/26/2002 004933 NATIONAL FIRE SPRINKLER A 002292 OASIS VENDING 000249 PE~ ~ Y CASH 000253 POSTMASTER 005459 PREMIER PROPERTIES 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description Undergmd Piping:10/0 I:N M/J N/SH Seismic Protection:16/1 :NM/JN/SH City Hall kitchen/coffee supplies West Wing kitchen/coffee supplies 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office supplies:P.D. Storefmnt Stn 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City vehicle maintJrepair svcs City vehicle maint/repair svcs REPAIR & MAINT OF VEHICLES~ 601171 ORIENTALTRADINGCOMPANY RecSupplies:HalloweenCamival 005456 OTT, WENDELL Reimb:Museum Conf CAM:7/25-29 003589 PAClFIC COAST ENTERPRISES Addresssing for tract #23143 & train 005446 PARNAKIAN, DEBORAH Refund: Exemise - Yoga for Today 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG Emp[oyeebeneflts Petty cash reimbumement Express mail & postal services Facade Prgm:Reimb Dev Fees Aug EE Recruitment Ads:HR Aug Var. Public Notices:City Clerk Aug Var. Public Notices:City Clerk Aug EE Recruitment Ads:HR 004792 R H A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Consult svcs for Vail Ranch Pk site C 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Various water metem City vehicle detailing & fuel usage City vehicle detailing svcs Dupl. Blueprints:79S sidewalk Dupl. Blueprints:79S sidewalk Amount Paid 225.00 225.00 459.79 122.80 77.77 296.13 142.69 19.19 1,031.93 146.27 237.50 35.00 250.15 873.78 66.20 190.00 4,166.23 283.94 57.00 -7.25 132.40 23,548.64 28.34 24.00 87.37 77.58 Page: 7 Check Total 450.00 582.59 77.77 458.01 1,031.93 146.27 237.50 35.00 250.15 873,78 66.20 190.00 4,499.92 132.40 23,548.64 49.34 164.95 Page~ apChkLst 06/26/2002 3:01:51PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79560 9/26/2002 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description CRC electrical supplies City Hall electrical supplies CRC electrical supplies 003587 RIZZO CONSTRUCTION INC 003027 ROOFTEK 003001 ROSS FENCE COMPANY 000277 S & S ARTS & CRAFTS INC 005018 SACHER, SUZANNE L. 79561 9/26/2002 003742 REHAB FINANCIAL CORPORATI RDAIoan servicing 79562 9/26/2002 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE Citywide Channels Clean-up Svcs 79563 9/26/2002 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI Misc. Equip Rental for PW Maint various parks rental equipment 79564 9/26/2002 000266 RIGHTWAY 9/14-10/11/02 equip rental:Paseo 79565 9/26/2002 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONTR(~ Jun plan check fees:Pala Imprv 79566 9/26/2002 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW ST Aug 2002 S.L.A.P. services July 02 S.L.A.P. services Aug OTS Grant/DUi Enforcement Cool Cats Car Show:8/10/02 79567 9/26/2002 Planning front counter improvements 79568 9/26/2002 Res imprv prgm:Goset Res Imprv Prgm:ldle 79569 9/26/2002 Res imprv prgm:Valenzuela 79570 9/26/2002 Misc supplies-tinytots 79571 9/26/2002 TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings 79572 9/26/2002 003389 SAN DIEGO CONVENTION Membership:10/1/02-16/1/03:G.W. 79573 9/26/2002 004562 SCHIRMER ENGINEERING COR Fire Prevention plan check svcs 79574 9/26/2002 000385 SHELDON EXTINGUISHER COM Fire extinguisher maint:Fire Prey Fire extinguisher maint:West Wing MAINTENANCE FACILITY CHEMICA 79575 9/26/2002 004814 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING I Design svcs:Barrier Rail Replace 79576 9/26/2002 003804 SKYHAWKS SPORTSACADEM TCSD Instructor Earnings Amount Paid 213.35 63.36 23.37 24.00 9,200.00 244.63 161.64 60.78 455.28 13,361.34 6,618.18 4,760.11 915.12 4,800.00 4,175.00 700.00 3,500.00 435.07 324.00 32.00 465.00 6,900.00 54.64 27.35 23.07 822.50 4,679.20 Page: 8 Check Total 300.08 24.00 9,200.00 406.27 60.78 455.28 25,654.75 4,800.00 4,875.00 3,500.00 435.07 356.00 465.00 6,900.00 105.06 822.50 4,679.20 Page~ apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 09/26/2002 3:01:51PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79577 9/26/2002 003766 SMALL, SANDRA K. (Continued) Description Amount Paid TCSD Instructor Earnings 448.00 Check Total 448.00 79578 9/26/2002 79579 9/26/2002 79580 9/26/2002 79581 9/26/2002 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR(; 004496 SPARKS EXHIBITS & ENVIRONh Recreation Supplies for TCC Recreation Supplies:Family Fun Night Office supplies for Finance Dept Supplies for Gift Giving Campaign Sept 2-19-999~9442 various mtrs Sept 2-02-351-4946 Senior Ctr Sept 2-18-937-3152 Museum Sept 2-23-365-5992 Stn 92 Sept 2-11-007-0455 6th St. Sept 2-20-817-9929 P.D.O.T. Stn Sept 2-18-049-6416 Front St Ped Sept 2-22-891-0550 various mtrs Sept 2-21-911-7892 S.Side Pk Lot Sept 2-19-171-8568 Wed Chapel Sept 2-21-981-4720 Hwy 79 Sept 2-22-057-2226 6th St Sept 2-14-204-1615 Front St Rdio Sept 2-24-151-6582 Ovedand Pala pk pest control svcs N/S snack bar pest control svcs Rancho Vista pest control svcs CHILDRENS MUSUEM CONSTRUCTI 160.98 45.56 38.45 12.79 1,977.94 1,721.53 1,113.88 611.29 516.77 457.70 323.26 226.61 194.96 91.55 48.41 24.50 13.39 48.00 39.00 39.00 201,693.74 257.78 7,399.59 126.00 201,693.74 79582 9/26/2002 79583 9/26/2002 000305 TARGET STORE 000309 TEMECULA COPIERS Digital camera for TCSD Misc. supplies for Sister City Prgm Aug B/W copy usage 420.04 53.27 2,549.86 473.31 2,549.86 79584 9/26/2002 79585 9/26/2002 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER Keys to the City Awards for SMART Pgrm EE awards:Bldg & Safety Award/engraving svcs:Senior Ctr Chamber's Luncheon:City Staff 3,013.99 256.98 51.72 11.85 120.00 3,334.54 120.00 79586 9/26/2002 79587 9/26/2002 004274 TEMECULAVALLEY SECURITY, 003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWON CRC locksmith svcs Maint Fac Iccksmith svcs TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 172.00 55.00 ~.~ 227.00 80.00 Page~) apChkLst 09/26/2002 3:01:51PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79586 9/26/2002 003849 TERRYBERRY COMPANY 79589 9/26/2002 79590 9/26/2002 79591 9/26/2002 79592 9/26/2002 79593 9/26/2002 79594 9/26/2002 79595 9/26/2002 79596 9/26/2002 79597 9/26/2002 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE I 004895 TUMBLES, J.W. 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 005072 UNIGLOBE TECHNOLOGY INC 002065 UNISOURCE 000325 UNITED WAY 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description EE service recognition awards 70.13 Toll reads usage 10.95 misc traffic control supplies for PW 258.60 misc traffic control supplies for PW 231.66 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 140.00 Employee del comp plan 17,136.41 P/T EE retirement 2,610.74 Illuminated St. Signs:Pechanga Pkwy 9,173,88 white copy paper for City Hall 2,219.22 Employee contributions 255.80 SEPT XXX-0073 GENERAL USAGE 1,832.07 Sept xxx-0074 general usage 255.99 SEPT XXX-1603 CITY HALL 89.59 Sept xxx-3564 alarm 55.43 SEPT XXX-8573 GENERAL USAGE 32.40 SEPT XXX-3923 STONE 27.55 79598 9/26/2002 004848 VERIZON SELECT SERVICES I Sept phone services 79599 9/26/2002 005458 VISTA PAINT Facade Imprv Prgm: Konchar 79600 9/26/2002 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC Ciiywide Tree Trimming Maint Svc 79601 9/26/2002 003756 WHITE HOUSE SANITATION Cleaning svcs:Btrfield Stage restrcom 79602 9/26/2002 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION I yr preventive maintenance svc Amount Paid 1,252.15 307.89 156.60 50.00 969.75 Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: Page: 10 Check Total 70.13 10.95 490.26 140.00 17,136.41 2,610.74 9,173,88 2,219.22 255.80 2,293.03 1,252.15 307.89 156.60 50.00 969.75 1,002,152.54 Page:10 APPROVAL CITY ~ DIRECTOR OF FI~NyE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Genie Roberts, Director of Financ~ October 8, 2002 City Treasurer's Report as of August 31, 2002 PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: Report asofAugust31,2002. Karen Jester, Assistant Director of Financ~/ Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant ~ That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's 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 August 31,2002. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: 1. City Treasurer's Report as of August 31,2002 Cash ActivEy for the Month of Au~Just: Cash and Investments as of August 1, 2002 Cash Receipts Cash Disbursements Cash and Investments as of August 31, 2002 Cash and investments Portfolio: City of Temecula City Treasurer's Report As of August 3t, 2002 Type of Investment Petty Cash General Checking Sweep Account (Money Market Account) Benefit Demand Deposits Local Agency Investment Fund Certificate of Deposit (Retention Escrow) Checking Account (Parking Citations) Trust Accounts- CFD 88-12 (Money Market AccOunt) Delinq Main. Reserve Account - CFD 88-12 (Investment Agreement) Delinq Main, Reserve Account - CFD 88-12 (Money Market Account) Reserve Account- CFD 88-12 (Investment Agreement) Reserve Account- CFD 88-12 (Money Market Account) Trust Accounts-TCSD COPs (Money Market AccOunt) Project Accouct-TCSD COPs (Money Market Account) Project Account-TCSD COPs (Local Agency Investment Fund) Delivery Cost Account-TCSD COPs (Money Market AccOunt) Trust Accounts-RDA Refinance Bonds (Money Market Account) Project Account*RDA Refinance Bonds (Local Agency Investment Fund) Admin Account-RDA Refinance Bonds (Money Market Account) COl Accounts-RDA Refinance Bonds (Money Market Account) Project Fund- TPFA Haweston CFD 01-02 (Money Market Account) Interest Fund - CFD 01-2 (Money Market Account) Interest Diffrntl Fund -CFD 01-2 (Money Market Account) Delivery Cost Account-CFD 01-2 (Money Market Account) Admin Ac. ct -CFD 01-2 (Money Market Account) Institution Metudty/ Temlination Yield Date C~y Hall n/a Union Bank n/a Union Bank 0.730 % (Highmark U.S. Treasury) Union Bank nta State Tmasurer-LAIF 2.594 % Bank of Sacramento n/a Union Bank n/a U.S Bank (First Am TreasuP/) 1.270 % CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2017 US. Bank (First Am Treasury) 1.270 % CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2007 U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % State Treasurer-LAIF 2,594 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % State Treasurer-LAIF 2.594 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % U.S, Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % US. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % US, Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % US Bank (First Am Treasury) 1.270 % U.S, Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.270 % (1)-This amount is net of outstanding checks. (2)-At August 31,2002 total market value (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) was $46,823,241,942. The City's proportionate share of that value is $61,239,324. All investments are liquid and currently available. The City of Temecula's ponfctio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds wfil be available to meet · budgeted and actual expenditures of the City of Temecula for the next six months. $ 80,465,304 (17,640,416) $ 84,048,025 Par/Book Balance $ 1,500 (96,316) (1) 306,000 336 (1) 61,069,542 (2) 128,593 6,092 1,095,429 500,000 369,804 1,531.460 64 22 2,956 2,704,551 6,444 10,340,046 5,193 25,110 5,150,000 258,939 129,825 453,613 50,000 $ 84,048,025 ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIUAl'4C~.,_,z:~_ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~William G' Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 8, 2002 Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for John WarneflSantiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study, Project No. PW02-07 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - CIP Laura Bragg, Project Engineer - CIP RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment No. 1 in an amount not to exceed $8,215.00 to the Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. to provide additional design services for the John WarnedSantiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study, Project No. PW02-07, and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. BACKGROUND: The overall project will ultimately complete the asphalt concrete paving of rural dirt roads including John Warner Road from Santiago Road to Jeramie Drive, Lolita Road, Paulita Road, La Presa Loop and Colver Court. The portion of the project covered under this contract consists of performing a Hydrology and Hydraulics Study and report preparation, calculation of amount of annual sediment transport, and preparation of storm drain plans and profiles. Design services will include the preparation of plans and specifications as needed to accompany the street improvement plans that have already been prepared by a private engineer and are under review. Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. of Hemet, California is currently under contract to perform the above stated work. While performing the preliminary hydrology study the focus was to align and size the storm drain to effectively control the current and projected flow with the least impact to downstream facilities. In order to adequately protect downstream facilities it is necessary to expand the study area and to extend the storm drain system to ensure sufficient conveyance of the flow. The boundary for the new study area will include John Warner Road to the south and east, Ynez Road to the west and Santiago Road to the north. The expanded scope will include utilities and right-of-way research for the additional study area, hydrology study to include Santiago Creek Watershed, sediment analysis for Santiago Creek, a revised system and alternative analysis that include the Vallejo Channel, topographic survey limits extended westerly to Ynez Road and properties that are affected between Ynez Road and Interstate 15, Base Sheets and Construction Drawings with expanded limits to include the proposed drainage alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road 1 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2002\IO0802\PW02-OTJohn Wamer HydrologyAmendment. DOC FISCAL IMPACT: The John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District Improvem'ent Project- Hydrology Study is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Capital Project Reserve Funds with the Improvements being constructed through a proposed Assessment District. The original contract limit was $60,940.00 which included the contract amount of $55,400.00 plus the 10% contingency amount of $5,540.00. The revised contract amount including Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $8,215.00 is $69,155.00. Adequate funds are available for Amendment No. 1 in Account No. 210-165-727-5802. ATFACHMENTS: Project Location Project Description Professional Services Agreement Amendment 2 R:\AGENDA REPORTS\2002\100802\PW02~)7John Warner H~rologyAmendment. DOC FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF SO. CALIFORNIA, INC. JOHN WARNER/SANTIAGO ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO. PW02-07 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of October 8, 2002, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City"') and Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On June 11, 2002 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for the John WarnedSantiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project, Project No. PW02-07 Hydrology Study'' ("Agreement") in the amount of $55,400.00. B. The parties now desire to increase the payment for services in the amount of $8,215.00 and amend the Agreement'as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 5 Payment of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Three Thousand Six Hundred Fifteen Dollars and No Cents ($63,615.00) for the total term 'of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 3. The ten pement (10%) contingency amount shall not exceed $5,540.00. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 r:\ClP~PROJECTS'tPW02-07~Engineedng Resources Amend I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Engineering Resources of So. California, Inc. 3550 E. Florida Ave., Suite B Hemet, CA 92544 (909) 765-6622 Matt Brudin, P.E., President Michael J. Stearns, Vice President/Secretary (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:\Clp'~PROJECTS\PW02-0TtEng[needng Resources Amend I INGIHEIING llESOURCES 96018002 A~gust 29, 2002 RECEIVED SEP 0 5 ZOOZ CiTY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant Engineer .............. City of.Temecula P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92590 CONTRACT A/v~ENDNtENT FOR JOHN WARNER ROAD / SANTIAGO ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT -- HYDROLOGY .STUDY Dear Laura: As the preliminary hydrology study for above project continues, the efforts have been focused on development of a storm drain alignment that would mitigate the existing dra'mage problem for the community with a miBimttm impact on the existing down stream facilities a~d the property owners. With that objective in mind, along with the follow-up of what was learned from our field visit with City staff, the study area is to be expanded to address the impacted down stream facilities to ensure adequate conveyance of the tributary flows without any adverse impact on the property owners. Therefore, we have revised the original scope of work dated May 15, 2002, to address the above concerns as following: UTILITIES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY RESEARCH This task will be extended to include the area of influence encompassed by Santiago Avenue to the north, Ynez Road to the west and John Warner Road to the south and east. Revised fee ................................................... $1,305 PROJECT SASE MAP The hydrology study base map will be based on Riverside Coimty Flood Control and Water Conservation Disffict (RCFC&WCD) topography maps. The Drainage study area will be bounded on the east by Margarita Road, to the west by Ynez Road, to the north by Pauba Road and by $ohn Warner Road to the south. However, a more detailed base map will be provided to delineate the proposed storm drain alignment and will include all items.specified in the original contract. Revised fee .................................................. $1,200 3550 E Romk Aw. 5unT B HeaT, CA 92544 {969) 765-6622 100.000P Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant Eh. gineer City of Temecula August 29, 2002 HYDROLOGY STUDY The liy&ology study will be extended to include Santiago Creek Watershca in acaoraance with the crit a aha delines specmed in me ori al contract. Revised fee .................................................. $ 4,050 SEDIMENT ANALYSIS This task will be expanded to include the sediment analysis for Santiago Creek, Revised fee .................................................. $ 2,710 SYSTEM AI,TE RNATIVE $ The work under this item will be as specified in the original contract. However, the preferred alternative was selected by City Staff in our previous submittal. This alternative will be revised to reflect the Vallejo channel and the relief drain in the proposed system. Revised fee ................ ' ................................. $ 3,930 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS I~'DRAULIC ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONs ~This work will be as outlined in the original contract. However, the analysis will be revised to include culverts within original study area, channel along Vallejo Avenue and the proposed storm drain system. The hydraulic analysis will be performed to determine the capacity of the existing system and how it would be impacted by the proposed system. Upon the completion of this task a meeting will be scheduled with the City Staffto present the viable alternative. Revised fee ........ : ......................................... $ 5,700 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ~IELD SURVEY-- This task is eliminated to be included as part of the topographic survey as specified in the original contract., ToPOGRAPBIC SURVEY -- This task will be revised to provide specifics about storm drain alignment and desilting basin at John Warner Road, and cross sections for the existing flood control channel along Vallejo Avenue and Ynez Road. Cross sections are crucial for hydraulic modeling to determine the capacity of the existing drainage system and to develop an ultimate storm drain alignment for the proposedpmject The limits of the topography wil[be extended westerly to include 100.000P Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant Engineer City of Temecula August 29, 2002 Page 3 the Ynez Road and the properties impacted between Ynez Road and Interstate Freeway 15. Revised fee ................................................. $10,335 Base sheets will be prepared in accordance to the guidelines in the original contract. However, it will be extended to include the proposed alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road within the limits specified above. Revised fee .................................................. $ 3,445 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS This task will r~main as outlined in the original contract. However, it will be extended to include the proposed alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road within the limits specified above. ReVised fee ' . ......... $26.740 SPECIFICATIONS This task will remain as outlined in the original contract. Revised fee .................... 2'. ............................ $ 2,760 COST ESTIMATES This task will remain as outlined in the off,hal contract. Revised fee .................................................. $1,440 Enclosed for your edification is our Fee Estimate table which has been revised to reflect these expanded items of work. If you have any questions regarding this amendment please give me a call. Respeetfully youts, Matt Brudin, P.E. President ITEM 6 APPROVAL CitY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA[~C~.E ~/2.~ CITY MANAGER ~,.~/,~ ./ ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 8, 2002 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula Fait Rod Run 2002 Event in Old Town. (Old Town Front Street, between Moreno Road and Second Street, and other related streets) PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA FALL ROD RUN 2002 EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT BACKGROUND: The Fall Rod Run necessitates the physical closure of certain streets in the Old Town area, and related detouring, to accommodate and provide the "Street Scene" ambience that allows the free movement of pedestrian traffic by minimizing potential vehicular- pedestrian conflicts. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public right of way. While a process was established for reviews and approvals, no mechanism was provided for delegating authority to temporarily close streets, or portions of streets, for these special events. I r:~agd rpt~2002\1008\fallrodrunclosure The recommended resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event sponsored by P & R Productions. This authority is limited to and delegated to the City Engineer (or an authorized representative) only. Any other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction related closures, etc., remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council. These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. This years Fall Rod Run Event sponsors propose street closures as follows: Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road (E) to Second Street from 3:00 pm to 9:00 pm on Friday October 11th, 2002, and from 6:00 am to 4:30 pm on Saturday, October 12th, 2002. Main Street mid-block, east and west of Old Town Front Street, will also be closed to through traffic. Sixth Street, Fifth Street, Fourth Street, and Third Street will be closed mid-block east of Old Town Front Street. Access is provided to handicap parking lots located at Sixth Street and Mercedes Street and at First Street and Old Town Front Street. Show car parking will be at designated parking lots and along both sides of Old Town Front Street as shown on the attached Location Map. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated costs for the Public Works Department Maintenance Division support is estimated at $3,800.00. Adequate funds are available in Account No. 001-164-601-5402. ATrACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2002- 2. Location Map 2 r:~agdrpt~O02\1008\faltrodru nc~osu re RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA FALL ROD RUN 2002 EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and, WHEREAS, The City of Temecula desires to authorize the closure of public streets for the Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event sponsored by P & R Productions, for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use those streets for the special event: and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for the Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event, specifically Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road (E) and Second Street, Main Street mid-block, east and west of Old Town Front Street, and Fifth, Fourth, and Third Streets east of Old Town Front Street on Friday, October 11,2002 from 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM and on Saturday, October 12, 2002 from 6:00 AM to 4:30 PM; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for the Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event sponsored by P & R Productions, and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the Temecula Fall Rod Run 2002 Event, and establishes the general rule that all other temporary public street closures shall be approved or denied approval by the City Council as follows: Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road (E) and Second Street, Main Street mid-block, east and west of Old Town Front Street, and Fifth, Fourth, and Third Streets east of Old Town Front Street on Friday, October 11,2002 from 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM and on Saturday, October 12, 2002 from 6:00 AM to 4:30 PM. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of October 2002. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W.Jones, CMC, City Clerk 3 r:~agdrpt~2002\1008\fallrod runclosure [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002-. 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 October 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: 4 r:~agdrpt~O02\l O08~fallrodrunclosure ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBdECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 8, 2002 Authorize Temporary Partial Street Closures for "Race for the Cure" Event October 20, 2002, in the Promenade Mall area (Margarita Road, Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Solana Way). PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works ~.Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 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 20, 2002 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT. BACKGROUND: The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation/'l'emecula Chapter has applied for permission to close portions of public streets in order to hold the Inland Empire Race for the Cure on Sunday, October 20, 2002, on and around the Promenade Mall area. Coordination for the activities on the Promenade Mall site has been negotiated with the Mall Site Management. A number of sponsors are supporting this event. The directly affected streets, including Ynez Road, Overland Drive, Margarita Road, and Solana Way would require some partial or full closures on the event date. The Mall Ring Road, a private road, will also be partially closed for the event. Provision for traffic movements along the race route and abutting streets have been reviewed and revised to meet traffic concerns along both major traffic routes and neighboring residences and businesses during the proposed event period. The race route begins at the starting line located on the Mall Ring Road, proceeds to the Mall Entrance Road opposite North General Kearny Road easterly over three (3) traffic lanes, then southerly along Margarita Road over two lanes of traffic, then westerly along Overland Drive over four lanes of traffic to Promenade Way where the beginning of a raised landscaped median on Overland Drive reduces the leg to two lanes of traffic, then southerly along Ynez Road over one lane of traffic, then easterly along Solana Way over one lane of traffic, then northerly along Margarita Road over two lanes of traffic to Overland Drive where the leg is reduced to one lane of traffic to Winchester Road where the course u-turns and proceeds southbound on Margarita Road over two 1 r:',agdrpt~O02\l O08'~laceForTheCureStreetClosu re lanes of traffic, then westerly along before said Mall Entrance Road over two lanes of traffic to the Mall Ring Road and the finish line located in a parking lot drive aisle off of the Mall Ring Road. The following summarizes the extent of street closures and the times of closure during the event. The actual event hours are from 5:00 AM to 11:00 AM: Overland Drive - Overland Drive, between Margarita Road and Promenade Way, will be fully closed. Overland Drive, between Promenade Way and Ynez Road, will be partially closed. The two (2) eastbound lanes will be closed for the event. This street will be closed between 6:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Ynez Road - Ynez Road, between Overland Drive and Solana Way, will be partially closed. The easternmost northbound lane will be closed for the event. Solana Way - Solana Way, between Ynez Road and Margarita Road, will be partially closed. The northernmost westbound lane will be closed for the event. This street will be closed between 6:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Margarita Road - Margarita Road, between Solana Way and Overland Drive, will be partially closed. The two (2) southbound lanes will be closed for the event from 6:00 AM to 10:30 AM. Margarita Road, between Overland Drive and Winchester Road, will be partially closed. The westernmost northbound lane will be closed for the event from 6:00 AM to 10:30 AM. Margarita Road, between Winchester Road and the Mall Entrance Road, will be partially closed. The two (2) southbound lanes will be closed for the event. This street will be closed between 6:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Mall Entrance Road (Private Street) - The entire Mall Entrance Road, the one opposite North General Kearny Road, will be closed entirely for the event. This street will be closed between 6:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Mall Ring Road (Private Street) - A portion of The Mall Ring Road, between the start and finish lines, will be closed entirely for the event. The traffic control plan shows the limits of closure. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public right of way. While a process was established for reviews and approvals, no mechanism was provided for delegating authority to temporarily close streets, or portions of streets, for these special events. The recommended resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the Inland Empire "Race for the Cure" Event sponsored by The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation/'remecula Chapter. This authority is limited to and delegated to the City Engineer (or an authorized representative) only. Any other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction related closures, etc., remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council. These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. 2 r:',agdrpt~O02\1008\RaceForTheCu reStreetClosu re The basic racecourse and event schedule is attached hereto. The approved traffic control plans will more effectively allow the movement of traffic in and to the Promenade Mall and other businesses in the adjoining areas, the residential neighborhoods, and the Solana Ridge Apartments. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs for City services have been provided for in the City budget in accordance with the funding agreement with the Inland Empire affiliate of the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2002- 2. Race Course Map 3 r:~agd rpt~2002\1008\RaceForTheCureStreetClosu re 'PlJ ,{u~ee)t le~eue9 'pB Jelseqou!N~ RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY PARTIAL STREET CLOSURES FOR INLAND EMPIRE "RACE FOR THE CURE" EVENT ON OCTOBER 20, 2002, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and, WHEREAS, The City of Temecula desires to authorize the partial closure of public streets for the Inland Empire Inaugural "Race for the Cure" Event sponsored by The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation/Temecula Chapter, for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use those streets for the special event: and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for the Inland Empire Temecuia "Race for the Cure" on Sunday, October 20, 2002 from 6:00 AM to 10:30 AM, possibly longer to allow everyone to finish the race: and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for the Inland Empire "Race for the Cure" sponsored by The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation/Temecula Chapter, and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the Inland Empire "Race for the Cure" Event on Sunday, October 20, 2002 from 6:30 AM to 10:30 AM, possibly longer to allow everyone to finish the race. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of October 2002. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W.Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 r:~agdrpt\2002\1008~Race ForTheCureSt reetCIosure [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002- 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 October 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City CLerk 5 r:~agdrpt~2oO2\lOO8\RaceForTheCu reStreetClosu re ITEM 8 APPROVAL c,Ty ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC%__ __ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council .ry~V~william G. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Hughes, October 8, 2002 Parcel Map 30468, Located South East Of State Route 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Gerald L. Alegria, Senior Engineer- Land Development RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve 1) Parcel Map No. 30468 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval BACKGROUND: Parcel Map No. 30468 is a fourteen (14) parcel subdivision located south east of State Route 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. The map contains 14 commercial parcels. State Route 79 South is improved however, as part of the development of Parcel Map 30468, the following improvements are required: Installation of the sidewalk on State Route 79 South along the propertyfrontage, Installation of street lights on State Route 79 South along the propertyfrontage, Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Jedediah Smith Road and State Route 79 South, and Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Constance "B" and State Route 79 South The survey monuments are required to be set also. On May 1,2002, the City of Temecula Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map 30468, with the appropriate Conditions of Approval. This final 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. It should be noted the Development Impact Fees (DIF) will be due and payable at the time of issuance of the Building Permits. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. Development Fee Checklist Fees & Securities Report Project Vicinity Map Parcel Map 30468 I r:~agdrpt~2002\1008\pm30468.map CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO. PM 30468 Staff reviewed the following fees relative to their applicabilityto this project. FEE Flood Control (ADP) Development Impact Fee CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Not Required Not Paid 2 r:~agdrpt~2002\1008\pm30468.map CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT PARCEL MAP 30468 DATE: October 8, 2002 iMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR SECURITY SECURITY Street and Drainage $ 500,000 $ 250,000 Water $ 0 $ 0 Sewer $ 0 $ 0 TOTAL $ 0 $ 0 Monument $ 13,000 DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFCD (ADP) Fee Development Impact Fee SERVICE FEES Planning Fee Comprehensive Transportation Plan Plan Check Fee Monument Inspection Fee Fees Paid to Date Balance of Fees Due $ 0.00 SNot Required $ Not Paid $ 68.00 $ 4.00 $ 1,530.00 $. 650.00 $ 2,252.00 $ 0.00 3 r:'tagdrpt~OO2\1008\pm30468.map CANYON LAKE MURRIETA TEMECUL~ L[ LAKE SKINNER IJECT ~ATION VICINITY ~IGH~Ay 7~ MAP NOT TO SCALE ! 8 ITEM 9 APPROVAL /"/,,/./, ~ CITY ATTORNEY _.,/_.~.~ ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANOE/~:~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council · ,~¢William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 8, 2002 Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract for the Pala Road Phase I Improvements, Project No. PW99-11 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Senior Engineer Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Accept the Pala Road Phase I Improvements, Project No. PW99-11, as complete. 2. File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract. 3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On March 22, 2002 the City Council awarded the construction contract to R.J. Noble Company, Inc. in the amount of $456,172.26 for said project and authorized the City Manager to approve change orders that are within the 10% contingency. The project widened Pala Road from two lanes to four lanes from Pala Road Bridge to Wolf Valley Road, modified the traffic signals at Loma Linda Road and Wolf Valley Road, and revised the traffic striping. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on or about 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. FISCAL IMPACT: The project is a Capital Improvement Project funded through an agreement between the City and the Temecula Band of Luiser~o Mission Indians. An acceleration of an appropriation of funds in the amount of $700,000 was necessary from the agreement for the Pala Road Phase I Improvements (Project No. PW99-11 ) to cover the construction costs. Contract Change Orders 1 & 2 were approved in the amount of $12,980.70. The total cost of the project including authorized contract change orders and quantity adjustments is $411,681.10. ATrACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit R:~AGEN DA REPORTS~2002\100802~PW99-11 PHASEIACCEPT.DOC RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. BOX 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the properly hereinafter described. Nature of Interest Vendee Under Contract. 92590. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to R.J. Noble Company, 15505 E. Lincoln Avenue, Orange, California 92865 to perform the following work of improvement: PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. PW99-1'1 (Interim) 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on October 8, 2002. That upon said contract the Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Pala Road Phase I Improvements - Project No. PW99-11 (Interim) 6. The location of said property is: Pala Road, Temecula, California Dated at Temecula, California, this 8th day of October, 2002 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby cedify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. th Dated at Temecula, California, this 24 day of September, 2002. Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk R:'~ClP~PRO J ECTS\PW99\99-11 \Phase I * Intedm project\COMPLETION NOTE.d~c Bond # 83 SB 103769219 BCM Executed in Duplicate CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MAINTENANCE BOND PROJECT NO. PW99-11 (INTERIM) PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS a KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: R.J. Noble Company, 15505 E. Lincoln Ave., Orange~ CA 92856 NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S Corporation (fill in whether a Corporation, Patlnerahip or individual) , hereinafter called Principal, and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of¥orty One Thousand One Hundred Sixty Nine DOLLARS and No/100 CENTS ($ 41,169.00 ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such th'at whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 26th.. ~day of .r'M~'c,h , 2002, a copy Of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW99- 11 (INTERIM), PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and was the final estimate approved on ]st July ,2002. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. MAINTENANCE BOND M-1 R:\ClP~° ROJ E CTS~PW99t99-1 I~INTERIM~2.002 INTERIM BID DOC TRAVELERS CASUALTY A~D SURETY COMI~ANY OF AMERICA TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY Hartford, Connecticut 06183-9062 POWER OF ATTORNEY AND CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY OF ATTORNEY(S)-IN-FACT KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Coanecticut, and having their principal offices in the City of Hartford, County of Hartford, State of Coaneqticut, (hereinal~er the "Companies") hath made, constituted and appointed, and do by these presents make, constitute and appoint: Michael D. Stong, Shawn Blume, Susan C. Monteon, Rosemary Standley, of Riverside, California, their true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, execute and acknowledge, at any place within the United States, the following instrument(s): by his/her sole signature and act, any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and other writings obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, or conditional undertaking and any and all consents incident thereto and to bind the Companies, thereby as fully and to the same extent as if the same were signed by the duly authorized officers of the Companies, and all the acts of said Attorney(s)-in-Fact, pursuant to the authority herein given, are l~ereby ratified and confirmed. This appointment is made under and by authority of the following Standing Resolutions of said Companies, which Resolutions are now in full force and effect: VOTED: That the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President, any Second Vice President, the Treasurer, any Assistant Treasurer, the Corporate Secretary or any Assistant Secretary may appoint Attorneys-in-Fact and Agents to act for and on behalf of the company and may give such appointee such authority as his or her certificate of authority may prescribe to sign with the Company's name and seal with the Company's seal bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and other writings obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, or conditional undertaking, and any of said officers or the Board of Directors at any time may remove any such appointee and revoke the power given him or her. VOTED: That the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President or any Vice President may delegate all or any part of the foregoing authority to one or more officers or employees of this Company, provided that each such delegation is in writing and a copy thereof is filed in the office of the Secretary: VOTED: That any bond, recognizance, contract of indenudty, or vairing obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, or conditional undertaking shall be valid and binding upon the Coarpany when (a) signed by the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President or any Vice President, any Second Vice President, the Treasurer, any Assistant Treasurer, the Corporate Secretary or any Assistant Secretary and duly attested and sealed with the Company's seal by a Secretary or Assistant Secretary, or (b) duly executed (under seal, if required) by one or more Attorneys-in-Fact and Agents pursuant to the power prescribed in Iris or her certificate or their certificates of authority or by one or more Company officers pursuant to a written delegatinn of anthority. This Power of Attorney and Certificate of Authority is signed and sealed by facsimile (mechanical or printed) under and by authority of the following Standing Resolution voted by the Boards of Directors of TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, which Resolution is now in full force and effect: VOTED: That the signature of each of the following officers: President, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President, any Assistant Vice President, any Secretary, any Assistant Sacretary, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any power of attorney or to any ce~ficate relating thereto appointing Resident Vice Presidents, Resident Assistant Secretaries or Attorneys-in-Fact for purposes only of exeenting and attesting bends and undertaldngs and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, and any such power of attorney or certificate bearing such fuesimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company and any such power so executed and certified by such facsimile signature and facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company in the future with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attac~ed. (I F.~o ~mdard) STATE OF CALIFORNIA / SS. COUNTY OF R~VERSZDE On ~7', .,2,/~ C)~., , before me, PERSONALLY APPEARED R. STANDLEY MICHAEL D. STONG personally kmown to me (or przvcd tc ~.z cn tF.z k.':.zlz of -~) to be the person~)' whose is/m,~subscribed to the within instrument and acknowl- edged to me that he/:,hc-/:kz7 zxecuted the same in his/ ..kzr/th_-'!r authorized capacit)%!zz); and that by hisflao, rd t.l~signature(-c,-)-on the instrument the person(t,.), or the entity upon behalf of which the person~q-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. This area for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL -- ,- Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] Aqq-ORN NY-IN*FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER:. DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OFPAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTI~P((IES) · SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE 1D-OS! Rev. 6/94 ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of CALIFORNIA County of ORANGE On 08/23/02 before me, Pamela Kitchens )ersonally appeared Start Hilton, Secretary of R.J. NOBLE COMPANY and Craig Roth, Assistant Secretary of R.3. NOBLE COMPANY · 1~ personally known to me ~OR- [] ISEAL] ~ro.ved.to' me on the asls' o['. satisfactory evidence to be 'the person(s) Whose name(s) ~s'/are Sbbscribed to the. within instrument and acknowledged tO me that he/she/they executed the' same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that. by his/her/their signature(s)_--On the instrurnent the person(s), or .the entit.y upon behalf of- Which..'the person(s) acted,~ . ex~cuted the Witness my.lhand and Official seal. " ' ISIGN~TURE OF NOTARY) ATTENTION NOTARY The information reqbested below and in the column to the right is OPTIONAL. Recording of th s document is not required by law and is also optional. t could, however, p~e~,er~t fraudulent attachment of thi~ Certificate to any unauthorized do'¢ument. THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT: or Type of Document Numberer Pages Date of Document Signer(~] Other ~an Named Abow RIGHT THUMBPRINT (Optional) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER)S) $1NDIVIDUAL(S ~CORPORATE ~ecretary Assistant Secretary OFFICERIS) r~ PARTNER{S} r-ILIMITED {~GENERAL (~ATTORNEY IN FACT [~TRUSTEEiSI {~ GU ARDIAk,~CON SERVATOR E}OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: (Name of Pmr#onie) or Entlty(iee) RIGHT THUMBPRINT )Optional) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER(S) DINDIVIDUAL(S) ;-1CORPORATE (~PARTHER(S) C1LIMITED E]GENERAt. {~ATTORNEY IN FACT r~TRUSTEE(S) ~GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [DOTHER: SIGNER I$ REPRESENTING: (Name of Permon(s) or Entity(imm) CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PW99-'I 'I (INTERIM) PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS This is to certify that R.J. Noble Company, (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW99-11 (INTERIM), PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW99-11 (INTERIM), PALA ROAD PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute None Pursuant to Public Contracts Code §7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reasoh of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. Dated: August 19, 2002 CONTRACTOR Stan Hilton~ Secretary Print Name and Title RELEASE R-1 R:\CIP\PROJECTS~PWgg~99-11~INTERIM~2.002 INTERIM BID DOC ITEM 10 APPROVAL /~-~,~ jr"--- CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Peter Thorson, City Attorney October 8, 2002 Consideration of Joining Other California Cities in Filing an Amicus Curiae Brief in the California Supreme in Support of the City of Burbank in the Invocation Case (Rubin v. City of Burbank) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council Authorize joining with other California cities in the filing an amicus curiae brief ("friend of the court brief") in support of the City of Burbank's position in the case of Rubin v. City of Burbank challenging the content of invocations given at the beginning of city council meetings and authorize the City Attorney to file the necessary documents with the court. BACKGROUND: On September 9th, the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles ruled that invocations at Burbank City Council meetings were unconstitutional because the City atlowed religious persons to use the name of deities in their invocations. The Court held that while invocations at the beginning of a council meeting are constitutional, they must not use sectarian prayers. Like many cities, Burbank has had a long practice of beginning City Council meetings with an invocation. Burbank typically relies on members of the Burbank Ministerial Association, a non- denominational organization of clergy and representatives of other groups, to deliver its invocations. In practice, neither the subject matter nor the content of invocations has been influenced by the Burbank City Council or the Burbank City Clerk. The Rubin case arose from an invocation given at the November 23, 1999 Burbank City Council meeting. The invocation was given by a religious whose invocation concluded as follows: "We are grateful heavenly Father for all that thou has poured out on us and we express our gratitude and love in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen." Two plaintiffs sued Burbank on the theory that it is a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause to begin a City Council meeting with a religious prayer invoking the name of Jesus Christ. The trial court determined that the November 23rd invocation was "sectarian" and therefore unconstitutional. It permanently enjoined Burbank from "knowingly and intentionally allowing sectarian prayer at City Council meetings." It also ordered Burbank to "advise anyone conducting an invocation as part of the City Council meeting that sectarian prayers are not permitted." R:/Agenda Repods/Rubin v Burbank 1 The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in its entirety. In the court's view, the "Jesus Christ" reference in the November 23rd invocation resulted in a violation of the Establishment Clause. On this point, the court reasoned as follows: "By directing the prayer to 'Our Father in Heaven ... in the name of Jesus Christ' the invocation conveyed the message that the Burbank City Council was a Christian body, and from this it could be inferred that the council was advancing a religious belief." [Rubin, supra at 10355.] The Court of Appeal was not persuaded by Burbank's argument that people giving invocations have a free speech right to include a sectarian prayer. On this point, the court declared: "In light of the fact that the legislative invocation given at the Burbank City Council meeting took place on government property, was authorized by the long standing policy of the city council, was part of the official agenda of the council meeting, and was for the purpose of calling for spiritual assistance in the work of the legislative body, we are satisfied that it was not 'private speech' ... As such those who provide legislative invocations at the Burbank City Council meetings are subject to the requirement that the prayers should comport with the First Amendment." [Rubin, supra at 10356.] The Burbank City Council will be filing a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court prior to October 21,2002. Numerous cities have expressed an interest in joining in a friend of the court brief in support of the City of Burbank. The Legal Advocacy Committee of the League of California Cities will consider the matter on October 3, 2002 and is expected to recommend that all cities join in the friend of the court brief in support of the City of Burbank. FISCAL IMPACT: the cities. None. The brief will be prepared and fi[ed on behalf of cities at no cost to R:/Agenda Reports/Rubin v Burbank 2 ITEM 11 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAJ~~' CITY MANAGER ~ ,// CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and Members of the City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager October 8, 2002 Vandalism Reward for Norm Reeves 9-11 Memorial Monument (Placed on the Agenda at the Request of Council Member Jeff Comerchero) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize a $2,500 matching reward for information leading to the arrest of those responsible for vandalizing Norm Reeves 9-I 1 Memodal Monument and adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF A REWARD FUND FOR PERSONS WHO FURNISH INFORMATION LEADING TO THE ARREST AND CONVICTION OF THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VANDALISM TO THE REEVES 9-11 MEMORIAL. BACKGROUND: The Norm Reeves Auto Dealership recently constructed a 9-11 memodal monument on its property containing the words "In God We Trust." The memorial was recently destroyed and Norm Reeves is offering a $2,500 reward for information leading to the arrest of the vandals. Councilmember Jeff Comerchero has requested that the City match the Norm Reeves reward for the arrest of those responsible for this reprehensible act. The City is committed to · thoroughly investigating this incident and seeing that the perpetrators are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, FISCAL IMPACT: This matching request of $2,500 will bring the total reward to $5,000 for information leading to the arrest of the vandals. Adequate funds are available in the Police Department budget to cover this request for a $2,500 reward. Attachment: Resolution No, 02- RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF A REWARD FUND FOR PERSONS WHO FURNISH INFORMATION LEADING TO THE ARREST AND CONVICTION OF THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VANDALISM TO THE REEVES 9-11 MEMORIAL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA HEREBY FINDS AND RESOLVES: Section 1. Pursuant to Califomia Government Code Section 53069.5, the City Council hereby approves the establishment of a reward fund for the purpose of encouraging persons having information regarding the identity and whereabouts of any person or persons who are responsible for the vandalism to the Reeves 9-11 Memorial located at Norm Reeves Super Group, 26845 Ynez Road, Temecula, Calitbmia, on September 30 or October 1, 2002, to provide such information to the appropriate law erfforcement authorities. The Council hereby sets the amount of the City's contribution to the fund to be $2,500.00. Section 2. The reward fund is hereby named the "Reeves 9-11 Memorial Reward Fund" (hereinafter "the Fund"). The Fund shall be maintained in the Treasury of the City of Temecula by the Director of Finance. No money shall be paid out of such account without the approval of the City Council, and disbursement checks shall be processed through the City's established demand check procedures. Section 3. The public is invited to contribute to the Fund to increase its balance. Contributions can be made at the Director of Finance's office in City Hall. All contributions by the public for purposes of increasing the balance in the Fund that are received by the City of Temecula or made payable to the City of Temecula shall be deposited into the Fund account by the Director of Finance. Records of the names and addresses of donors, the amounts contributed, and date such donations were received shall be maintained by the Director of Finance. Section 4. the Fund shall: Persons who desire to be eligible to receive all or a portion of the money in (a) submit written, oral, physical or other evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the vandalism to the Reeves 9-11 Memorial by January 15, 2003, to the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, or to any other law enforcement agency; and (b) cooperate with the Sheriff's department and with any prosecuting attorneys during the investigation, trial preparation and trial phases of the criminal justice process involving persons suspected of vandalizing the Reeves 9-I 1 Memorial.. Page 1 Section 5. Persons who satisfy the criteria of Section 4 shall be considered for receipt of all or part of the reward upon conviction of the person charged in the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial and upon approval of the distribution.by the City Council. Section 6. Law enforcement personnel and any Federal, State or City of Temecula employee discovering the identity and whereabouts of the person or persons convicted of causing the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial during the scope and course of his or her employment shall not be eligible to receive the reward. Any person charged with causing, or complicity in, the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial shall not be eligible to receive the reward. Section 7. If any person or persons are convicted of causing the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial, the City Manager shall request the Sheriffs Department to obtain a certified copy of the entry of judgment in the case and to forward such document to the City. The City Manager shall also request the Sheriffs Department to prepare a report as to the names of persons providing information to the Sheriffs Department and any other law enforcement agency that led to the arrest and conviction of the persons causing the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial. Such report shall set forth the relative importance of the information submitted by each person if there is more than one and shall include a recommended pro rata distribution of the reward to persons who submit information leading to the arrest and conviction.. The City Manager shall request that such report be submitted to the City within thirty (30) days of the conviction. If more than one person is standing trial for causing the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial, the report shall not be forwarded until the last person charged is either convicted or acquitted. Section 8. Upon receipt of the Report specified in Section 7 and any public comment, the City Council shall consider and approve or disapprove the disbursement of the monies in the Fund. Section 9. Upon approval of disbursements from the Fund by the City Council, a check or checks for disbursement of the monies in the Fund account shall thereupon be drawn in accordance with the Council's decision and the disbursement instructions. All such checks shall be processed through the City's established demand check procedures. Upon disbursement of all monies in the Fund, the City Treasurer shall close the Fund account. Section 10. If no person has been apprehended or charged with causing the vandalism of the Reeves 9-11 Memorial by October 1, 2003, all monies in the Fund shall be returned, with interest accrued thereon, to the respective donors. Any undisbursed balance shall be deposited to the City General Fund for law enforcement or public safety purposes designated by the City Council. If one or more persons have been so apprehended and charged but not yet convicted by October 1, 2003, the Fund shall be retained until trial of the person or persons charged has been completed. If a conviction is not obtained, disbursements shall be made as provided above in this Section. Page 2 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATTEST: SUSAN JONES, CMC CITY CLERK Page 3 ITEM 12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY / ' ~/""'~' DIRECTOR OF FIN/(NCE,/"~~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Grant Yates, Assistant to the City Manager October 8, 2002 Resolution of Support for Proposition 47 (Placed on the agenda at the request of Mayor Roberts) PREPARED BY: Aaron Adams, Sr. Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 47-THE KINDERGARTEN-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2002 BACKGROUND: Proposition 47 will improve student achievement and test scores by reducing overcrowding and providing a clean, safe place for kids to learn. The Kindergarten- University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002 authorizes a $13.05 billion bond to put Californians back to w~rk fixing old schools and building some of the 46,000 new classrooms needed and cannot be spent on bureaucracyor wasteful overhead. School construction and repair projects are subject to audits and strict accountability Proposition 47 would provide Temecula Valley Unified School District with immediate funding for High School #3, Middle School #5, Temecula Valley High School 2-Story Building - Opened in 2001, Wolf Creek Elementary School, Chaparral High School E~pansion, Vail Elementary Expansion and Margarita Middle School Expansion projects. These projects represent $107,674,892 in anticipated State funding, with additional capacity for 7,176 new students in 278 new classrooms. Better Schools. Proposition 47 will help fix leaky roofs, repair broken bathrooms, install heating and air conditioning, upgrade college laboratories and research facilities, and give students access to the technology they need to meet academic standards, improve test scores and compete in the modern workforce. More Classrooms. California has the 2nd most overcrowded classrooms in the country. The Office of Public School Construction data shows that we need 46,000 new classrooms in the next 5 years to relieve overcrowding. Strict Accountability. Proposition 47 funds can only be used for school construction and renovation and are subject to audits and strict accountability Puffing Califomians Back To Work. Economic studies show Proposition 47 will have the added benefit of creating 250,000 new jobs at a time when we need them the most. The Temecula Valley Unified School District as well as the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce have already taken a position of support on this proposition. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time Attachments: Resolution 02- RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 47-THE KINDERGARTEN-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2002 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND REQUEST AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, Proposition 47-The Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002--provides $13.05 billion in bonds to relieve overcrowding, reduce class size and repair and upgrade California's elementary, middle and high schools, community colleges and universities; and WHEREAS, California has the second most overcrowded classrooms in the country; 22% of all K-12 public school students are on year-round class schedules because there isn't enough space in overcrowded school districts; and one-third of all K-12 classrooms in the state are portable trailers; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 is needed to build some of the 46,000 new classrooms that data from the Office of Public school Construction shows are needed in the next five years; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 ensures every critically overcrowded school district is eligible for its fair share of funds to build new classrooms; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 funds will help fix leaky roofs, repair broken bathrooms, install heating and air conditioning, upgrade college laboratories and research facilities, and give students access to the technology they need to meet academic standards, improve test scores and compete in the modern workforce; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 provides matching funds to school districts that have already or will soon pass local school construction bond measures; and WHEREAS, The California Taxpayers' Association supports Proposition 47 because it requires strict accountability to ensure funds are spent properly and where they are needed most; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 funds can only be used for school construction and renovation and are subject to audits and strict accountability; and Prop. 47 also targets funds to where they're most needed - to overcrowded schools and deteriorating schools needing repair; and WHEREAS, Proposition 47 will have the added benefit of creating 250,000 new jobs at a time when we need them the most, putting Californians back to work while building a better learning environment for our children; and wHEREAs, Proposition 47 is supported by a large and diverse coalition, including the California State PTA, California Teachers Association, California Taxpayers' Association, California Chamber of Commerce, League of Women Voters of California, Californians for Higher Education, California Federation of Teachers, California Building Industry Association, California Business Roundtable, Congress of California Seniors and local teachers across the state. Resos\99-40 I THEREFORE [BE IT RESOLVED, The City of Temecula City Council supports Proposition 47, the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of October, 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, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 00- 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 October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Resos\99-40 2 ITEM 13 ORDINANCE NO. 02-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002, to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-22 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-23 recommending that the City Council approve of a Zone Change for the Project, and adopt the Rancho Pueblo R:/Ords2002/02-04 1 Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-6) with the recommended amendments as described on the Errata Sheets attached hereto. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- Section 2. The City Council hereby amend the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as follows: For the properties identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 and 959-070-001 thru -006, set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 3. The City Council hereby amend Chapter 17.22 of the Temecula Municipal Code by adding thereto the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-6) as Sections 17.22.160 through 17.22.178, inclusive, amended as described on the Errata Sheets, of the Temecuia Municipal Code, as said sections are set forth in the document attached hereto as Exhibit B to this Ordinance and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002 ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] PJOrds2002/02-04 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 02-04 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 24th day of September, 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 8th day of October, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk PJOrds2002/02-04 3 EXHIBIT "A" PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522 (Zone Change) RANCHO PUEBLO PLANNED DEVELOMPMENT OVERLAY MAP (PDO-6) CITY COUNCIL DATE - September 24, 2002 R/Ords2002/02-04 4 EXHIBIT B Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay - 6 R/Ords2002/02-04 5 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:23 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Stone presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 3 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Pratt, Stone ABSENT: 2 DIRECTORS: Naggar, Roberts Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 27, 2002. 2 Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract - Chaparral High School Swimming Pool - Proiect No. PW00-08CSD RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Accept the project Chaparral High School Swimming Pool - Project No. PW00- 08CSD as complete; 2.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a twelve- month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 2.2 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. MOTION: Director Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 2. The motion was seconded by Director Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Directors Naggar and Roberts who were absent. Minutes.csd\092402 1 DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No additional comments. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comment. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT General Manager Nelson relayed his appreciation to the School District for its cooperation with the completion of the Chaparral Pool project, noting that this facility will benefit the community and residents for many years to come. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:24 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 8, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\092402 2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:24 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 3 AGENCY MEMBERS: Pratt, Stone, and Comerchero ABSENT: 2 AGENCY MEMBER: Naggar, Roberts 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 September 17, 2002. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Naggar and Agency Member Roberts who were absent.. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. R:~vlin utes.rda\092402 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:25 PM., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 8, 2.002, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R;\Minutes.rda\092402 2 ITEM 14 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN,,~'~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/C~uncil Debbie Ubnoske~Dire~c~ctor of Planning October 8, 2002 Villages of Temecula General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138); Change of Zone (PA00-0139); Development Plan (PA00-0140); Tentative Parcel Map (PA00- 0152) PREPARED BY: Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant 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 ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 2. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013, AND 0t4, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Ternecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.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 PLANNING APPLICATION PA00- 0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,014. 4. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL / OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0'12, 0t3, AND 0'14. 5. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0152 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29140 SUBDIVIDING THE SITE FROM 3 LOTS INTO 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013, AND 014. BACKGROUND: The Villages of Temecula project located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the intersection of Moraga Road and Rancho California Road was originally scheduled for the City Council meeting on June 25, 2002. However, the applicant's representative Markham Development Management Group, Inc. requested that the project be continued to either the July 23ra or the August 13th, 2002 City Council Meeting in order to R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\l 0-8-02 CC Staff Report. doc 2 address the concerns of the surrounding property owners. Subsequently, the applicant's representative requested a second continuance until the September 17, 2002 City Council meeting to continue discussions with the neighbors and City Council members. On September 17, 2002 the project was heard by the City Council. As a result, staff recommended continuance of the project until the October 8, 2002 City Council Meeting in order to review the revised exhibits resulting from that Public Hearing. DISCUSSION: At the Council Meeting on September 17, 2002 staff recommended continuance to further review the modified exhibits presented to the City Council by the applicant's representative, Markham Development Management Group, Inc. and address any concerns voiced by the Council. The following exhibits were reviewed by staff: [] The Modified Conceptual Grading Plan [] The Modified Site Section Plan(s) The modifications to the project included removal of the entire apartment building along the east boundary of the property, the relocation of the apartment building along the southerly portion of the site closer to the Recreation Building in the apartment complex, the addition of a third story for four (4) apartment buildings, additional garages located along the east boundary, the lowering of the entire apartment pad elevation by eight (8) feet, the landscape proposal for the 2 acre open space area recreational area at the southwest corner of the property and three (3) additional tot lots added to the apartment complex site. Additionally, the City Council raised the following concerns at the October 8, 2002 hearing: [] Traffic impacts related to the proposed Change of Zone application. [] A possible access pathway for the children living within the apartment complex to Vail Elementary School. City Staff has reviewed the modified exhibits that were submitted by the applicant's representative. The Public Works Department and the Temecula Community Services Department (TCSD) have confirmed that no additional changes to the conditions of approval are necessary as a result of the modifications proposed. Additionally, the Temecula Community Services Department (TCSD) has chosen not to accept the open space area at the southwest corner of the project for maintenance or as mitigation required by the Quimby Ordinance. The Planning Depadment has reviewed the modified exhibits submitted. According to the modified grading plans, site sections and site plan, the view shed that would be provided to neighboring residents would substantially improve as a result of lowering the apartment building pads eight (8) feet. Additionally, the removal of the proposed apartment building at the east side of the project will provide more than sufficient buffering to the neighbors to the east located on lots 4, 5, 6 and 7. The view from the rear of lots 4, 5, and 6 would be above the rooftops of the parking garages. The view for Lot 7 will not change as a result of the grading proposed. The additional set back of 27 feet has been provided for the three-story apartment building along the southerly portion of the property, which will also provide more than sufficient buffering. The City Traffic Engineer has analyzed the projected traffic impacts resulting from the proposed mix of uses permitted by the PDO, and has determined that the project would generate approximately 1,455 fewer daily trips and 78 fewer PM peak hour trips than is projected for uses with the current zoning designation. Additionally the applicant has indicated that they would R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 3 reasonably cooperate with all adjacent properly owners in order to develop a possible access pathway for the children living within the apartment complex to Vail Elementary School. ATTACHMENTS: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Draft Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment Draft Ordinance approving Zone Change Draft Resolution approving Development Plan Draft Resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map Planning Commission Minutes Adopted Planning Commission Resolutions Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits City Council Agenda Report (June 25, 2002) Revised and new exhibits a. Modified Conceptual Grading Plan b. Modified Site Section Plan (Sections "M", "V", "W", "X", and "Y"). c. Modified Site Section Plan (Sections "1 through L"). d. Modified Site Plan and Sub Area Map e. Modified Landscape Plan R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 5 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA00- 0138, PA00-0t39, PA00-0140 AND PA00-0152, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO (S). 944-290-0t 2, 013, AND 0'14. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section t. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and MJW Property Group filed Planning Application Nos. PA00-0138, General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139, Zone Change, PA00-0140, Development Plan, and PA00-0152, Tentative Parcel Map, for the property consisting of approximately 23 acres and generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2002 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-003 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project, a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Development Plan and Tentative Parcel Map. On September 17, 2002 and October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project and all comments received regarding the Mitigated R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-~ 1 Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca. 92589. The City Council reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration were discussed at a public hearing of the City Council held on September 17, 2002 and October 8, 2002. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA There is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with law. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project and approves the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination describing the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program by the City Council in the Offices of the County Clerk of the County of Riverside in accordance with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8h day of October, 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 held on the 8th day of October, 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 INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Temecula Village Development Lead Agency Name and City of Temecula Address P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner Number (909) 694-6400 Project Location The south side of Rancho California Road, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of Rancho California Road and Cosmic Drive. Unsectioned land within T8S, R3W, located on the USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangle, San Bernardino Base and Meridian. (APN # 944-290-012, 013, 014) Project Sponsor's Name and TV Development, LP ~.ddress c/o Markham Development Management Group, Inc. 41750 Winchester Road, Suite N Temecula, CA 92590 General Plan Designation Professional Office (12.74 acres) Medium Density Residential (7-12 dwelling units/acre) (10.23 acres) Zoning Same as General Plan Description of Project The Project consists of the following planning applications: 1. PA00-0138 proposes a General Plan Amendment which will reorient the current north / south boundaries of (PO) Professional Office (12.74 acres) and (M) Medium Density (10.23 acres) to an east / west orientation of 7.71 acres of (PO) Professional Office and 15.26 acres of (M) Medium Density. 2. PA00-0139 proposes a Zoning Amendment which overlays the current zoning of (PO) Professional Office and (M) Medium Density with a mixed- use office/retail (PDO-5) Planned Development Overlay. 3. PA00-0152 proposes a Tentative Parcel Map subdividing the current three pamels, which are a portion of lot 24 of Tract 3334, into 8 individual parcels. 4. PA00-0140 proposes to construct 160 attached single-family residential units on approximately 15.26 acres. The apartment buildings will consist of two-story structures with stucco exteriors consisting of simple horizontal or gabled parapets. The project also proposes 71,100 square foot of single story and two-story office/retail space on approximately 7.71 acres. Access to the project site will be from Rancho California Road. Surrounding Land Uses and Rancho California Road serves as the nodh boundary of the project site, Setting with commemial and multi-family development located on the nodh side of the road. Single-family residential uses are located to the east and south. Undeveloped open area, approved by the City for multi-family residential use is located to the west. Other pubic agencies whose The only other agency approval that may be required is an incidental take approval is required permit (ITP) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No stream channels are located on this ridge located south of Rancho California Road, therefore an Army Corps 404 Permit or Department of Fish and Game 1603 Agreement appears not to be required. No Regional Board approvals are required. R:~D P~O00~O0-O140 Village of Temecula~laitial Study.~f 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 and Hazardous Materials Population and Housing Noise X: Geology and Soils Public Services Water Utilities and Service Systems Air Quality Aesthetics Transportation/Cimulation ~( Cultural Resoumes X: Biological Resoumes Recreation Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance None R:~,D FA2000~O-O 140 Viilage of yemecuia~lnitial Study,rff 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 effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ~X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or 'potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothin~l further is required. Printed Name: Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner For: City of Temecula R:~D P~2000~O0-O t 40 Village of Ternecula~lnitial Study.rff 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: ~ncoq~ed a. Physically divide an established community?. X b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation X of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 14a 1.b f.C The project site is surrounded with urban/suburban development. Residential uses exist to the south and east; multi-family residential development has been approved on the vacant property located immediately to the west; and commemial development exists to the north of Rancho California Road which is one of the major east-west arterials in the City of Temocula. The construction and occupancy of 160 residential units and 71,100 square feet of office/retail on this approximate 22.97-acre property will be an urban infill development project. The type of project proposed and the location of the project eliminate any possibility of causing adverse impact from physically dividing an established community. Based on the site's medium density residential and professional office designations, and the infill character of the pr'oject site, the proposed Temecula Village project is consistent with the village center and planned development overlay concepts presented in the General Plan and Development Code. The proposed project does not pose any significant adverse land use impacts with implementation of required mitigation. The project [equires the approval of a General Plan Amendment and a Change of Zone. Potential mitigation for other issues is discussed in the appropriate sections of this Initial Study. No mitigation is required for land use issues beyond those that are already included in the proposed project Planned Development Overlay. The project site constitutes an island of undeveloped property that is surrounded on all sides by urban and suburban dew~lopment. The site does contain disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat, but it is not identified in the City General Plan or any other agency plans as part of a habitat conservation plan or a natural community conservation plan. Converting the property to suburban uses comparable to that surrounding the site will require mitigation through acquisition of an incidental take permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, but discussions with the Service biologists indicate that the appropriate solution for this site is not to retain it as permanent habitat due to the surrounding level of development. If mitigation is required based on the presence of the California Gnatcatcher, the Service Staff indicates that it should be acquired offsite at a location determined suitable by the Service (See Biological Resources Section). 2~ POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (fop example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: 2.a The City General Plan designated a total of 772 acres of medium density residential land use. The proposed project will convert -15.26 acres of this designation to 160 apartment units. At an occupancy rate of 2.83 persons per unit, the total population that will occupy this project at full occupancy is forecast to be 453 persons. However, as Temecula Village is an infill project where many service needs of residents are provided onsite, it is not forecast to inducer population growth that will exceed the capacity of roads, utilities, and other infrastructure anticipated in the General Plan. Additionally, the proposed office/retail uses on site are only approximately two-thirds of the minimum FAR square footage anticipated in the General Plan for this site (.21 compared to a minimum of .3), and 20% of the maximum FAR (.21 compared to the maximum FAR of 1.0). Based on this evaluation, the proposed project is not forecast to cause significant growth within the City of Temecula. 2.b 2.C The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace any existing housing. The project will provide critically needed apartment housing units for the City, and equally important, the adjacent professional and commercial development can reduce the overall trip generation by allowing pedestrian trips to replace vehicle trips. The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace any existing population. The project provides essential rental housing that will serve a portion of the City's residents which relies upon this type of housing which is in very short supply within the City and surrounding area No mitigation is required. R:'~D P~O00~00-O 140 Village of Temecul~'Jnitial Study.~ 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involvin~l: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the X most recent AIquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral , spreadiog, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. i Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or propert},?. e. I Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of X ' septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewate~ Comments: 3.a A detailed description of the City's geology and soils is contained in Chapter 4.1 of the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). According to the GPEIR, the City of Temecula is in Ground shaking Zone II, which will experience moderate to intense ground shaking in the event of a major regional earthquake. Geologic mitigation measure 5 is identified in Section 4.1.3 of the GPEIR and ii is deemed adequate to reduce potential ground shaking impacts to a level of no significance. No additional mitigation is required. A review of the City's Fault Hazard Zones in the General Plan (Figure 7-1) indicates that the project site is not located within a fault hazard zone and it has a very Iow probability of being exposed to fault rupture. A review of the City's Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards in the General Plan (Figure 7-2) indicates that the project site is not located within a zone of potential subsidence or liquefaction. The proposed project has a very Iow probability of being exposed to these geologic hazards. Although the project site is located on a Iow ridge, no landslides were observed on the property proposed for development. A geotechnical investigation by CHJ Incorporated reached this same conclusion. A copy of this geotechnical study is available at the City Planning Department office for review if desired. The lack of observed landslides, the Iow vertical relief of the site, and the shallow slopes would indicate a Iow potential for being exposed to significant landslide hazards on this project site. 3.b Development of the project site will expose it to potential erosion and downstream sedimentation. The General Plan requires mitigation for project to control erosion. Further, specific requirements have been established under the state-wide NPDES program that requires every project to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction and over the long-term. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are identified in the SWPPP to control erosion on a site and any sedimentation R:~D P~OO0\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Jn~tiel Study.~ generated by disturbing the site for development. Mitigation is required to control potential erosion and sedimentation. The following standard City condition of approval shall be implemented. 3.b. 1 The SWPPP prepared for this project shall implement BMPs identified in the County's Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the performance standard that must be met is to minimize erosion on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded sediment on the project site. 3.C As noted under issue 3.a, the project site has a minimal potential for any instability related to subsidence, liquefaction, or landalides. Based on a review of the General Plan, the Friant-Lodo-Escondido Association underlies the site and it has no potential to be expansive or create hazards related to expansive soils. The project site will be served by a sewer collection system so there is no potential for the site to have adverse impacts related to use of subsurface wastewater disposal systems. Implementation of mitigation measure #5 (General Plan) in the General Plan for ground shaking impacts and measure 3.b.1 for erosion/sedimentation impacts will reduce the only potentially significant geology and soil impacts to a level of no significance. R:'~D P'~?.000~O-O 140 Village of Ten~.~cula~nitla] Study. rd ; 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALIFY. Would the project: Signa~ant ~gnacant S~g~cent tmpact ~act U~ess ~ ~ a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. I Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 1. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Ivlap or other flood hazard delineation maD? h. Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which X would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X . injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 4.a The proposed project would permit development of 160 multi-family residential dwelling units and 71,100 sq. ft. of office/retail space. This type of development does not generally generate any wastewater, other than domestic or municipal, which will require treatment or waste discharge requirements. No water quality standards are forecast to be violated by implementing the proposed project. Wastewater will be delivered to the regional treatment plant for treatment under waste discharge requirements established by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. During construction and occupancy implementation of BMPs as outlined in Supplement A of the Riverside County DAMP will be implemented which will control pollution to a level of no significance. See mitigation measure 3.b.1 .(See Condition Of Approval, 3.b.1) 4.b The project site is located on a ridge, which has no potential to serve as a recharge location for surface runoff. Therefore, the project has no potential to adversely intedere with groundwater recharge. The proposed project does not include any extraction of groundwater, so no adverse direct impact can result from implementing the proposed project. The GPEIR addresses water demand from development in the City of Temecula, including 772 acres of medium density residential uses and 520 acres professional R:\D P~2000~O*0140 Village of Temecula~lnitial Study.rtl 4.C 4.d 4.e 4.f 4.g 4.h office uses. Rancho California Water District has confirmed in the "will serve" letter dated May 17, 2000 that water will be available upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assign water rights. The GPEIR concludes that the City's two purveyom can meet cumulative water demand within the City without having a significant adveme impact on the environment, including depletion of the areas groundwater supplies. The proposed development increases the number of dwelling units anticipated in the General Plan by 37 and increases demand for residential uses. However, the decrease in commemial/office acreage (5.03) and actual proposed commemial/office square footage (71,100 square feet compared to a permissible a range of between 100,754 and 335,000 square feet under the applicable Floor Ama Ratio (FAR)), and consequent decrease in water demand for commercial/office uses, decreases water demand mom than the additional 37 residences will increase demand. Therefore, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant cumulative, indirect adverse impact on the area groundwater aquifem. The project site presently drains to existing storm drains in Rancho California Road and at the southwest comer of the project site. From them runoff entem the regional drainage system, which terminates in Murrieta Creek and ultimately the Santa Margarita River. The existing drainage pattern will be retained after project development. Erosion and siltation issues are addressed in previous discussions under geology and hydrology. A preliminary drainage/hydrology study prepared by engineem of Markham Development Management Group, Inc. verifies that the existing drainage system is adequate to accept the volume project runoff from the developed site without causing any significant adveme downstream impacts. As noted in 4.c above, the project would not alter the existing site or area drainage system. It will increase runoff as a result of increasing the impervious sudace on the project site, but the City imposes standard conditions to detain surface runoff on the property to ensure that the maximum runoff volume from the site is not be significantly increased. NO adverse impacts are forecast to affect properties downstream of the site from developing the project as proposed. Please refer to the discussion under 4.d above. Please refer to the discussion under 4.a above. The project site is located on a ridge and is not located in the vicinity of any identified 100-year flood hazard area. No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. The project site is located on a ridge and is not located in the vicinity of any identified dam inundation flood hazard area. No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from develop!ng the project site as proposed. .Since the project is not near any water body and is located on a ridge, no potential exists for the site to be adversely impactecl by inundation from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. R;'~D P~2000',00-0140 Village of Ternecula~nitial Study.~ 5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable x air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially x to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any x criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant x concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number x jot people? Comments: 5.a 5.b 5.C The land use designations will vary somewhat from that which is contained in the City's General Plan. A total of 37 additional multifamily residential units are being proposed on the project site than would be permitted under the existing land use designations. In addition, the amount of commercial development has been reduced on the project site in order to create a pedestrian scale commerciaVoffice development. The proposed project modification is of such a small scale and meets the objective of providing adequate multifamily housing adjacent to a commemial and job generating development that the overall reduction in trip generation and vehicle miles traveled will be fully consistent with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Development of the project site with mitigation measures as outlined in the SCAQMD ~CEQA Air Quality Handbook" will not conflict with any applicable air quality plan. Air quality within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) is improving, and development of the proposed project will be in full conformance with the RCPG and AQMP because it contains all of the elements identified in these plants to minimize trip generation and vehicle miles traveled. The proposed project's development will ensure that the emissions will be minimized to the maximum extent possible and will contribute to the regional pregrems being implemented to ensure that air quality emissions in the SoCAB will ultimately be brought within the carrying capacity of the Basin. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook contains a screening table for operations and construction impacts. Under Table 6-2 of the Handbook, the threshold for potential cumulative significant air emissions is 261 apartment units. The comparable threshold for development of office and commemial development is 96.221 square feet and 50,000 square feet respectively. The project proposes 36,000 square feet of office space and about 35,100 square feet of commercial development, including an -9,600 square foot day care center. The proposed project falls below these thresholds and therefore, this project does not have a potential to cause significant air emissions within the basin during operation. Regarding construction (refer to Table 6-3 in the Handbook), the total area to be graded is approximately -23 acres, which will occur over a period of one to two months. The threshold for significant grading air quality impacts is 177 acres quarterly; therefore, the proposed project falls below these thresholds. Assuming an average of 2,000 square feet for each unit, the total gross floor area (GFA) for the multifamily project is 320,000 square feet of GFA which is also below the threshold of significance for apartments (1,410,000 GFA) and the 71,1000 square foot commercial area falls well below the 975,000 GFA in Table 6-3 of the Handbook. Based on these comparisons, the proposed project will not cause or contribute to cumulative significant increases in air emissions. To prevent nuisance fugitive dust standard erosion/dust control measures are required as conditions of grading and building permits. I~D P~2000~00-O 140 Village of Temecuta~lnitial Study. rtl §.d 5.e None of the activities at the project site (multifamily residences or the commemial/office uses) have a potential to generate significant volumes of pollutants or create substantial pollutant concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors. None of the activities at the project site have a potential to generate significant odors or create substantial odor concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors. R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Tern ecula",lnitial Study. rtf 6. TRANSPORTATION I TRAFFIC. Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. :{esult in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capacit~ X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Comments: 6.a A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates (Traffic Impact Analysis Temecula Village Development) for a project with a total of 454 single family units and a mixed-use retail and commercial village center on the project site end an adjacent -21 acre parcel to the west. This study was revised and updated in August 2000. The proposed project consists of 160 apartment units and 71,100 square feet of office/retail use, which fall within the scope of .the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). The proposed project is an infill development. The TIA concluded the following regarding the area circulation system impacts: "Under both year 2001 With and Without Project traffic conditions, the intersections of Rancho California Road at the 1-15 Southbound Ramps, F15 Northbound Ramps and Ynez Road are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service (i.e., worse than LOS D) during the PM peak hour...With roadway improvements planned at these' intersections, and with the opening of Overland Drive overpass...the three intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better, for both the Year 2001 Without Project and With Project traffic conditions. These improvements are now in place. Consequently, WSA does not propose any specific measures to mitigate project traffic impacts." "The developer will be responsible for payment of development impact fees in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City. Prior to project opening, the City may negotiate an agreement with the developer to implement off-site improvements in exchange for fee credits." Based on the data contained in the TIA, the proposed project can be implemented without causing any significant adverse impacts to the circulation system. 6.b Please refer to the discussion in 6.a above. 6.c The project site is notlecated near any airport and has no potentialto adversely impact any airtraffic pa~erns. 6.d Based on the TIA, the proposed project circulation system improvements will not cause any roadway hazards. 6.e Emergency access to the project site will be via Rancho California Road on the north and two private roads, one extending south from Rancho California Road along the west side of the proposed project and another road entering the shopping center. These two roads will provide adequate emergency access. R:\D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula'dnitial Study.~ 6.f 6.g The applicant has provided adequate parking spaces to meet the City's Development Code requirements in both the commercial/office (Sub areas A and B) and multifamily development (Sub area C) areas, The project will be conditioned to provide alternative transportation facilities consistent with the road improvements serving the project site and provides a bus bay and seating with shelter designed to be used as a transit stop No conflict or adverse impact to adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or programs is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. R:~D P',2000100'O 140 Village of Temecula',Jnitial Study.~ 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species, identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish' and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or X regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game Or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish er wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resoumes, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments; 7.a The letter from United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service dated May 31,200'0, recommends that focused surveys occur within suitable habitat on site prior to any ground disturbing activities. According to the Biological Survey, the project site contains a mix of coastal sage scrub (CSS), ruderal/disturbed lands and non-native trees. Biological surveys were prepared for the project site. No sensitive plants and no Quino Checkerspot Butterflies (QCB) were identified on the property, but a pair California Gnatcatchers (CAGN) were identified. Therefore, based on the current survey, an incidental take permit will need to be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or FVVS). Based on initial discussions with the Service's Staff, the preference is for offsite mitigation at a 3:1 ratio for CSS and a 1:1 ratio for the disturbed grassland, with appropriate endowments and protection of resources at the mitigation site. Therefore, the following mitigation measure will be implemented. 7.a.1 The project developer shall acquire compensatory mitigation acreage off the project site as outlined above for the -23 acre parcel. Pdor to grading the project site, the developer shall provide the City with a copy of the incidental take permit issued for the proposed development. 7.b The project site does not contain any waters of the United States, riparian or wetland resources. Therefore, development of the proposed project cannot adversely impact such resources. 7.c Please refer to the discussion in 7.c above. R:~ P~000~00-0140 Village of Tem~ula~lnitial Study, rtl 7.d The project site is surrounded by urban/suburban development and as an infill parcel, its development has no potential to adversely impact wildlife movement. 7.e There are non-native tree species on the site that may require acquisition of a permit for removal. The developer is required to obtain such a permit and no mitigation is required to ensure that the permit will be obtained prior to removal of any trees en the property. 7.f Development of the proposed project does not conflict with the provisions of any habitat conservation plan and, in fact, with the mitigation outlined above should support implementation of such plans. No additional mitigation will be required for the proposed project. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: I~corpocat ed a. Result in the loss oi' availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: 8.a 8.b There are no mineral resource designations nor any known mineral resources on this project site Since the site is located on a ridge, outside of alluvial deposits, no potential for sand and gravel resources exists on the project site. Development of the site has no potential to lose access to known and available mineral resources since none occur on the project site, nor is access required across the site to such resources. No mitigation is required for the proposed project, R:~) 1:~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~ln[tial Study. Itl 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementalion of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, X injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands? Comments: 9.a The proposed project will consist of residential, o~fice and retail uses that do not involve significant potential for routine transport or use of hazardous materials or routine generation of hazardous wastes beyond those normally encountered in urban/suburban "village center" type setting, typically termed "household hazardous wastes". The one exception to this finding is the possibility of installing a gasoline station at the project site. Therefore, a potential does exist for this project to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through its implementation· Gasoline service stations are heavily regulated, regarding both the management of fuel on the site and required operating conditions, which are established through the County and other regulatory agencies, such as the South Coast Air Quality Management District. To ensure that the implementation of a service station on the project site does not pose any significant health hazard through the routine transport of hazardous materials for use and for disposal, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 9.a. I Pdor to authorization to begin operations by receiving fuel or other hazardous petroleum materials, the developer shall provide the City with the following materials: the Business Plan filed with the Department of Environmental Health that outlines how hazardous products will be safely delivered to the site; managed on the site; and removed from the site as hazardous waste, if any. This will include all safety measures required to minimize hazards and public health risks as outlined in the required spill prevention, response and countermeasures plan. All requirements for managing hazardous R:~D P~°000',00-0140 Village of Temecula~nitial Study.~ff 9.b 9,C 9.d 9.e 9.f 9.g 9.h materials and wastes must conform to local and state public health and safety requirements established by the State Department of Toxic Substances Control. Riverside County and the City of Temecula. Since significant quantities of hazardous material (petroleum products, including gasoline and diesel fuel) will be used or hazardous wastes generated on the site, a potential exists for significant impacts to the environment from upset or accidental release conditions. The mitigation outlined under 9.a above will ensure that any hazards related to upset or accidental release conditions am managed within the level of safety established by regulatory agencies to ensure such a potential falls below a nonsignificant level of potential safety hazard. Additional requirements may be necessary at the time a specific development proposal is reviewed. Since substantial quantities of hazardous materials or wastes will be handled on the project site (petroleum fuels), there is a potential to emit hazardous emissions in quantities that could cause a significant public health impact. SCAQMD Rules 461-464 establish the controls for operating gasoline stations, and each station must conduct a public health risk analysis before obtaining operating permits from the District. Regardless, there is no school within 1/4 mile that would be exposed to such emissions. These emission control requirements are in place and mandatory, so additional mitigation is not required to ensure that public health is not adversely impacted. Additional requirements may be necessary at the time a specific development proposal is reviewed. The project site is not identified as a contaminated site under Government Code Section 65962.5. The project site is not near any airport or private airstrip and has no potential to adversely impact airport operations. Please refer to the discussion under 9.e above. Development of the project site has no potential to modify or adversely affect an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The project site does contain a minimal wild land fire hazard onsite based on the presence of the CSS, but due to the surrounding urban development this fire hazard is not considered significant. The proposed project will eliminate the wild land fire hazard on the property if it is approved. No adverse wild land fire hazard impact is forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. R:'~D P~000~0-0140 Village of Temecula',lnitial Study.r~ 10, NOISE. Would the project: a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of X standards establisbed in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground X borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the proiect? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project'? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the proiect area to excessive noise levels? Comments: 10.a According to a summary noise evaluation by Mestre Greve Associates, the project would be exposed to · noise levels of approximately 64.7 Ldn from traffic noise on Rancho California Road. However, the residential uses included in the proposed project would not be exposed to noise at this level. The Temecula Village Development design buffers the residential uses from traffic noise on Rancho California Road with the office/retail development abutting Rancho California Road. The landscape elements between the office/retail development and the residential component of the project also buffer noise from Rancho California Road. The future residents of the site will not be exposed to severe noise levels. (Please also see response 10.c). 10.b Based on the discussion in 10.a above, development of the proposed project will not expose, future residents to excessive ground borne vibration or noise levels. 10.c Future background noise levels will be dominated at the project site by noise generated from traffic on Rancho California Road, directly north of the project site. The proposed project permits or conditionally permits the development of use such as a restaurant, small health club, small dance/aerobics/martial arts studio (less than 5000 sq. ft.), Laundromat, and specialty retail uses in Sub Area A. These businesses may operate during evening hours causing nuisance noise to residents in the development and in the surrounding area. The proposed project also permits or conditionally permits the development of a fast-food restaurant, health club, dance/aerobics/martial arts studio (greater than 5000 sq. ff.), auditorium, conference facilities, gas station with car wash, market, movie theater, Laundromat, nightclub/teen club, veterinary clinic with overnight facilities, and specialty retail uses in Sub Area B. These businesses maY also operate during evening hours, but there is a nuisance ordinance requirement to ensure noise levels are not excessive. 10.d Construction noise levels will be above background noise levels during daylight hours, but the City General Plan requires construction noise mitigation by restricting construction activities to daylight hours. With implementation of this measure the short-term noise impacts are not forecast to be significant to the surrounding land uses. R:~D P~2000~O0-O t 40 Village of Temecuta~Jnitial Study. rtl 10.e 10.f The project site is not located near an airport or a private airstrip and has no potential to be exposed to significant airport operation noise impacts. Please refer to the discussion in 10.e above. 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 followln~l areas: a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other pedormance objectives for any of the public services? b. Fire protection? X c. Police protection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X Comments: 11.a The proposed project is an infill development within the central portion of the City of Temecula and all services are already available at the project site. The development of 160 apartment units and 71,100 sq. ft. of office/retail space will place a small increment of cumulative demand on the service systems (fire, police, schools, and parks). Based on a review of the GPEIR all of the. service system impacts from developing the proposed project can be mitigated to below a significant level by implementing mitigation measures identified in that document. These measures include: Fire Service, Measures 1 and 2; Police Service, Measures 1-4, and Education Measures 1-1 and 1-6, as appropriate. For park and recreation services, those appropriate mitigation measures for the proposed project from Measures 1-3, 1-8 and 1-12 shall be implemented. With implementation of these measures, the proposed project can .be implemented without causing or contributing to a significant cumulative public services impact. 11 .b Please refer to the discussion in 11 .a above. 11 .c Please refer to the discussion in 11.a above. 11,d Please refer to the discussion in 11.a above. 11 .e Please refer to the discussion in 11 .a above. 11 .f Please refer to the rliscussion in 11 .a above. R:~O P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~nitia~ Study. rff 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Qualit7 Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the proiect's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X re~]ulations related to solid waste? Comments: 12.a The proposed project will deliver wastewater to the regional treatment wastewater reclamation plant in Temecula. The Rancho California Water District (RCWD) operates the facility and it has capacity to meet the demand from the proposed project within its authorized treatment capacity. This facility operates within its waste discharge requirements. Therefore, the proposed project is not forecast to cause a violation of wastewater treatment requirements, either directly or indirectly. 12.b According to the GPEIR, adequate capacity exists within the RCWD water supply and wastewater treatment systems to provide water and wastewater capacity for the proposed project. This conclusion is also supported by urban water master plan adopted by the RCWD. 12.c The site already drains to existing storm drains in the area and a regional storm water system. The connection of this site will not cause the need to expand these facilities based on detention of storm runoff. Future volume of flow from the site would not exceed the current maximum flows due to onsite retention. The drainage analysis for the project site outlines the detailed information regarding existing and future storm water runoff. 12.d Adequate water supplies have been identified by the RCWD to meet the City of Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the preposed preject. See also 12.b above. 12.e Adequate wastewater treatment capacity has been identified by the RCWD to meet the City of Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also 12.b above. 12.f According to the General Plan and the County Solid Waste Management Plan adequate landfill disposal capacity exists within the regional landfills to meet current and future demands. 12.g By participating in the City's source reduction and recycling element, the proposed project will comply with all statutes and regulations for management of solid waste. The proposed commercial and residential project does not pose any significant or unique management requirements. R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~initial Study.~ Regarding energy supplies to the project and region, the City of Temecula's General Plan identified adequate capacity for energy systems. Since this document was adopted electric and natural gas utilities have been deregulated and short-term shortages in electricity and natural gas will be experienced until new electrical generation and natural gas production have been installed and are in operation. This impact is not considered a significant adverse impact at the level of individual urban developments, because adequate capacity is available but at a higher costs than have occurred in the past, i.e., the commercial systems ara functioning but at a much higher cost than forecasted. The energy availability issue will cause short-term inconvenience during the higher electricity and natural gas consumption periods, specifically on the hottest summer days when air conditioning loads are the greatest or during the winter on cold days. The City has adopted building codes that require implementation of energy conservation measuras for new development, implementation of these design and construction standards is considered adequate compliance with energy conservation goals and policies. The additional energy demands resulting from the project would normally be considered a less than significant impact. However, as noted above racent shortages in generation capacity may require the new residents to pay higher costs for electricity or to accept short-term rolling black outs in response to excessive short-term demand. These limitations will be rasolved as new generating capacity is brought on line over the next few years. This short-term electricity constraint is not considerad to be a significant adverse impact, particularly since the new structures will be constructed with an awareness of these constraints. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic rasources, including, but not X limited to, traes, rock outcropping, and historic building within a state scenic highwa~ c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glara, which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: 13.a The proposed project will infill a small undeveloped area along the Rancho California Road urban corridor. No scenic vistas will be adversely impacted at the project location from developing the proposed _project based on the surrounding land uses, which are consistent with that proposed by this project. 13.b NO major tree resources, rock outcroppings or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is not located on a scenic highway, but it will be required to meet design raquirements along Rancho California Road to be consistent with existing development. This is a planning and design issue for which the City has established design guidelines and no adverse environmental impact or mitigation is required to ensure that the project conforms to local design guidelines. 13.c. The proposed project will be located adjacent to existing single-family units to the east of the project site. Design requirements will be imposed on the proposed project by application of standards in the Planned Development Overlay District in addition to the Community Design Element standards and design plan. Based on the City's requirement to meet these design guidelines, the proposed project has no potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and surroundings, Which is comprised of a combined urban/suburban visual setting. R:~D 1:~2000'~00-0140 Village of Teme<,'ula~nitial Study, rtl 13.d The proposed project must meet the County's Palomar Lighting Ordinance No. 655 requirements for no conflict with Palomar Observatory. Due to proximity to residential uses, the project will be conditioned to not create significant light and glare impacts onsite or impacting the surrounding area and uses. Implementation of this measure will ensure that no light or glare sensitive areas are exposed to significant light and glare impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resoume as defined in Section 1506.57 b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57 c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 14.a A cultural resources survey of the project site was conducted by Jean A. Keller and no historical resources are known to occur on the project site. Therefore, no potential exists for the proposed project to adversely impact such resources. 14.b The GPEIR sensitivity map for amhaeological resources identified the project site as being within a sensitive area for archaeological resources. Jean A. Keller completed a survey of the site and no resoumes were discovered on the property. However, due to the potential for such resoumes to occur in the subsurface of the property, the following mitigation measure will be implemented: 14b. 1 Dudng initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor shall be present and shall have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. 14. b.2 If any cultural resources are exposed dudng initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City shall be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist shall evaluate the resources. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report these i'esources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. 14.b.3 If any human remains are encountered dudng initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery shall be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office shall be contacted to manage such remains. Although the probability is Iow, any cultural resources discovered during site preparation and grading will be managed to ensure that all resource value is protected and preserved. With implementation of the above measures, lhe potential for significant cultural resource impact has been reduced to a level of no significance. 14.c The GPEIR sensitivity map for paleontological resources identified the project site as being within a sensitive area for paleontological resoumes. Due to the potential for such resources to occur on the property, the following mitigation measure will be implemented: R:~D F~2000'~O-O 140 Village o! Temecula~nitial Study~rtf 14.c. 1 During excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor shall be present and shall have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report on these resources to the ensure the values inherent in the resources are adequately characterized and preserved. 14.d Please refer to the discussion in 14.a above. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a. Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: 15.a The proposed project includes recreation areas as part of the project including swimming pool, clubhouse and play areas. Based on the inclusion of these recreational features as part of the proposed project, existing neighborhood park utilization is not forecast to increase significantly. The residents of the development are likely to increase demand for regional facilities, such as baseball diamonds, basketball courts, etc. However, these are managed facilities where the individual users is typically integrated into existing leagues and the cumulative demand for such facilities is not forecast to increase substantially from implementing the proposed project. No significant adverse impact to recreational resources is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. 15.b Please refer to the discussion in 15.a above. R:'~D 1:~2000\00-0140 Village of Tem~cula~lnitial Study.~ 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, X 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 eflects of probable future projects? c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: 16.a-c The Temecula Village Development consists of a 160-unit apartment complex and 71,100 sq. ft. office/retail space that is proposed to be constructed on an infill parcel of land located on the south side of Rancho California Road, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of Rancho California Road and Cosmic Drive. The proposed project is not consistent with the details of the City of Temecula General Plan and zoning designations as delineated on current land use and zoning maps. However, it is consistent with the concept of Village Center and Planned Development Overlay presented in the General Plan as a method of integrating multiple uses over a large site containing more than one land use or zoning designation. For the majority (eight of fifteen) of environmental issues discussed in this Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing, Geology and Soils, Mineral Resoumes, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems, and Recreation) no potential for significant adverse impact has been identified and no project specific mitigation, other than standard conditions utilized by the City, will be required. For the remaining seven issues project specific mitigation will be required to ensure that implementation of the proposed project does not cause significant adverse physical changes in the environment. Specifically, mitiga[ion is identified to control erosion and sedimentation on the site for Hydrology and Water Quality issues. Mitigation is established to prevent nuisance fugitive dust from impacting adjacent uses during construction. The project site contains coastal sage scrub habitat that was determined to be occupied by the California Gnatcatcher. Based on discussions with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, this site will not be managed for long-term habitat and offsite compensation is the appropriate mitigation to reduce this impact to a level of no significance. The project's traffic is identified as having a potential to adversely impact the local cimulation system and a combination of recently completed improvements and project specific improvements are required to ensure that the circulation system operates at acceptable levels of service in the future. The site is identified as having a potential for significant paleontological resources and the possibility of archaeological resources. Mitigation is identified to reduce the potential impacts to such resoumes to a no significant level of impact. Mitigation is also provided to reduce the nuisance noise, from evening/night-time uses on the project site, to a less than significant level. Finally, mitigation is identified to control potential commercial lighting impacts on adjacent residential property. Based on the evaluation contained in this Initial Study, the City proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration as the appropriate environmental determination to comply with the Calitornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). R:',D P~O00~00~3140 Village of Temecula\lnitial Study. rtl 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 checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the preiect. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan, 1993. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, 1993. 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 4. 1999 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey 45-Day Letter Report Rancho California Road Project, Merkel & Associates, Inc., June 10, 1999 5. Kading/Rancho California Road City of Temecula Biological Constraints Report, Merkel & Associates, Inc. June 4, 1999. 6. Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Temecula Village/Temecula Ridge Development Temecula, California, Wilbur Smith Associates, August 28, 2000. 7. Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay, Markham Development Management Group, Inc., January 2001. 8. Drainage/Hydrology Study for Tentative Pamel Map No. 29140 Village Commercial and Apartments 9. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) 1997 10. Southern California Association of Governments "Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide", 1996 11. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment -Temecula Ridge (PA99-0371), Jean A. Keller, 1999 12. Preliminary Noise Analysis for Temecula Ridge, Mestre Greve Associates, February 14, 2000. 13. Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential/Commercial Development City of Temecula, CH J, Inc., June 8, 1999 14. Riverside County Flood Control District "Supplement A to the Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plans, arid Attachment to Supplement A", 1996 15. Rancho California Water District, Steve Brannon, P.E., May 17, 2000 May17, 2000 Carole Donahoe, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY LOT NO. 24 OF TRACT NO. 3334 APN 944-290-012, APN 944-290-013 AND APN 944-290-0t4 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0149 · Dear Ms. Donahoe: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an · Agency .Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact all Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, · RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 00~SB:at066\F012-TB'~FCF i'l !' 3UN 0 9 ?000 i !l United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, California 92008 Carole Donahoe Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 MAY 3'1 2000 Re: Planning Application PA00-0149; City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Dear Ms. Donahoe: We have reviewed Phmning Application PA00-0149, Village of Temecula Apartments, Riverside County, California. We offer the following comments and recommendations on the biological resources that could be affected by the proposed project based on our knowledge of sensitive and declining species and habitat types in Riverside County. We are concerned about "take" of federally listed species protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the take of any federally listed endangered species by any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Take includes "harass" and "harm", as defined by section 3 of the Act. Harass in the definition of take means "an intentional or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying il to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering." Harm in the definition of take in the Act means "an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.". (see 50 CFR § 17.3). Take incidental to an otherwise la~al activit5, ma)' be authorized under sections 7 or 10 of the Act. The proposed project is to construct a 160-unit, two-story apartment complex with clubhouse and pool. The project site is located on the south side of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Drive in Riverside County. This area is known to support occupied habitat for the federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica, gnatcatcher), endangered Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas ed#ha quino), and the endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi, SKR). Populations of these species have been documented in the Rancho California area. If habitat, such as remnant coastal sage scrub, clay soils, or grasslands, occurs on the proposed project site, then the site may support listed species. Therefore, we reconm~end that focused surveys occur within suitable habitat on site prior to any Carole Donahoe ground disturbing activities. If these wildlife species occupy the project site, incidental take authorization likely will be required before the proposed project can proceed. The proposed project: occurs within the boundary of the Stephens' kangaroo rat Habitat Conservation Plan. Compliance with the regional incidental take permit will be required prior to any ground disturbing activities. If wetlands are affected by the proposed project, an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers section 404 permit and/or California Department offish and Game 1600 permit may be required. We recommend that impacts to coastal sage scrub or any other sensitive resource be considered cumulatively significant and mitigated prior to any ground disturbing activities. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. If you have any questions or comments please contact Ruth Olsen of my staffat (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, ,1~ Jim A. Bartel Assistant Field Supervisor I-6-00-NFTA-339 cc: Glenn Black (CDFG, Chino) Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: Planning Application PA00-0138 General Plan Amendment Planning Application PA00-0139 Zoning Amendment Planning Application PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map Planning Application PA00-0140 Development Plan Location: South of Rancho California Road, east of Cosmic Drive and west of Moraga Road intersection, (APN# 944-290-012, 013, & 014). Applicant: The MJW Property Group, Barton L. Buchalter, 7131 Owensmouth Ave, Suite 6-D Canoga Park, CA 91309-7961 Biolo.qical Resources General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Affect endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds). (1). The project developer shall acquire compensatory mitigation acreage off the project site as discussed with the U.S: Fish and Wildlife Service staff whose preference is for offsite mitigation at 3:1 ratio for costal sage scrub and a 1:1 ratio for undisturbed grassland, with appropriate endowments and protection of resources at the mitigation site. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the incidental take permit issued for the proposed development prior to grading the project site. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the grading plan check review process. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Department of Public Works and Planning Department · Hazards and Hazardous materials General Impact: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transportation, use, or disposal or hazardous matedals. Mitigation Measures: (2). Prior to authorization to begin operations by receiving fuel or other hazardous petroleum materials, the developer shall provide the City with the following materials: the Business Plan filed with the Department of Environmental Health that outlines how R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Mitigation Monitoring Program.dcc 1 Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitorin.cl Party: hazardous products will be safely delivered to the site; managed on the site; and removed from the site as hazardous waste, if any. This will include all safety measures required to minimize hazards and public health risks as outlined in the required spill prevention, response and countermeasures plan. All requirements for managing hazardous materials and wastes must conform to local and state public health and safety requirements established by the State Department of Toxic Substances Control. Riverside County and the City of Temecula. Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures prior to the issuance of a building permit for uses producing hazardous materials (e.g. gas station). Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Riverside County Fire Department, Building and Safety Department, Public Works Department and Planning Department Cultural Resources General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5 (3). Dudng initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor shall be present and shall have the authority tO stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. Specific Process: (4). If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City shall be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist shal! evaluate the resources. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report these resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. (5). If any human remains are encountered dudng initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery shall be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office shall be contacted to manage such remains. Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the grading and building plan check review process. R:~,D F'~O00\O0-0140 ViJtage ol Temecula~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Department of Public Works and Planning Department Cultural Resources (cont.) General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleotological resource or site or unique geological feature. (6). Dudng excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor shall be present and shall have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report on these resources to ensure that the values inherent in the resources are adequately characterized and preserved. Planning staff will verify compliance witl~ the above mitigation measures as part of the grading plan check review process. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Department of Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. (7). If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery shall be terminated immediately and the'County Coroner's office shall be contacted to manage such remains. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the grading and building plan check review process. During any ground disturbance and prior to the issuance of a building permit. Department of Public Works and Planning Department R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village o~ Temecula~/lifigation Monitoring Program.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 6 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0t38, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0'12, 013,0'14, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section '1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and MJW Property Group filed Planning Application Nos. PA00-0138, General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139, Zone Change, PA00-0140, Development Plan, and PA00-0152, Tentative Parcel Map, for the property consisting of approximately 23 acres generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2002 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-003 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project, Tentative Parcel Map and Development Plan for the Project and recommended that the City Council approve of a General Plan Amendment and zone change for the Project. On September 17, 2002 and October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for R:/Resos 2002JResos 02-__ 1 the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA00-0138, PA00-0139, PA00-0140 AND PA00-0152, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014." Section 2. findings: A. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following The Project, including the General Plan Amendment, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project, including the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Project, including the General Plan Amendment, is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project, including the General Plan Amendment, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The Project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site and represents a relocation of existing land uses. Section 3. The official "General Plan Land Use Map" of the General Plan of the City of Temecula is hereby amended to realign the Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (M) land-use designation boundaries of a 23 acre site, generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel Nos. 944-290-012, 013, 014 as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated by reference and made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 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 reguiar meeting held on the 8th day of October, 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 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 [:)RAFT ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONE CHANGE R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 7 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA00- 0139 A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0t2, 013, 014. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and MJW Property Group filed Planning Application Nos. PA00-0138, General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139, Zone Change, PA00-0140, Development Plan, and PA00-0152, Tentative Parcel Map, for the property consisting of approximately 23 acres generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2002 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-003 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project, a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a Development Plan and a Tentative Parcel Map. On September 17, 2002 and October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for 11086\0024\697580.1 the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- , and Resolution No. 002- , approving a General Plan Amendment for the project. Section 2. findings: The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following The Project, including the zone change and text amendment, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project, including the zone change and text amendment, has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Project, including the zone change and text amendment, is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project, including the zone change and text amendment, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. Section 3. The City Council hereby amends the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as follows: For the parcel identified as APN # 944-290-012, change the zoning designation from Professional Office (PO) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO 5), as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. For the parcel identified as APN # 944-290-013, change the zoning designation from Professional Office (PO) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO 5), as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. For the parcel identified as 944-290-014, change the zoning designation from Medium Density Residential (M) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO 5), as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section4. The City Council hereby amends Chapter 17.22 of the Temecula Municipal Code by adding thereto the Villages of Temecula Planned Development Overlay District as Sections 17.22.140 through 17.22.149, inclusive, of the Temecula Municipal Code, as said sections are set: forth in the document attached hereto as Exhibit B to this Ordinance and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, including the text shown on the Errata Sheet as recommended by the Planning Commission. Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002. 11086\0024\697580.1 - 2 - ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, 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 October, 2002, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of October, 2002 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk 11086\0024\697580.1 - 3 - Exhibit A Exhibit B Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay R:~I) PX2000\00-0140 Village of Tcm¢cula\Tcm¢cula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc l Errata Sheet - Planning Commission Modifications Planning Application No. PA 00-0139 Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay (PDO) The Planning Commission made the following recommendations to the City Council pertaining to Planning Application No. 00-0139 (Planned Development Overlay - PDO) at their meeting of February 22, 2002: Tabie 17.22.1XX (Schedule of Permitted Uses) · Aerobics/dance/gymnastics/martial arts studios (less than 5,000 square feet): delete "C" from Sub Area A and change "P" to "C" in Sub Area B. · Animal Hospital (indoor only): delete "P" from Sub Area B. · Appliance sales and repairs (household and small appliances): delete "P" from Sub Areas A and B. · Automobile parts .- sales: delete "P" from Sub Areas A and B. · Bowling alley: delete "P" from Sub Area B. · Community care facilities, less than 5,000 square feet: delete "P" from Sub Areas A, B and C. · Congregate care housing for the elderly, less than 5,000 square feet: delete "P" from Sub Areas A B and C. · Furniture sales: delete "P" from Sub Area B. · Garden supplies and equipment sales and service: delete "C" from Sub Area B. · Grocery store, retail & specialty less than 10,000 sq. ft.: change "P" to "C" in Sub Area B. · Health and exercise clubs (less than 5,000 sq. ft.): delete "C" from Sub Area A and change "P" to "C" in Sub Area B. · Laboratories, film, medical, research or testing center: delete "research or testing centers" from Description of Use and add "P" to Sub Area B. · Nursing homes/convalescent homes, less than 5,000 sq. ft.: delete "C" from Sub Areas A, B and C. · Parcel delivery services: delete "P" from Sub Areas A and B. · Public utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission): delete "C" from Sub Areas A and B. · Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care): delete "P" from Sub Areas A, B and C. · Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales: add "no outdoor storage" to Description of Use. · Temporary real estate tract offices: delete "P" from Sub Areas A, B and C. · Wedding chapels: delete"P" from Sub Area B. Section 17.22.1XX, A.2 (Pedestrian Linkaqes) - p. 16 · Add the following language as the last sentence of the 2nd bullet item: "A pedestrian linkage shall be provided to the east of the drive lane that connects Sub Area A to Sub Area C". Section 17.22.1XX, B.2 (Pedestrian Linkaqes)- p. 17 The 1st bullet item shall be revised to read: "Two (2) pedestrian linkages shall be provided between Sub Area B and Sub Area C. In addition to the pedestrian linkage depicted on Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan), a pedestrian linkage shall be provided to the east of the drive lane that connects Sub Area B to Sub Area C". R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Errata Sheet.doc 1 Section 17.22.1XX, B.7.A.1 (Si.qna.qe Proqram)- p. 35 · Delete last bullet item: "Individual plastic channel letters". Section 17 22 150.C.3 (Design and Setback Standards) · Buildinq Heiqht. The height of the structure shall not exceed *,,.v .... ~_~/'~ three (3) or ~ (35) forty (40) feet in height. Section 17.22.154.B.d (Architectural and Landscape Design Guidelines) Slopes created on the eastern and southern slopes will be extensively landscaped to meet current City Development Code standards. Since these are down slopes of various lengths, trees and shrubs are provided near the top of the slope to allow for maximum privacy for the existing single-family residents. The southwestern por[ion of the site will ~ w!!! rcmain in a n.".turc! ct"tc be graded and planted with turf, trees and shrubs in order to provide an active recreational open space for local residents. Reference Exhibits C- 6a (Plan) and C-6b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at East and Exhibits C-7a (Plan) and C- 7b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at south. PDO-5 Exhibit Section 17.22.156 A · Modified Conceptual Site Plan and Sub Area Map PDO-5 Exhibit Section 17.22.156 C-6a and 17.22.156 C-6b · Modified Landscape Section and Plan Sub Area C - Interface at East PDO-5 Exhibit Section 17.22.156 B · Modified Sidewalk: Plan PDO-5 · Modified Key Map R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village ef Temecula\Errata Sheet.doc 2 Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Chapter 17.22, Sections 17.22.140 through 17.22.156 Table of Contents 17.22.140 17.22.142 17.22.143 17.22.144 17.22.146 17.22.148 17.22.150 17.22.152 17.22.154 17.22.156 Title Purpose and Intent Proj~mt Vision Relationship With Development Code and Citywide Design Guidelines 1. Development Standards 2. Design Guidelines 3. Approval Authority Use Regulations Sch(~ule of Permitted Uses Design Standards and Setback Standards Vehicular Circulation System Standards Architectural and Landscape Design Standards Incorporation of Exhibits Exhibit 17.22.156 A. Conceptual Site Plan and Sub Area Map Exhibit 17.22.156 B. Sidewalk Plan ... Exhibit 17.22.156 C. Landscape Plan and Section Legend, Plans and Sections Exhibit 17.22.156 D. Conceptual Building Elevations ' Exhibit 17.22.156 E. Color and Material Board Exhibit 17.22,156 F through ff Exhibits Attached to Application Text of new sectien 17.22.156: "17.22.156 Incorporation of Exhibits. All development within the Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District shall conform and comply with the requirements set forth in the following Exhibits, which exhibits are on file in the Official Records of the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full and which are also reduced in size to be included in the Zoning Code Text: Exhibit 17.22.156 A. Conceptual Site Plan and Sub Area Map Exhibit 17.22.156 B. Sidewalk Plan Exhibit 17.22.156 C. Landscape Plan and Section Legend, Plans and Sections Exhibit 17.22.156 D. Conceptual Building Elevations Exhibit 17.22.156 E. Color and Matedal Board Exhibit 17.22.156 F through ff Exhibits Attached to Application" RAD IA2.000~04} 140 Village of Temecula\Tcmccula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 2 TEMECULA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT 17.22.140 TITLE Sections 17.22.140 through 17.22.156 shall be known as "PDO-5" (Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District). 17.22.142 PURPOSE AND INTENT The Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-5) is intended to provide regulations, for the safe and efficient operation, and creative design of a unique office/retail and residential area within the City. PDO-5 encompasses 22.97 acres and is located on the south side of Rancho California Road, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of Rancho California Road and Cosmic Way. PDO-5 has been divided into three distinctive sub areas, as depicted on Exhibit A (Conceptual Site Plan & Sub Area Map). Sub Area A consists of office/retail property which immediately abuts existing single-family residential to the east. Sub Area B consists of the remainder of the office/retail area. Sub Area C consists of M (Medium Density Residential, 7-12 dwelling units/acre) which encompasses the rear portion of the site and abuts existing single- family residential to the south. The PDO area is surrounded by existing single-family development to the northeast, 'east and south and multi-family development to t. he northwest. The property to the west is currently vacant, but zoned M (Medium Density Residential, 7-12 dwelling units/acre). This special overlay zoning district regulation is intended to permit a range of neighborhood convenience uses, which are compatible and complimentary to the existing residential development and M (Medium Density Residential, 7-12 dwelling units/acre) proposed as part of the PDO. Performance standards, in addition to those referenced from the City's Development Code and City-wide Design Guidelines, have been provided to ensure internal project compatibility as well as compatibility with the adjacent single-family residential development and to protect these adjoining uses from excessive noise, odor, smoke, toxic materials, and other potentially objectionable impacts. It is the intent of the City to use these special regulations to supplement the regulations of land uses and development already existing within the adopted Development Code. (Ord. 99-03 § 2) 17.22.143 PROJECT VISION The Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO) is intended to provide a comprehensive planning approach to the development of 22.97 acres. As discussed above, the project has been divided into three distinctive sub-areas, which have been created to foster an overall development to serve the needs of existing and future residents. While it is not feasible to create a pure "Village Center' at this location because the project is considered "in-fill," the project will include many design features, which are found in a Village Center. These features include: pedestrian scale of development, unique signage, gathering places, transit provisions and neighborhood serving uses. This is accomplished through its design, development standards, permitted and conditionally permitted uses and.guidelines that will be implemented at the Development Plan stage. Sub Areas A & B comprises the office/retail component of the project. Uses in Sub Area A have been selected which provide support services to existing and future residents. These uses are limited in size and scope and are intended to be compatible with the existing single-family residential to the east. Single story elevations have been included 'to help te create a pedestrian scale. Drive-through facilities have been prohibited in Sub Area A. This area will also provide a place for existing and future residents to work. Uses in Sub Area B have been chosen that cater to both the pedestrian and the automobile. Existing and future residents, as well as passing motorists will be able to utilize potential services provided in this area. Some auto-oriented uses are permitted in Sub Area B. This is a necessary component to the project, as it will serve to internalize vehicle trips and reduce vehicle trips to auto-oriented services along Rancho California Road. Sub Area C is the residential component of the PDO. A total of one hundred sixty (160) units may be developed in this area. As depicted on Exhibit A, multi-family residential development is envisioned in this Sub Area, although other residential and limited non- residential uses are also envisioned in this Sub Area (reference Section 17.22.146, Use Regulations). Large landscaped buffer areas have been provided between this Sub Area and the existing single-family development to the east and south. Several obstacles to pedestrian access exist within the Sub Areas, as well as to the existing single-family residential to the east and south, the existing multi-family residential to the north (across Rancho California Road) and to planned multi-family 'residential development to the west. A comprehensive sidewalk plan, which has been coordinated with tile landscape plan, is included as Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan). This plan will foster pedestrian access within the site. When coupled with the existing/proposed pedestrian network, obstacles to pedestrian movement will be greatly reduced. 17.22.144 RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ClTYWIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES The list of permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses for the Temecula Village Planned Development Oveday District is contained in Table 17.22.148. Except as modified by the provisions of Section 17.03.050, the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. Development Standards. The development standards in the Development Code (Chapter 17.08) that would apply to any development within a Neighborhood Commercial zoning district that are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete for Sub Area A. The development standards in the Development Code (Chapter 17.08) that would apply to any development within a Community Commercial zoning district that are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete for Sub Area B. R:~D PL2000~0q) 140 Vill~.ge of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 4 The development standards in the Development Code (Chapter 17.06) that would apply to any development within a Medium Density Residential zoning district that are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete for Sub Area C. This includes site open space and private open space requirements, as well as overall project density. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements per Chapter 17.24 of the Deve,lopment Code will apply to Sub Areas A, B & C. e. Water Efficient Landscape Design Requirements per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code will apply to Sub Areas A, B, and C. Design Guidelines. The City-Wide Design Guidelines that are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete. a. Chapter 3 (General Commercial Design Guidelines) and Chapter 4 (Specific Commercial Development Type Design Guidelines) for Sub Area A and Sub Area B. b. Chapter 5 (Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines) for Sub Area C. Approwal Authority. The Conceptual Site Plan is depicted in Exhibit A. Approximate building square footage and location, as well as approximate location of parking, drive lanes, access points and landscaping,, are shown on this Exhibit. Conformance with Exhibit A, as well as the provisions contained below will allow the Approval Authority for projects approved under PDO-5 as follows: Permitted uses, which are within Sub Area A and Sub Area B of PDO-5, and are consistent with the provisions contained within PDO-5, shall be a staff level approval and shall not require a noticed public hearing. Those perrnitted uses found to not be consistent with the above shall be heard by the Planning Director at a noticed public hearing. Conditionally Permitted uses, which are within Sub Area A and Sub Area B of PDO-5, and are consistent with the provisions contained within PDO- 5, shall be approved by the Planning Director and will require a noticed public hearing. The approval requirements contained in the Development Code that are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete for Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses within Sub Area C. Any other relevant rule, regulation or standard that is in effect at the time an application is deemed complete. (Ord. 99-03 § 2) R:~D P~2000~0~}140 Village of Temecula~Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 5 17.22.'146 USE REGULATIONS The list of permitted land uses for the Temecula Village Planned Development Oveday district is containecl in Table 17.22.148. Where indicated with a letter "P" the use shall be a permitted use.. A letter "C" indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted subject to the approval o'f a conditional use permit. Where indicated with a "-", the use is ~rohibited within the zone. R:'*D P~2000\00~0140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 6 Table t7.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use IAI B I C A Adult business Aerobics/dancelgymnasticsljazzerciselmartial arts studios (less C than 5,000 sq. ft.)* Aerobicsldancelgymnastics/jn77ercise/martial arts studios (greater P than 5,000 sq. ft.)* Airports Alcoholism or drug treatment facilities Alcohol and drug treatment (outpatient) Alcoholic beverage sales ~ C Ambulance servic, es Animal hospital (indoor only) Antique restoration C Antique sales P P Apparel and accessory shops P P Appliance sales and repairs (household and small appliances) Arcades (pinball and video games) - Art supply stores P P Auction houses - Auditoriums and conference facilities C Automobile dealers (new and used) - Automobile sales (brokerage)-showroom only (new and used)-no - outdoor display Automobile Oil Change/Lube Services with no major repairs - Automobile painting and body shop Automobile repair services - Automobile rental C Automobile salvage yards/impound yards Automobile service stations P Automotive parts -sales - Automotive service stations selling beer and/or wine - with or - without an automated car wash~ B Bakery goods distribution I I J R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Vill:flge o f Temccula\Temccula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 7 Table ~17.22.'148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use I^1 B I c Bakery retail P Bakery wholesale - Banks and financial institutions, without drive-through P P Banks and financial institutions, with drive-through P Barber and beauty shops P P Bed and breakfast C Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) P P Billiard parlor/pool hall Binding of books and similar publications Blood bank P P Blueprint and duplicating and copy services P Bookstores P P Bowling alley - Building material :sales Butcher shop - P C Cabinet shop - Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) P P Candy/confectionery sales P P Car wash, full service Carpet and rug cleaning Catering services, P Clothing sales P P Coins, purchase ;and sales P P Cold storage facilities Communications and microwave installations C Communications equipment sales C Community care facilities, less than 5,000 square feet* - , Computer sales and service P P Congregate care housing for the elderly, less than 5,000 square feet2' Construction equipment sales, service or rental Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Construction trailer P P P R:kD P~2000\00~) 140 Viltage of Temecuia\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 8 Table 17.22.'148 Schedule of Permitted Uses '[emecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use I A I S I C Convalescent facilities, less than 5,000 square feet* C P Convenience market~ Costume rentals P P Crematoriums Cutlery sales P D Data processing equipment and systems C C Day care centers C C Delicatessen C P Discount/department store Distribution facility Drug store/pharmacy P P Dry cleaners, no drive through P P Dry cleaning plant E Emergency shelters Equipment sales and rentals (no outdoor storage) P Equipment sales and rentals (outdoor storage) F Family day care homes (small and large) - P Feed and grain sales - Financial, insurance, real estate offices P P Fire and police stations - Floor covering sales P Florist shop P P Food processing - Fortune telling, spiritualism, or similar activity - Freight terminals - Fuel storage and distribution Funeral parlors, mortuary Furniture sales Furniture transfer and storage R:'~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Tem¢cula\Tcm¢cula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 9 Table 17.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use BI c G Garden supplies and equipment sales and service Gas distribution, meter and control station General merchandise/retail store less than 10,000 sq. ft.* Glass and mirrors, retail sales Governmental offices, less than 5,000 sq. ft.* Granny Flat Grocery store, retail & specialty less than tO, O00 sq. ft. Grocery store, wholesale Guest House Guns and firearm sales P P P P C P H Hardware stores, less than 2,000 square feet* Health and exercise clubs (less than 5,000 sq. ft.)* Health and exercise clubs (greater than 5,000 sq. ft.)* Health food store Health care facility, less than 5,000 square feet* Heliports Hobby supply shop Home and business maintenance service Hospitals Hotels/motels P P Ice cream parlor impound yard Intedor decorating service Junk or salvage yard K Kennel -I R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 10 Table '17.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use I^1 B I c L Laboratories, film, medical P Laundromat P P Laundry service (commercial) Libraries, museums and galleries (private) C P Liquefied petroleum, sales and distribution Liquor stores and wine shops~ C Lithographic service Locksmith P P M Machine shop Machinery storage yard Mail order businesses P P Manufactured homes P Manufacturing of products similar to, but not limited to, the Following: Custom-made product, processing, assembling, packaging, and fabrication of goods within enclosed building (no outside storage), such as jewelry, furniture, art objects, clothing, labor intensive manufacturing, assembling, and repair processes which do not involve frequent truck traffic. Compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. Wholesaling, storage, and warehousing within enclosed building, freight handling, shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unrefined, raw or semirefined products requiring further processing or manufacturing, and outside storage. Uses under 20,000 sq. ft. with no outside storage Massage Medical equipment sales/rental P P Membership clubs, organizations, lodges R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Villalge of Tcmecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 11 Table 17.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use I A I B I C Mini-storage or mini-warehouse Mobile home sales and service Motion picture studio Motorcycle sales and service Movie theaters C Musical and recording studio C N Nightclubs/taverns/bars/dance club/teen club~ C Nurseries (retail) C Nursing homes/convalescent homes, less than 5,000 square feet* - O Office equipment/supplies, sales/services C P Offices, administrative or corporate headquarters with greater than C 50,000 sq. ft.* Offices, professional services with less than 50,000 sq. ft., including, but not limited to, business law, medical, dental, p p veterinarian, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, real estate, insurance* P Paint and wallpaper stores P Parcel delivery services Parking lots and parking structures, appurtenant to the primary C C use ~awnshop P Personal service '.shops P P Pest control services - Pet grooming/pet shop P P Photographic studio P P Plumbing supply yard (enclosed or unenclosed) Postal distribution - Postal services P P Printing and publishing (newspapers, periodicals, books, etc.) C Private utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission) R:~D P~.000\00-0140 Village of Tcmccula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 12 Table 17.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use rA I B I C Q R Radio and broadcasting studios, offices P P Radio/television transmitter Recreational vehicle parks Recreational vehicle sales Recreational vehicle, trailer, and boat storage within an enclosed building Recreational vehicle, trailer and boat storage-exterior yard Recycling collection facilities - P Recycling processing facilities Religious institution, without a day care or private school C C C Religious institution, with a private school C C Religious institution, with a day care C C Residential (one dwelling unit on the same parcel as a commercial C C or industrial use for use of the proprietor of the business) Residential, multiple-family housing P Residential, single-family detached P Residential, duplex P Residential, single-family attached (greater than two units) P Residential care facilities for the elderly C C P Restaurant, drive-in/fast food C Restaurants and other eating establishments C P Restaurants with lounge or live entertainment~ C Retail support use (15 percent of total development square footage in BP and LI) Rooming and boarding houses C P S Scale, public Schools, business and professional C C Schools, private (kindergaden through Grade 12) C C - :Scientific research and development offices and laboratories Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care) 2 R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PEK) - PC Changes.doc Table 17.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use t A I B J C Solid waste disposal facility Sports and recreational facilities - Swap Meet, entirely inside a permanent building Swap Meet, outdoor Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales no outdoor storage P T ITa or shop P P Taxi or limousine service Temporary real estate tract offices Tile sales P Tobacco shop C Tool and die casting Transfer, moving and storage Transportation terminals and stations Truck rentals (no sales or/service) TV/VCR repair P P U Upholstery shop I I I V Vending machine sales and service - Veterinarian clinic w/overnight facilities (indoor kennels) P W Warehousing/distribution Watch repair P P Wedding chapels Welding shop Welding supply and service (enclosed) Y R:'~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Tem¢cula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 14 Table t7.22.148 Schedule of Permitted Uses Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay District Description of Use iAIB I C Z 1. The CUP will be subject to Section 17.08.050(G) of the Development Code, special standards for the sale of alcoholic beverages. 2. All Senior Project housing residential projects shall use the development and performance standards for the M (Medium Density Residential) zone and the provisions contained in Section 17.06.050.H of the Temecula Development Code. * The Director of Planning may approve an increase in floor area up to 15% for those uses that have a maximum square footage specified. Ord. 99-03 § 2) 17,22.150 DESIGN AND SETBACK STANDARDS The following standards are designed to increase the compatibility between uses within and adjacent to the project. The standards are to be implemented based upon the appropriate Sub Area. A. Sub Area A 1. Landscape Setback/Buffer. A landscaped buffer area, not less than twenty-five feet (25') in width shall be provided between Sub Area A, and the existing residential development to the east. Reference Exhibits C-3a (Plan) and C-3b (Section). The landscaping shall include (at a minimum) specimen trees, shrubs, and appropriate ground cover. No parking areas are allowed in this visual buffer area. A wail shall be provided on the eastern property line between Sub Area A, and the existing residential development to the east. The height of the wall shall be six feet and may be increased to eight feet if deemed necessary and appropriate by the Community Development Director. A minimum twenty-five foot (25') landscape setback from the property line shall be provided along the Rancho California Road frontage. No parking or drive lanes may be allowed to encroach into this area. Reference Exhibits C-2a (Plan) and C-2b (Section). R:~D F52000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 15 Pedestrian Linkaqes. · Pedestrian linkages shall be provided in accordance with Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan). · Pedestrian linkages shall be provided between Sub Area B, Sub Area A and Rancho California Road. Pedestrian access between Sub Area C and Sub Area A will be via Sub Area B. A pedestrian linkage shall be provided to the east of the drive lane that connects Sub Area B to Sub Area C. Building Height. All buildings in Sub Area A shall be one-story. Vaded roof heights shall not exceed twenty-eight feet (28') in height. Towers and other architectural features shall not exceed thirty-nine feet (39') in height. Gathedn,q Spaces. A minimum of one (1) pedestrian gathering space shall be provided in Sub Area A. Gathering spaces shall contain the following items: · Shading. (i.e., umbrellas, shade structures). · Plantings (i.e., a mixture of trees, shrubs, vines). within planter areas or potted. · Seating. (i.e., chairs, benches, seat walls). , Eating area. These may be Transit Previsions. Provisions for a transit stop shall be provided in either Sub Area A or B. Final location shall be determined at the Development Plan stage, through consultation with the developer, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and the City Traffic Engineer. Load n.q Areas. All required loading spaces shall be located in the front of the building. No loading shall be allowed on the side or the rear of the buildings. Trash enclosures. No trash enclosures shall be permitted on the rear sides of the buildings or along Rancho California Road. All enclosures shall be architecturally compatible with the main building and screened with landscaping. Exact locations shall be determined at the Development Plan stage. Sub Area B. Landscape Setback. A minimum twenty-five foot (25') landscape setback from the property line shall be provided along the Rancho California Road frontage. No parking or drive lanes may be allowed to encroach into this area. Reference Exhibits C-la (Plan) and C-1 b (Section). 2. Pedestrian Linkages. Pedestrian linkages shall be provided in accordance with Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan). R:'~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Tcmecula\Tern¢cula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 16 · Two (2) pedestrian linkages shall be provided between Sub Area B and Sub Area C. In addition to the pedestrian linkage depicted on Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan), a pedestrian linkage shall be provided to the east of the drive lane that connects Sub Area B to Sub Area C. · Pedestrian linkages shall be provided between Sub Area B, Sub Area A and Rancho Califomia Road. Transit Provisions. Provisions for a transit stop shall be provided in either Sub Area A or B. Final location shall be determined at the Development Plan stage, through consultation with the developer, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and the City Traffic Engineer. Gathedn.q Spaces. A minimum of one (1) pedestrian gathering space shall be provided in Sub Area B. Gathering spaces shall contain the following items: · Shading. (i.e., umbrellas, shade structures). · Plantings (i.e., a mixture of trees, shrubs, vines). These may be within planter areas or potted. · Seating. (i.e., chairs, benches, seat walls). · Eating area. 5. Loadinq Areas. All required loading spaces shall be located in the front of the building. No loading shall be allowed on the side or the rear of the buildings. Trash enclosures. No trash enclosures shall be permitted on the rear sides of the buildings or along Rancho California Road. All enclosures shall be architecturally compatible with the main building and screened with landscaping. Exact locations shall be determined at the Development Plan stage. Sub Area C. Building Setbacks. All structures shall be setback a minimum of forty-five (45) feet along the eastern and southerly property line, which abuts existing single-family residential development. Reference Exhibits C-6a (Plan) and C-6b (Section). Pedestrian Linkages. Pedestrian linkages shall be provided in accordance with Exhibit B (Sidewalk Plan). · A minimum of one (1) pedestrian linkage shall be provided between Sub Area C and Sub Area B and between Sub Area B or Sub Area C and Sub Area A. · A pedestrian pathway system shall be provided within Sub Area C. Building Hei,qht. The height of structures shall not exceed three (3) stories or forty (40) feet in height. R:kD P~000~00-0140 Village of Tcmecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 17 Buildin,q Plottin.q. Buildings on the eastem property line shall be plotted so that they will not view into the existing residences to the east of the project. The ends of units or garages shall be located on the perimeter. R:'~D 1~000~00~)140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Clumgcs.doc 18 17.22.152 VEHICULAR CIRCULATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Vehicular Cimulation System Standards have been developed to assure that adequate vehicular access ingress and egress exist for the project, that internal project circulation and vehicle stacking are sufficient and that necessary emergency vehicle access requirements are met. A Conceptual Site Plan (Exhibit A) has been prepared with input from the Planning, Public Works and Fire Departments. Locations and approximate square footage for building envelopes, access points from Rancho California Road and the western road, drive lanes, parking lots and parking lot landscaping have been provided on the conceptual plan in an effort to depict typical overall development of the site. Minor changes or modifications to the conceptual plan may occur provided they are reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula at the development plan stage. Access Points: Three (3) access points to the project have been provided to the site from Rancho California Road. 1. Access to Sub Area A shall be provided from the easterly access point on Rancho Califomia Road and by a drive lane, which is perpendicular to Rancho California Road (through Sub Area B). 2. Access to Sub Area B shall be provided from all three (3) access points on Rancho California Road. Access to Sub Area C shall be provided from the two westerly access points on Rancho California Road and from the property to the west via the westerly Rancho California Road project access point. 17.22.154 ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural and Landscape Design Guidelines have been included for the commercial component of PDO-5 (Sub Area A and Sub Area B). These guidelines, when used in conjunction with the Citywide Design Guidelines, will provide the necessary assurances that a comprehensive and high quality project is developed on the site. Unless expressly stated below, Residential Architectural Guidelines for Sub Area C are contained within Chapter 5 of the City-Wide Design Guidelines. A. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. Form, Height And Massing A vadety o[ building form, height and massing techniques shall be utilized to achieve a pedestrian scale of development. The Guidelines contained below correspond to the Conceptual Building Elevations (Elevations), contained in Exhibit D. The Elevations are representative of the design concept that is strongly encouraged in the commercial component of Temecula Village. Final design of the individual buildings will utilize the design concepts depicted on the Elevations and may vary from the Elevations depicted in Exhibit D. · The architectural design of the office and retail area in Sub Area A shall be single-story structures with covered walkways, colonnades, arcades and R:~D Pk20O0~0-0140 Village of Temecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Chaages.doc 19 openings that create interest. Structures in Sub Area B may be increased to two- stories; however, they must meet the criteria mentioned above. · Two-story buildings shall not exceed thirty-four feet (34') in height. Exceptions to this height limitation, up to forty feet (40') in height, shall be allowed for towers and other amhitectural features. · Offsets in planes shall be used to reduce the mass of building walls, accent entry areas, and create amhitectural interest. · Building forms shall be of simple geometry with sculptural or traditional forms acceptable. · Second floor balconies/dormers is a method that can be used to reduce the mass of large buildings. · Pediment entries, colorful window and door trim shall be used for accent purposes. · Building entries shall be defined and articulated through the use of items such as columns and stone veneers. · Recessed windows and entryways shall be used, especially at the ground level as they add interest to the product. · Windows or window-type elements are encouraged on second story elements. · Windows on the second floor should line up with windows on the first floor, making the column/structure apparent. · All sides of the buildings shall receive adequate detail treatment; however, reduced articulation shall be permitted for those sides of the buildings that are not clearly visible from public view. · The use of arcades is encouraged on front elevations of larger buildings (Shops "B" and Building "F") and on the western elevations of the buildings in Sub Area A (Buildings "G", "H" and "1"). 2. Colors & Materials The colors and materials for all Sub Areas shall be consistent with the color and material board (Exhibit E). The purpose of the color and material board is to provide continuity between the components of the Temecula Village PDO. A. Colors · The predominant building color includes a mixture of earth tones (grays, whites, yellows, tans and browns, similar to colors already used throughout the City of Temecula and other Southern California cities. Warm or light colors are the most appropriate for trim. · Brighter colors shall be .limited to signs, doors, window trim and other detailing related to pedestrian areas. B. Materials · Cement Plaster, or similar materials will be used predominantly throughout as will natural color ledger stone, wood trellis and copper patina metal roofing. · The use of canvas awnings is strongly encouraged over windows and entries. · Textured concrete (poured in place or tilt up) and concrete block may be used on building elevations. R:~) PLT.000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC (lmnges.do~ 2O · High quality, dark colored roofing, such as sealed non-reflective metal, wood or concrete shingles or shakes, and asphalt/concrete composites am recommended. · Beams, posts and wooden or stone columns should be simple with camps and toes. Cam should be taken so that the width of the column is in proportion to the scale of the building. 3. Roof Forms · Flat roofs with simple horizontal or gabled parapets are encouraged. Roofs shall be high enough to hide rooftop equipment. · Rooftops shall be designed to be visually attractive when viewed from adjacent buildings or roadways. · Varied roof heights shall be incorporated to reduce building massing. · The use of cornices is strongly encouraged. B. LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. Project-Wide Landscaping Plant communities currently represented on the site are annual grasslands and woodland tree plantings. Existing development in the area also establishes a plant palette for the project to draw from. The landscape theme for the site development is intended to compliment the existing development, while at the same time establishing it own identity. The landscape theme is also intended to support the architectural guidelines by creating screens and buffers where needed and views where opportunities exist. Guidelines: · Plant material selection for street trees shall be determined by the Chapter 8 (Public Design Guidelines) of the City-Wide Design Guidelines and complement the existing street trees on Rancho California Road. · Introduced plant materials will be installed so that they reflect the surrounding plant species. · Irrigation systems shall include Iow flow drip systems, consistent with the Section 17.32 of the City's Development Code (Water-Efficient Landscape Design). · Landform grading and the use of berming shall be used in coordination with development pad landscaping to screen parking and loading areas. 2. Project Edges Project edges will be the most visible components of the project. These edges include: Rancho California Road edge, residential (internal)/office/retail (internal) edge, residential (intemal)/residential (external) edge and residential (internal)/residential (external) edge. The intent is to provide a comprehensive landscape approach to the project, while paying attention to the particular needs of each edge condition. Plans and Sections are provided to guide future Development Plans in these areas. The Landscape Plan and Section Legend, Plans and Sections are included as Exhibit C and Exhibits C-la through C-7b. a. Rancho California Road Edge Landscaping along Rancho California Road will be complimentary to existing landscaping along Rancho California Road, as well as serve to identify the project. Streetscape plantings will be coordinated with interior streetscape and parking treatments as well as with adjacent parcel landscaping. Enhanced project entdes at two locations will provide a gateway into the project. Reference Exhibits C~la (Plan) and C-lb (Section): Rancho California Road/Sub Area B Interface and Exhibits C-2a (Plan) and C-2b (Section): Rancho California Road/Sub Area A Interface. b. Residential (External)/Office/Retail Edqe This edge will serve to buffer the proposed development in Sub Area A from the existing single-family residential to the east. A minimum twenty (20) foot landscape buffer shall be required from the eastern property line to any structure. An architecturally treated wall shall be constructed on the eastern property line to further serve as a buffer. Evergreen trees with broad canopies may be utilized to allow for maximum privacy for the existing single-family residents. Reference Exhibits C-3a (Plan) and C-3b (Section): Sub Area A Interface at East. c. Residential (Internal)/Office/Retail (Internal) Edge This edge will be viewed by residents living adjacent to the project and will act as a buffer between the development and residential use. Native vegetation in good condition will be retained where possible and layered densely planted evergreen landscape materials will be provided for further screening. Reference Exhibits C- 4a (Plan) and C-4b (Section): Sub Area C/Sub Area B Interface and Exhibits C- 5a (Plan) and C-5b (Section): Sub Area C/Sub Area A Interface. d. Residential (Intemal)/Residential (External) Ed,qe Slopes created on the eastem and southern slopes will be extensively landscaped to meet current City Development Code standards. Since these are down slopes of various lengths, trees and shrubs are provided near the top of the slope to allow for maximum privacy for the existing single-family residents. The southwestern portion of the site will be graded and planted with turf, trees and shrubs in order to provide an active recreational open space for local residents. Reference Exhibits C-6a (Plan) and C-6b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at East and Exhibits C-7a (Plan) and C-7b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at South. 3. Major Entries Special landscaping will occur at the major entries that will identify the points of entry and set the tone for the center. Plantings will be coordinated with the Rancho California Road edge. Clear views for traffic safety and project signage must be maintained. Enhanced vehicular and pedestrian access will identify major entries, as follows. R:~D PL2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 22 "17.22.156 Incorporation of Exhibits. All development within the Temecula Village Planned Development overlay Distdct shall conform and comply with the requirements set forth in the following Exhibits, which exhibits are on file in the Official Records of the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full and which are also reduced in size to be included in the Zoning Code Text: Exhibit 17.22.156 A. Conceptual Site Plan and Sub Area Map Exhibit 17.22.156 B. Sidewalk Plan Exhibit 17.22.156 C. Landscape Plan and Section Legend, Plans and Sections Exhibit 17.22.156 D. ConCeptual Building Elevations Exhibit 17.22.156 E. Color and Material Board Exhibit 17.22.156 F through ff Exhibits Attached to Application" R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Tcmecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.do~ 23 LILIl_l EXHIBIT SECTION 17.22.156 C LANDSCAPE PLAN AND SECTION LEGEND, PLANS AND SECTIONS Exhibit C: Landscape Section and Plan Legend Exhibits C-la (Plan) and C-lb (Section): Rancho California Road/Sub Area B Interface Exhibits C-2a (Plan) and C-2b (Section): Rancho California Road/Sub Area A Interface Exhibits C-3a (Plan) and C-3b (Section): Sub Area A Interface at East Exhibits C-4a (Plan) and C-4b (Section): Sub Area C/Sub Area B Interface Exhibits C-5a (Plan) and C-5b (Section): Sub Area C/Sub Area A Interface Exhibits C-6a (Plan) and C-6b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at East Exhibits C-7a (Plan) and C-7b (Section): Sub Area C Interface at South R:~D PX2000~00-0140 Village of Temecuh~Temecula Village pIX) - PC Changes.doc 24 ~x~mRTT sF~IoN 17.2Z.156 C RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. CONICAL DECIDUOUS STREET TREE TYPICAL MEDIUM FOREGROUND. SHRUB MASSING TYP.- LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYPICAL BROAD CANOPY DECIDUOUS TREE TYPICAL CONCRETE. SMALL FLOWERING ACCENT SHRUB MASSING TYPICAL UPRIGHT EVERGREEN TREE IYPICAL- PYRAMIDAL EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL RESTAURANT 1J PLAN VIEW '(~ Rancho California Road / Sub Area B Interface NTS SECTION 17.22.156 Z RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYPICAL PYRAMIDAL EVERGREEN TREE '[YPICAL BROAD CANOPY DECIDUOUS TREE FLOWERING ACCENT 6' CONCRETE SHRUB MASSING ~YPICAL SIDEWALK TfPICAL 2 CONICAL DECIDUOUS STREET TREE 2 -- MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. --MINOR ENTRY MONUMENT OFFICE PLAN VIEW. (~ Rancho California Road / Sub Area A Intedace NTS .x.,.~ SEC'~Z01~ 17.22.1§6 C zO o~ ; I(XHTRI~ 'S~,C'~TO~* 17.22.1-%6' C RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. 3 -- BROAD CANOPY EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL -- LARGE BACKGROUND' SHRUB MASSING' IYPICAL MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. DECIDUOUS ACCENT TREE I'(PICAL I BLOCK PERIMETER WALL 'IYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Al[ACHED TO WALL IYPICAL · PLAN VIEW Rancho California Road/Sub Area A Interface NTS lcl'g~l~IT S]~TION 17.22.156 C · KxbTRT'~ $~C~:[Olq 17.22.156 C PYRAMIDAL DECIDUOUS ACCENT TREE 'IYPICAL PYRAMIDAL EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL BROW DITCH BROAD CANOPY EVERGREEN TREE LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB IVlASSING TYPICAL MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. SMALL FLOWERING SHRUB MASSING TYPICAL 4 MULTI-FAMILY. RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK 'IYPICAL ES All'ACHED TO FENCE .TYPICAL TUBULAR STEEL FENCE T'N~IC,AL PLAN VIEW Sub Area C / Sub Area B Intedace {~"' zx~mRI~ $]~'~I01~ 17.22.156 C '~'X'nTBI~ SE, CtIOI~ 17.22.156 c eR6~ C~OPY DEC)DUOUS TREE 'PFPICAL LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYPICAI.~ BROAD CANOPY EVERGREEN TREE PYRAMIDAL EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL PYRAMIDAL DECIDUOUS 'ACCENT TREE TYPICAL.- 5 .% I PARKING /~ RETAINING '- WALL' DITCH MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. 8' TUBULAR STEEL FENCE TYPICAL VINES A1TACHED TO FENCE TYPICAL 5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK IYPICAL 5 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL . PLAN VIEW Sub Area C / Sub Area A Interface NTS l~11Tl~X'~ SECTION. 17.22.156 C _11 I MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. -- LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB MASSING UPRIGHT EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL GARAGES TYPICAL MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL GARAGES / / SINGLE/~AMILY I RESIDENTIAL BROAD CANOPY DECIDUOUS TREE TYPICAL I BROAD CANOPY ~ERGREEN TREE ~PI~ NATURAL OPEN SPACE TYPICAL m SLOPE GROUNDCOVER ~PICAL I 8' TUBULAR STEEL FENCE TYPICAL PLAN VIEW Sub Area C Interface at East NTS ~x~BIT S~'TION 17.22.156 C ~x-~uIT SECTIO~ 17.22.~56C LARGE BACKGROUND SHRUB UASSING TYPICAL BROAD CANOPY EVERGREEN TREE TYPICAL MEDIUM FOREGROUND SHRUB MASSING TYP. PYRAMIDAL DECIDUOUS ACCENT TREE TYPICAL CONCRETE SID~ALK TYPICAL PYRAMIDAL TREE TYPICAL .8' TUBULAR STEEL FENCE TYPICAL SMALL EVERGREEN SCREEN TREE TYPICAL 7 '~NGLE! FAMILY RF'SID£~ITIAL I .I PLAN VIEW Sub Area C Interface at SOuth NTS Guidelines: Accent trees with fall or flowering color should be used as identify plantings. · Low-scale walls, shrubs and groundcovers with annual or perennial color should be used to highlight key areas, such as the base of project entry monuments. · Trees should be massed to create an effect similar to native plantings in undisturbed areas. R:',D P~2000~00~ I ~0 Village of Tcm~cula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC C~nges.doc 25 SECTION 17.22.156 C Z KxHr~TT SK~IOH ¢7.22.156 C ~o< =< .9 Z 0~- n,-o ~. (:,) Secondary Entries Secondary entries delineate the entry to the project interior. They are located at the westerly and easterly edges of the project along Rancho California Road. Design elements may include accent plantings, Iow scale walls, and monumentation. Guidelines: · Shrubs and groundcovers with annual or perennial color should be used at the base of project entry monumentation. · Accent trees, such as palm trees or crape myrtle varieties should be used to identify entries. R:~D PO,000~)I40 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Cl~anges.doc 26 .x.J.6IT SF"CTIoN i7.22.156 C oo ~o ~ ~Z OZ Project-Wide Hardscape Concept HardscaPe elements should be used in coordination with the architecture and landscaping to provide a link between the street edge and individual developments. Attention to hardscape details can create a strong sense of community by relating different developments to an overriding theme. In addition, property hardscaping can improve pedestrian safety, movement and visual enjoyment of public areas. a. Pavinq Materials The use of enriched paving treatment has been recommended for the major entry into the site and intersections to highlight key areas of the streetscape. Guidelines: Paving materials that incorporate natural rock or stone ara highly recommended. · Major intersection and project entry crosswalks shall be highlighted by enriched paving treatments such as stamped, colored concrete, interlocking pavers or cobblestones to visually denote crosswalks. · Near buildings, paving materials should be consistent with major intersection treatments, using interlocking pavers, cobblestone, natural stone, or textured concrete. ~x.I~IT SF, CTION 17.22.156 C SMOOTH CONCRETE BANDS TYPICAL EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE ACCENT ln'PICAL INTERLOCKING PAVERS TYPICAL -- FREE STANDING PILASTER W/ DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE · &: BUILT-IN LAMP TYPICAL,-- PLAN VIEW Enhanced Paving at Intersection Alternate 1 NTS f 17o22.156 C INTERLOCKING PAVERS TYPICAL SMOOTH CONCRETE BANDS TYPICAL EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE ACCENT TYPICAL COBBLE STAMPED COLORED CONCRETE TYPICAL / \ // FREE STANDING PILASTER W/ DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE & BUILT-~IN LAMP TYPICAL-- PLAN VIEW . Enhanced Paving at Intersection (~) Alternate 2 NTS b. Street Furniture Hardscape elements such as benches, bollards, paving and light standards should reflect the theme of the overall commercial center, complimenting the amhitecture and landscape. Materials used in construction of street furniture should compliment architectural materials used on adjacent buildings. Safety and durability need special consideration. Guidelines: · Natural stone, rock, textured concrete, wood, or metal are all acceptable building materials for street furniture. · Street furniture should be located within gathering and/or shaded seating areas within the center. · All benches should be of simple design of wrought-iron metal, or concrete with supports and scroll detailing and finished natural wood slats for the sitting area. · Trash receptacles and other minor details particular to individual parcels must relate to the architectural style of buildings. R:~D P%2000~00-0140 Village of Temeeula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 28 SECTION 1.?.22~156 C BENCH c. Walls and Fences When necessary for security or to mitigate grading, walls or retaining walls and fences can reinforce the project's identity and image. The material, style, and height of walls and fences shall in order to ensure visual consistency, provide an element of continuity throughout the center. Guidelines: Construction materials and colors shall be consistent with the project architecture with dark-toned hues and earthtone colors preferred. The use of a hedge/bollard treatment is acceptable and encouraged. · For walls built to screen ancillary structures adjacent to buildings such as trash enclosures, construction materials should compliment the architecture. · · The horizontal mass of continuous walls should be softened by landscape planting and vines. · Tubular steel or an equivalent may be used for fencing. 4. Lighting Concept In the design of lighting, careful consideration must be given the overall architectural theme as well as to the safety of the site users. An emphasis should be made to emphasize human scale in public areas adjacent to buildings and along walks. Guidelines: · Warm white lighting is encouraged, bright colored or blinking lights shall not be allowed. · Light standards will blend architecturally with buildings, pedestrian areas, and other hardscape elements. · Design and placement of site lighting must minimize glare affecting adjacent properties, buildings and roadways. · Natural stone and concrete may be used for light standard bases. · All lighting shall be consistent with the Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance. · "Old town Style" lighting fixtures, either attached to building Or pedestal mounted along pedestrian walkways and gathering areas shall be utilized. R'kD PX2000~00-0140 Viii,age of Temecula\Temecula Village pDO2~ PC Changes.do~ .xHLJS.[T SECT~'O-8* '17.22,156 C LIGHTING STANDARD 5. Signage Program A comprehensive sign program is provided for Temecula Village in order to meet the different type of signage needs. Building-mounted signage will need to be oriented to both to the pedestrian (internal to the project) and motorist (along Rancho California Road). In addition, it will be necessary to be sensitive to the existing single-family development to the south and east of the project site. Monument signs will be permitted along the Rancho California Road frontage, at project entries, which identity the commercial center, as well as the major tenants. Lastly, directional signage will be necessary to safely guide throughout all Sub Areas. A. Guidelines Appropriate. · Generally, small, Iow key signage for tenant spaces. · Building mounted signs for project identity. · A limit of four colors on a sign. Additional colors are acceptable only when incorporating a company logo. · Eye level signs; window and door signs. · Signs consistent with building texture, color and architectural style. · Uniquely shaped signs that are related to the product or service provided (i.e., barber poll). · Signs that have illumination sources consistent with Mount Palomar lighting standards and restrictions. 2. Inappropriate · Typical "can" or "box" signs with entire face areas made of plastic. · Signs mounted above building roofiines (parapet), or roof-mounted signs. · Signs that incorporate any manner of mechanical movement, audible elements, flashing or intermittent lighting, and/or moving or otherwise animated forms, · Signs that interfere with or conflict with any traffic control device, create a safety hazard by obstructing the clear view of pedestrian or vehicular traffic or interfere with efficient operations of emergency vehicles. · Signs, which prevent free access to or from any fire escape, door, window or exit, or access to any standpipe. · Landscaping or the use of annual or ornamental flowers that form a sign or message. · Signs not in scale with the pedestrian orientation. Vehicle signs. · Signs extending above the eave or parapet, roof-mounted signs, non- projecting signs which project more than twelve inches (12") from a given building face. Signs painted onto building surfaces or trash bins and their enclosures. R:kD F%2000~04) 140 Villa;~¢ of Tcmecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - P~ Changes.doc 30 · Signs with disproportionate, visually distracting, or reflective surfaced background or graphics. · Signs with non-contrasting background, graphics or font, which render the sign illegible. · Inflatable signs. · Off-site signage. B. General Si.qn Standards and Specifications The area of a sign or logo with individual letters shall be measured by a rectangle around the outside of the lettering and/or the pictorial symbol. · Planning and Building and Safety Departments' review and approval is required prior to the placing, erecting, moving, or reconstructing of any sign within the Specific Plan area. · All permanent signs shall require a permit prior to erecting or attaching the sign. · Signage that is not approved as part of the Development Plan process, shall be approved administratively by the Planning Director. · If a situation arises that is not covered by these sign regulations or the type of permit required, the Planning Director shall provide written interpretation after consulting the City's Sign Ordinance. · All building-mounted signs shall meet or exceed all applicable city, state and federal codes. · All signs containing electrical components shall conform to the Uniform Lighting Code. C. Buildin.q-Mounted Signs General. · Signs shall be placed to be compatible with the building and accent the architectural design of the structure. · Sign colors should be compatible with the building's color. · Signs and letter sizes shall be used which are complementary to the building scale. · Signs should have individually spaced letters. · Signs shall have concealed illumination source, either internal or external. Wall signs. · Signs attached to front walls and/or side walls of buildings shall have a surface area not to exceed one (1) square foot per linear foot of the respective face of the building. Sign attached to rear walls of buildings shall have a surface area not exceeding one-half (~) square foot per linear foot of the surface area of the rear face of the building. No wall-mounted signs shall be permitted on the rear of the buildings in Sub Area A, which face the existing single-family residential development. · For storefronts thirty feet (30') wide or less, a maximum letter height of 8" is required. · For storefronts 30'-60' wide, a maximum letter height of 12" is required. · For storefronts 60' wide or greater, a maximum letter height of 16" is required. · 1'he maximum letter height allowed is 24'. 3. Permanent Window Signs. · Store identity, graphics, typography and/or company logo may be silkscreened or etched on the tenant's window. · The maximum square foot graphic area allowed per window shall not exceed four (4) square feet or fifteen pement (15%) of the total window area from the exterior of the building, whichever is greater. · Signs will not be permitted on doom. 4. Awning Signs · Twenty pement (20%) maximum coverage allowed of the total exterior surface of each awning. · Internal illumination is prohibited. Projecting Signs · No more than one (1) projecting sign will be allowed per tenant. · The maximum size may not exceed six (6) square feet and shall not extend more than three feet (3') from the wall surface. · Projecting signs shall only be attached to buildings and shall not be illuminated. Hanging Signs and Under Canopy Signs · No more than one (1) hanging sign shall be allowed per tenant. · Signs are permitted under a canopy and parallel to the parking lot; maximum size of six (6) square feet; minimum of seven feet (7') vertical clearance shall be required from walking grade to the bottom of the sign. D. Monument Signs General Requirements · All portions of signs, including the base, shall be constructed with materials and colors that are compatible with, and serve to complement the building. · All monument signs shall include the address of the site. Numerals shall be no larger than ten inches (10") in height and no smaller than six inches (6") in height. · Low growing shrubs, groundcover and/or annual co[or shall surround the base of the sign. The landscaping shall be a minimum of one (1) foot distance from the sign. R:'~D PX2000~004)140 Village of Temecula\Tcmecula Village PDO - PC Changes.doc 32 2. Specific Requirements Maior Monument Sign · One major monument sign, not to exceed nine feet (9') in height above grade with up to fifty (50) square feet of signage area shall be permitted at the project major entry. · Colors and materials for the sign shall reflect the center. · Up to five (5) tenants may be advertised on the sign. · Each tenant placard shall not exceed one foot (12") high. xxstIl, IT S]~C'~ION 17.22.1~6 C # 2'-6" SQ. 3'-6" SO. STUCCO FINISH PILASTER CAP RECESSED GLASS BLOCK W/ WROUGHT IRON GRILLE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED. TYPICAL 4 SIDES STUCCO FINISH MASONARY PILASTER DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE MOUNTED TO PILASTER ,,,,- LEDGERSTONE VENEER PILASTER BASE ALTERNATE: COBBLE STONE VENEER PILASTER BASE FINISH GRADE ELEVATION Pilaster Lamp / Directional Sign NIS Minor Monument Siqns · A minor entry monument sign, not to exceed five feet (5') in height above grade with up to thirty-six (36) square feet of signage area shall be permitted at each minor entry monument sign. · Colors and materials for the sign shall reflect the center. · Up to three (3) tenants may be advertised on the sign. · Each tenant placard shall not exceed ten inches (10') high. R:~D PX2000k004} 140 Village of Temecula\Temecula Village PDO - PC Clmnges.doc 34. Eo Directional Siqns · Shall consist of small-scale versions of monument sign design and contain graphics conforming to the design for monument signs and building mounted signs. Shall have contrasting background/graphic colors. · Shall have direct or indirect concealed illumination. · Individual directional signs shall not exceed three (3) square feet in area, or have an overall height exceeding three feet (3') above finished grade. · Multiple-tenant directional signs shall not exceed twelve (t2) square feet in area, or have an overall height exceeding six feet (6') above finished grade. · Shall not contain Iogos. ~IBIT SECTION 1~.22.156 E ATTACHMENT NO. 4 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report,doc 8 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET; GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 0t3, AND 014. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section t. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and MJW Property Group filed Planning Application Nos. PA00-0138, General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139, Zone Change, PA00-0140, Development Plan, and PA00-0152, Tentative Parcel Map, for the property consisting of approximately 23 acres generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2002 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-003 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project, a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, a Development Plan and a Tentative Parcel Map. On September 17, 2002 and October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- , Resolution No. __ R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 1 adopting a General Plan Amendment, and Ordinance No. 02- approving a Zone Change. Section 2. findings: A. The City Council of the City of Temecuta hereby makes the following The Project, including the Development Plan, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project, including the Development Plan, has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Project, including the Development Plan, is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project, including the Development Plan, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The Project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site and represents a relocation of existing land uses. Section 3. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.05.010 of 1he Temecula Municipal Code: The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop an office/retail center and 160 apartment units is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Office Professional and Medium Density Residential for the site, provided the service station is deleted from the plan. The overall development of the land as conditioned, is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the Development Code and related Planned Development Overlay document. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Section 4. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Application for a Development Plan (PA00-0140) for the design, construction and operation of a 160 unit apartment complex and eight retail / office buildings totaling 68,700 square feet, generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-012, 013, and 014 subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002 R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 2 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 reguiar meeting held on the 8th day of October, 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 CITY OF TEMECULA ' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. Project Description: Development Impact Fee Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PA00-0140 Development Plan PA00-0140 Construct 160 attached single-family residential units on approximately 15.26 acres and a 68,700 square foot office/retail center on approximately 7.71 acres. Residential Attached and Retail Commercial 944-290-012, 013,and 014. October 8, 2002 October 8, 2004 PLANNING DIVISION General 2. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) ho,~r period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, 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 or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense o[ the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 3. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula'~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc 4. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten linear feet. 5. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C, D, and E, prior to issuance of building permits. 6. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Rancho California Road frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box London Plane (Plantus Acerfolia 'BIoodgood'). 7. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. 8. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 9. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 10. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits A through ff and the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 11. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance ¢)f all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer, Property Owner's Association, or any successors in interest. 12. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 13. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Primary wall exterior: Entry Doors, Railing, Shutters Roof Fascia, Trim and Garage doors La Habra Stucco "Cortez" (Base 200) La Habra Stucco "Meadow Brook" (Base 100) Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 Lifetile California "Mission Blend" Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 14. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 15. The applicant shall submit the architectural design of the apartment buildings for Planning Commission review. The architecture of the apartment shall be consistent with the architecture of the office/commercial buildings. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 16. The apartment building on the east edge of the property in proximity to Lot numbers 36 and 37 of the Starlight Ridge Development shall be redesigned to the satisfaction of the Planning Department in order to reduce the negative view shed impacts. (Added by the Planning R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 17. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the commercial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape surfaces within those parcels. '18. The applicant shall provide a pedestrian access from the east portion of the Apartment Complex to Rancho California Road. A Site Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 19. The applicant shall insure that all trees planted along the east property line of the subject development be a minimum size of 24" box trees. The applicant shall revise the landscape plans and resubmit the plans for Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 20. The applicant shall add various tot lots throughout the apartment complex. The size, content and location shall be incorporated in the landscape plans and submitted to the planning Department for approval. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 21. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for all (8) eight apartment buildings, garages, carports and clubhouse proposed in tills project. The applicant shall revise the architecture of the apartment buildings by incorporating the elements found in the retail / office buildings proposed. The elevations shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and be approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. (Added by the Planning Commission ,at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit 22. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Rancho California Road landscape planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the first certificate of occupancy. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 24. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 25. The applicant and owner of the real property represented by this approval shall join and maintain actiw~= membership in the Crime Free Multi-housing Program. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 26. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 27. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 28. 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. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc General Requirements 29. 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. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to issuance of a grading permit: 33. 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. Verizon g. Southern California Edison Company h. Southern California Gas Company Development Plan 34. ^ 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. 35. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 36. A Geotechnical 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. 37. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc 4 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. 42. 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 arid 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard .No. 301,302 and/or 303. g 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. i. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 43. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Street "A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with 50-ft. right- of-way. b. The driveway at the main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ff. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. c. The easterly driveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a Iccp road. 44. 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. 45. The westerly and easterly driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements. 46. 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. 47. 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. 48. 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 Parcel 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 City prior to commencement of the appraisal shall have approved the appraiser. 49. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 50. 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. 51. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 52. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 53. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 54. Parcel Map 29140 shall be approved and recorded. 55. 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. 56. 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. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Developrnent Plan COA*s with CC changes.doc 57. 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. 58. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 59. A bus bay within the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 60. 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' PJW) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimburse the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their property. b. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane. c. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equipment, loops, and interconnect. d. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 61. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavementtransitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 62. 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 63. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 64. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 65. 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. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 66. 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 R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula',Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc 7 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Planning Department Department of Public Works Riverside County Health Department Community Services District g. Verizon h. Southern California Edison Company i. Southern California Gas Company 67. 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. 68. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 69. A Geotechnical 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. 70. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 71. 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. 72. 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. 73. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct 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. 74. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 75. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. R:~ P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~evelopment Plan COA's with CC changes.doc 8 76. 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. 77. 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. 78. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 79. 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 d. Southern California Edison 80. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 81. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, 82. 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 83. Prior to installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into the respective TCSD maintenance program. 64. All parkway landscaping, slope areas and interior streetlights shall be maintained by the property owner or private maintenance association. 85. The Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 86. 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. 87. Class II bike lanes shall be included on the street improvement plans for Rancho California Road. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Rancho California Road as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. Prior to the issuance of buildin.q permits: 68. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to .97 acres of parkland, based upon the City's the current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro-rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of each building permit requested. BUILDING AND SAFETY 89. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the R:'tD P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 90. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 91. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 92. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 93. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 94. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 95. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 96. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 97. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 98. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 99. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 100. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Obtain the Division of the State Architect recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the Building Official, to implement in the building design. 101. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 102. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 103. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 104. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 105. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 106. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 107. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 108. Show all building setbacks. 109. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc ]0 quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 110. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes that are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 111. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1875 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2725 GPM with a 3-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 112. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6"x 4"x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 113. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 114. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.03.020) 115. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 116. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 117. Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 118. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 119. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 120. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc tl fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 121. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 122. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) 123. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 124. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 125. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. 126. Prior toissuanceofCertificateofOccupancyor building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 127. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 128. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located in locations approved by the Fire Department. (CFC 902.4) 129. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 130. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 131. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Developrnent Plan COA's with CC changes.doc arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 132. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developedapplicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 6001.3) Special Conditions 133. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland- vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 134. Prior toissuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) 135. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA- 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 136. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 137. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 138. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 139. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 140. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services dated May 31,2000. (Attached letter) 141. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the Pechanga Cultural Resources dated January 10, 2002. (attached letter) 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. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Development Plan COA's with CC changes.dec 13 Applicant's Signature Date Name printed R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula'~Development Plan COA's with CC changes.doc ]4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 9 RESOLUTION NO. 02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0152 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29140 RE- SUBDIVIDING THE SITE FROM 3 LOTS INTO 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0t2, 0t3, AND 014. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and MJW Property Group filed Planning Application Nos. PA00-0138, General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139, Zone Change, PA00-0140, Development Plan, and PA00-0152, Tentative Parcel Map, for the property consisting of approximately 23 acres generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of.the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as Assessors Parcel No(s). 944-290-01 2, 013, AND 014 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2002 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-003 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project, a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a Development Plan and a Tentative Parcel Map. On September 17, 2002 and October 8,2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 1 Section 2. findings: Section 3. declare that: On October 8, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- , approving a General Plan Amendment, Ordinance No. 02- approving a Zone Change, and Resolution No. 02- approving a Development Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following The Project, including the Tentative Map, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project, including the Tentative Map, has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Project, including the Tentative Map, is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project, including the Tentative Map, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The Project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site and represents a relocation of existing land uses. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find determine and The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district, and as permitted by the Planned Development Overlay zone, may have parcels with access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that the common-use [acilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping are maintained by a Property Owner's Association. 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 The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Conditions of approval have been added to ensure that final soils reports are submitted with the construction plans. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 2 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. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared which will provide conditions and requirements to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. City staff will ensure compliance of the mitigation measures as provided in the Monitoring Plan. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 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. As conditioned, the project will be required to provide access easements across each lot to provide for parking and on-site circulation. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Section 4. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map No. 29140, Application No. PA 00-0152, subdividing the existing 3 lots into 8 lots, for the property generally located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road intersection of Rancho California Road known as assessors parcel no(s). 944-290-012, 013, and 014 subject to the specific conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section $. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 3 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 reguiar meeting held on the 8th day of October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. Project Description: Development Impact Fee Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map PA00-0t52 Tentative Parcel Map subdividing the current three parcels, which are a portion of lot 24 of Tract 3334, into 8 individual parcels. Residential Attached and Retail Commercial 944-290-012, 013,and 014. October 8, 2002 October 8, 2004 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's cheok or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirement,'s 2. The parcel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, 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. 3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentalit!/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 damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City RSD P~2000\00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Parcel Map COAs CC.doc deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. Parcel Map Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 5. 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. Cable 'TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon k. Southern California Edison Company I. Southern California Gas Company 6. The Develope,r 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/VV) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (includi[ng but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimburse the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their property. b. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additio~na110' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane. c. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equiprnent, loops, and interconnect. d. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 7. All street imProvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans s'landards for transition to existing street sections. 8. 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. R:~ P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Parcel Map COAs CC.doc Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207,207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 800, 801,802 and 803. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400, 401 and 402. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303. 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. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underg round. Design, of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 9. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Street ~A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft within a 50-ft. right-of-way. b. The driveway at the main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ft. with a 6' sidewalk for each. c. The easterly driveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parldng immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a loop road. 10. 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. 11. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Rancho California Road on the Parcel Map with the exception of three (3) openings, as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. a. The westerly and easterly driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements. 12. 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. 13. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Parcel Map COAs CC.doc 3 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. 14. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision, which is part of an existing Assessment District, must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 15. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 16. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning 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. 17. 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. 18. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and iif he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Parcel 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. 19. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 20. 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. 21. A bus bay witlhin the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 22. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 23. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 24. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 25. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 26. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. 27. Easements, wlhen required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula'~Parcel Map COAs CC.doc 4 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 shallbe kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 28. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 29. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 30. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services dated May 31,2000. (Attached letter) 31. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the Pechanga Cultural Resources dated January 10, 2002. (attached letter) By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approwd. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Date Name printed R:'tD P~000\00~0140 Village of Temecula\Parcel Map COAs CC.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~arcel Map COAs CC.doc CITY OF TEMECULA FATIVE PARCEL HAP' NO. zgI&~ CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSIOI~I DATE- February 20, 2002 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP R:ID P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temect~la~Staff Repor~ and COAs.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village ef Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 10 Planning Application No. 00-0138, 0139, 0140 and 0152 (General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Development Plan and a Tentative Parcel Map) - Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner 1.1 Recommend to City Council, adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072; 1.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23, ACRE SITE; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0t40, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL / OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARI= FEET, AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0152, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBDIVIDING 3 LOTS AND CREATING 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,014. Staff's presentation By way of overheads, Assistant Planner Preisendanz provided an overview of the project plan (per agenda material), relaying the following: 1) the proposal to amend the General Plan in order to realign the current vertical designation to a more horizontal orientation which would allow for the Commercial and Office portion of the property to be located along Rancho California Road and th(; Medium Density to be located along the southerly portion of the project, 2) the proposal to amend the Zoning Map which would allow for a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) and will provide the Development Standards and Design Guidelines for future development, 3) the proposal to develop a 160-unit apartment complex with garages and carports on the southern portion of the project site, and Commercial/Retail/Office buildings on the northerly portion, and 4) to subdivide the site (three existing parcels) into eight parcels via a Tentative Parcel Map with seven of these parcels being in the Commercial/Office area, and one remaining in the Residential area. Continuing his presentation, Assistant Planner Preisendanz relayed that staff has been working with the applicant regarding this particular project for over two years, addressing land use R:\D Pt2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 19 compatibility (primarily with neighboring residents in the Starlight Ridge, The Villages, and the Temecula Ridge Apartments) and buffering elements, advising that due to these issues of concern, staff requested the applicant to submit a PDO which will require an increased setback along the easterly portion of the property (25 feet), and require an additional setback along the southerly portion of the property that abuts the apartments in Starlight Ridge (noting the requirement for a 25-foot landscaped buffer), relaying that the closest building along the southerly portion would 65 feet, the closest apartment building along the easterly portion would be 45 feet, noting the requirement for enhanced landscaping to further the buffering of the property from the adjacent homeowners; via maps, specified the area within the PDO where the Commercial buildings would be required to be one story in order to lower the impact to the adjacent homeowners to the east; relayed that within the PDO area, th~ apartment complexes will be required to be kept at a two-story level maximum (with a 35-foot height limit); advised that in order to provide land use compatibility through the PDO, staff is requiring the applicant (in order to retain staff's recommendation for approval) to remove the gas station which is proposed at the front entry of the project, noting that staff was of the opinion that this use would be more vehicular-oriented rather than pedestrian-oriented; and concluded that it was staff's opinion that this project plan would provide a better project than was originally designated under the General Plan and zoning. For Chairman Chiniaeff, via overheads, Assistant Planner Preisendanz provided additional specification regarding the easterly edge of the property with respect to the relationship between the height of the one building (which was at a distance of 45 feet) and the adjacent lots (Lot Nos. 2, 5, and 6) in the Starlight Ridge development. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, specifying how the height of this building would relate to the pad elevations of these adjacent lots. The applicant's presentation Mr. Barton L. Buchalter, the applicant; thanked City staff for their efforts regarding this particular proposal, noting that since approximately 1998 this project has been through numerous machinations; noted his willingness to continue working with staff, now the Planning Commission, ultimately the City Council, as well as the surrounding residents, to make efforts to ameliorate the concerns expressed; with respect to the fear expressed from vadous residents regarding an increase in traffic and crime with the development of an apartment complex, relayed that based on other projects that this particular company has developed in the community, this project development would be an asset to the community; noted that this family has a history of building the highest quality project feasible and maintaining ownership after the project's completion; specified the allowable uses with the current zoning, and the vast improvement with the current proposal; provided additional information regarding the Commercial area; apprised the Planning Commission of the community meeting the applicant held with the Portofino Apartment and Woodcreek Apartment communities (inviting 688 residents and/or families) to review the project plan, advising that during the four-hour event only one negative comment was expressed whereby a resident noted a desire to exclude the proposed gas station; with respect to the gas station use, noted the relative importance of this use due to the associated economic viability of the project, clarifying that this use would be restricted, as follows: no alcohol sold on the premises, limited hours, and high architectural standards; and relayed that with these restrictions, the benefits of including this use in the project would outweigh any detrimental impacts, additionally noting the lack of gas stations in this area. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, presented the project plan; provided a brief history of the property, the previous zoning, and the proposed PDO; noted the efforts of the applicant to mitigate the impacts related to the view shed; relayed the benefit of being able to R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 20 eliminate left-turn movements into the Target Center (to enter the Mobil gas station), the Texaco gas station, and the Shell station with the inclusion of the proposed gas station; introduced the development team members who were available to answer questions; with respect to the letters staff received today (dated February 13, 2002, and January 29, 2002, from representatives of the Starlight Ridge, Alta Vista, and The Villages Homeowners Associations), advised that the applicant would address these comments in written detail prior to City Council presentation of the project; and with respect to architectural design, noted that the applicant was open to architectural comments from the Planning Commission. The applicant addresses the Planninq Commission's questions For informational purposes, Commissioner Olhasso noted that for future projects, it would be her preference that three- and four-story projects be developed in Temecula; with respect to this padicular project, recommended that the European-styled design of the retail area be carried over to the apartment architecture; and recommended the inclusion of tot lots in the project plan. For Commissioner Telesio, Mr. Markham provided information regarding the applicant's view of what constitutes an "amenity," advising that it would be an element that enhanced the project (i.e., a pool, a recreation room, an exercise room), creating a more attractive high quality apartment complex which would be an asset to the community, noting the applicant's openness for input from the Planning Commission regarding a definition for the term "amenity:' specified the proposed access points in the project, additionally noting the pedestrian access points; advised that the signage for the gas station would most likely be a Iow profile monument sign, relaying that the applicant would be willing to come back to the Planning Commission for review of the signage plan for the Commercial area, and in particular the gas station when a sign program was developed. Addressing Commissioner Mathewson's queries, Mr. Markham confirmed that the minimum landscape setback requirement on the eastern portion of the project proximate to the Commercial area was 25 feet, 45 feet on the eastern side proximate to the residential area, 65 feet on the south, and approximately 25 feet on Rancho California Road; specified the pedestrian linkage from the Multi-family area tothe Commercial area on the western portion of the project, providing additional information regarding the design of this access which met ADA requirements, confirming that while there was no pedestrian access route on the east side of the access road, there was a possibility that a route could be incorporated into the slope, advising that the project was designed to encourage all the pedestrian access on the western side. For Commissioner Guerdero, the applicant's representative noted that the Portofino Project's setback was approximately 15 feet (Commissioner Guerriero relaying that the Temecula Ridge Development had a setback of approximately 120 feet), Mr. Markham advising that this particular project's setback along Rancho California Road for the Commercial area was 25 feet from the property line which constituted 31 feet of landscaped setback including the area behind the sidewalk, additionally noting that there was also a slight grade difference. For clarification, Mr. Buchalter noted that the property owner inherited certain elements included in this project, and subsequently made revisions as staff directed, and time allowed; and in response to Commissioner Othasso's comments, advised that the applicant would not be opposed to revising the design of the apartment complex, implementing a more contemporary style. For the Planning Commission's information, Senior Planner Hogan confirmed that a clear definition of what constitutes an "amenity" has not yet been determined (as the term relates to R:'~) P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Reportdoc 21 the Growth Management Plan), noting that both the Planning Commission and the City Council have struggled with this term. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Vince Di Donato, landscape architect representing the applicant, specified the various trees proposed which would provide varying heights, some color, screening, and a softening effect on the wall, advising that when the trees mature the building would nearly completely be screened; confirmed that the majority of the trees Would be 24-inch box size, providing' additional information regarding each species growth rate; and advised that the applicant would not be opposed to increasing the size of a portion of the trees if that was the desire of the Planning Commission. The public is invited to comment The following individuals spoke as proponents of the project: o Mr. A. G. Kading · o Ms. Carolyn Fritchey ~ Mr. Robert Oder 2000 Rancho California Road 42763 North Star Court 29911 Mira Loma Drive The above-mentioned individuals were in favor of the project for the following reasons: · The zone char~gewas preferable. · Impressed with this ultimate proposal, noting the changes the project has undergone. · The proposed retail center will be a stabilizing influence for the Multi-family areas. In favor of the proposed service station if a high level of architectural design were to be implemented. · Noted that alternate projects this particular company has developed have been exemplary. · Relayed a desire to obtain information regarding the uses in the retail center. Per comments relayed at a National Association of Homebuilders Conference, advised that "amenities" were described as any element, which could assist in the improvement of the lifestyle in an apartment (i.e., a gated complex). · After attending an informational meeting regarding the project, noted that numerous concerns were allayed, in particular the grading plan (which would lower the site), the location, the design, the proposed permitted uses at the Commercial Center, the fact that this property owner has a history of continuing ownership after development of projects, and the owner's contention that he will continue with the ownership of this properly, and the proposed fencing. As an 18-year resident residing adjacent to this property, opined that it was an individual's responsibility to obtain information regarding parcels surrounding one's residence, advising that she had known for years that this property was planned to be a Commercial/Multi-family development. · Emphasized the importance of the rights of property owners to develop on their own land. · Advised that the concerns of the residents residing proximate to the project site should be addressed, if feasible. · The benefits due to the shopping center with its pedestrian links. The need for apartments in Temecula, and the probable decrease in rental prices as the demand is met. For informational purposes, Mr. Oder noted his concurrence with Commissioner Olhasso's comments regarding the recommendation for future apartment projects to be taller, and fewer to be of the traditional box-shaped design. The following individuals expressed opposition to the project: R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 22 Mr. David Boucher Mr. Scott Hanson Ms. Marli Calabrese Ms. Laura Hanson Mr. Thomas Chisham 42797 Twilight Court 42298 Cosmic Drive 42059 Cosmic Drive 42298 Cosmic Drive 42422' Agena Street The above-mentioned individuals were opposed to the project for the following reasons: · Concerned regarding air quality and noise impacts associated with this project. · Desired a greater buffer between the project and the surrounding areas. · Opposed to the proposed gas station. · Concerned regarding the view of the parking lot from the street. , Expressed a preference for the development of professional offices rather than retail uses. · Decreased property values. · Noted a preference for the development of condominiums in lieu of apartments, in particular, at the top portion of the project. · The natural rural character of the community would be decreased with implementation of this project. · Recommended that there be more of a transitional project (i.e., office buildings) developed and not a major commercial center. · Read a letter (which was submitted to staff) written by Ms. Debra Moreno who could not attend this hearing but had concerns regarding the project, the letter including comments previously expressed, as well as a concern regarding traffic impa'cts. Inadequate access points for children traveling to school. In response to Mr. Boucher's comments regarding the negative impacts this project would have on his view shed, Chairman Chiniaeff noted that if this property was graded flat, a single-family home would be proximately the same ultimate height as this multi-family unit with the proposed grading plan. In response, Mr. Boucher additionally noted his preference for multi-family units for ownership, and not as rentals. For Chairman Chiniaeff, Mr. Scott Hanson noted that his residence did not back directly adjacent to the project; reiterating his concern regarding noise impacts. For ~he record, Chairman Chiniaeff noted the Planning Commission's receipt of two letters, which staff received today, February 20, 2002 (dated February 13, 2002, and January 29, 2002, from representatives of the Starlight Ridge, Alta Vista, and The Villages Homeowners Associations), which were previously referenced by Mr. Markham. It is additionally noted for the record that a petition with 27 signatures attached to the letter of February 13, 2002 (which outlined concerns regarding the project) was submitted to staff, as well as the letter from Ms. Moreno, which was read into the record during the public comment period. The applicant's rebuttal Mr. Markham further addressed the following issues: Concurred that this project would have no greater impact regarding the view shed than would a single-family home, which Chairman Chiniaeff had explained earlier. Relayed that the setbacks had been increased at the direction of staff (between the time of last year's and this year's community meetings). R:\D P~000\00-0140 Vi{lage of Temecuta\CC Agenda Repod.doc 23 Provided additional information regarding the PDO, which is a zoning document; and noted that the least intensive commemial area was located proximate to the single-family homes (in Sub-area A). With respect to concern raised regarding the maintenance of the property since it was for rental occupants and not for ownership, specified the alternate projects in the community that this company owns and maintains. Relayed that the project was conditioned to design and construct a signal, which would additionally assist the Portofino residents. Advised that it was likely that the primary cause of the noise impact that residents are experiencing was derived from the traffic onramps on Rancho California Road and would not be as a result of this project, noting that Mr. Dodson could further address this issue. Noted that the project was conditioned to build an 8-foot high wrought iron fence along the property line, which will be consistent with the fencing along the Kading property, relaying that this fencing would aid in addressing various concerns of the surrounding residents. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries, provided additional information regarding the development of condominiums and the associated construction liability issues. Mr. Buchalter provided the following information: Clarified that this property was purchased due to the existing Multi-family zoning, specifying the efforts to make numerous improvements in the project plan. With respect to the ownership vs. rental issue, specified that this particular company solely develops rental projects (i.e., high-end apartment complexes), additionally noting the success of the Ryland Development, which was located adjacent to the Portofino Apartment complex. In response to Commissioner Olhasso, noted that the project will have high-speed connectivity (i.e., fiber; Digital Subscriber Line.) With respect to traffic issues, Mr. Bob Davis, traffic engineer representing the applicant, noted the following: Provided additional information regarding the location of the proposed signal (Director of Public Works Hughes noting that the distance from Cosmic Drive to this location was approximately 740 feet). Confirmed, for Chairman Chiniaeff, that the uses allowed per the existing General Plan would have generated more trips than will be generated by this particular project, noting that with Professional Office uses there would have been a greater impact during peak periods. Relayed that a conservative discount of trips was factored into the data for the anticipated internal trips between the Residential and the Commercial areas; and for Commissioner Telesio, provided additional information regarding the relationship between particular types of permitted uses and the associated impact with respect to an anticipated reduction in trips. The Commission deliberates For informational purposes, Commissioner Olhasso noted that with respect to letters from the public for Planning Commission consideration, that if the information is received on the day of the hearing (as were the two letters referenced at this particular meeting) there was inadequate time for the Planning Commission to thoroughly review the comments, recommending that information be submitted at an earlier date. Noting that Starlight Ridge was one of her favorite communities, Commissioner Olhasso thanked the residents who attended this hearing ir~ order to express their comments to the Planning Commission; with respect to the remarks noted regarding a preference for the R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 24 development of condominiums vs. apartments, relayed that from a crime prevention standpoint, apartments were more easily policed due to the single ownership; and with respect to this particular project expressed the following recommendations: That this project be conditioned to participate in the Cdme Free Multi-Housing Program; That the trees proposed to be installed adjacent to the residential area be increased in size; That this project be conditioned to have staff investigate park amenities, specifically considering inclusion of a tot lot; and That the architectural design on the apartment complex be brought back to the Planning Commission for review prior to construction. After echoing Commissioner Olhasso's comments, in particular that the zoning for this area had been identified and the residents could have obtained information regarding the future development of this property located adjacent to the residential area, Commissioner Telesio expressed the following recommendations regarding the proposed project: Concurred that the design of the apartments should come back to the Planning Commission for review, noting hopes of the architectural style being consister~t with the proposed design of the Commercial area; and With respect to the proposed gas station use, relayed that he could support the inclusion of this use at the proposed location subject to the landscaping plan being adequate, and the signage subdued, recommending that this use also be brought back to the Planning Commission for approval of the specific plans; Addressing the proposed plan, Commissioner Mathewson relayed the following recommendations: With respect to the proposed gas service station, relayed his opposition to inclusion of this use, noting that the negative impacts could not be adequately mitigated; With respect to the architectural design of the Commercial area, advised that he was impressed with the proposal; Regarding the permitted uses in the Co~mmercial area, noted concern regarding adequate parking provisions if the uses were high attractors (i.e., the Trader Joe's use located on Winchester Road); Recommended that there be an additional pedestrian linkage incorporated on the eastern side of the project accessing the Commercial area (to be located down the slope face from the apartment pad level to the Commercial pad level); and With respect to the amenities issue, as it relates to the Growth Management Plan (GMP), recommended that there be investigation pursued regarding implementing a trails system to and from this site, if feasible, noting that if this system was not feasible that there be consideration for imposing an additional fee, an amenity fee, to be deposited into a fund to be used for recreation facilities in the community; and opined that on-Site amenities did not fulfill the GMP requirements due to not benefiting the community, as a whole. ~/ith respect to this particular proposal, Commissioner Guerriero noted the following recommendations: Advised that he was strongly opposed to the inclusion of the gas station due to traffic and environmental impacts; With respect to the proposed signal, noted his opposition to locating a signal in this area in light of the existing five signals, recommending that an alternate plan be investigated; With .respect to setbacks, recommended that there be efforts to increase the 25-foot setback; With respect to community amenities; relayed that it appeared that this project was not proposing any amenities which would benefit the community, as a whole; R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Repeal.doc 25 Recommended that a certain portion of the'apartments be allocated for Iow- income/affordable housing; Queried why patio homes could not be incorporated into the proposal, noting the plethora of apartments in the area; and With respect to the negative view shed impacts, concurred with the resident's comments, recommending that there be the elimination of one story of the building in the area where the residential views would be negatively impacted. Chairman Chiniaeff made the following recommendations regarding this particular project: With respect to the apadment complex elevations, concurred with the need for improvement, noting that to create consistency with the architectural style proposed for the Commercial area would be appropriate; and With respect to the landscaped setbacks, recommended that proximate to Sub-area A (along the eastern portion of the project), that this setback be increased in order to screen the project from the houses located in this area. Commentin,q on the permitted uses in Areas A, B, and C, the Plannin,q Commission made the followinq recommendations for the City Council's consideration: That Animal hospitals be deleted; That Appliance sales and repairs not be permitted in Areas A or B; · That aerobics/dance/gymnastics/']azzercise/martial arts studios solely be permitted in Area B via a CUP; That Automotive parts sales be removed as a permitted use in Areas A and B; That Bowling alley be deleted; That Community care facilities and Congregate care be deleted; That Furniture sales be deleted; That Garden supplies and equipment sales and service be deleted; That Grocery story, retail and specialty be permitted solely by CUP in Area B and that the size of the use be limited to less than 10,000 square feet. That Health and exercise clubs be solely permitted in Area B via a CUP; That Laboratories, film, medical (deleting research or testing) be added as a permitted use in Area B; That Nursing Homes be deleted; That Private utility be deleted; That Parcel delivery services be deleted; That Senior citizen housing be deleted; That with respect to Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales that there be a restriction prohibiting outside storage; That Temporary Real Estate tract offices be deleted; and That Wedding Chapels be deleted. With respect to the gas station use, Chairman Chiniaeff noted his support of the inclusion of this use, subject to the use being well-screened, and with exemplary architectural design, advising that he would visit the gas station located in the Dana Point area, which had been referenced by the applicant as an example of what would be proposed at this site; and with respect to the overall project plan, concurred with Commissioner Mathewson's concept regarding imposing an amenity fee as a recommendation for the City Council's consideration. For Commissioner Telesio, Mr. Markham and Mr. Kading specified the off-site installments proposed with the Temecula Ridge Project in order to offset the GMP's requirements for amenities. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 26 In response to Chairman Chiniaeff, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that the signal would be installed in conjunction with the project's development, advising that staff would not want the signal installed until it was warranted, noting that the timing of the installation would be affected by the project's phasing; and confirmed that if the Commercial area was proposed in Phase I of development, that the signal would be installed at that time. In light of Commissioner Mathewson's comments, Commissioner Olhasso queried whether this project was conditioned for park mitigation fees to pay for active fields' in the City. In response, Senior Planner Hogan advised that there was imposition of a Development Impact Fee component for park and recreational amenities, as well as the project being subjected to the Quimby Act requirements. For clarification, Commissioner Mathewson noted that his recommendation was for a fee over and above the typical requirements in order to address the GMP amenities issue. With respect to monument signage, Commissioner Mathewson recommended that corporate Iogos be avoided (which has resulted in a mish-mash of signage at alternate sites, with no consistency with respect to design); recommended that the design of the monument signage be exemplary. In response, Mr. Markham relayed that the applicant could bring the sign program before the Planning Commission, when developed, while noting that wood signage (which was recommended by Commissioner Mathewson) degrades rapidly. Commissioner Mathewson advised that he would provide staff with photographs of pleasing signage in order for the applicant to pursue similar design concepts. In response to Chairman Chiniaeff, Assistant City Attorney Curley noted that the Planning Commission might desire to take action on the General Plan Amendment recommendation separately, relaying the vote ratio, necessary for approval of this particular cpmponent. The Planning Commission opted to take action separately on the various components of this proposed project, approving the associated documents, including Resolution No. PC 2002-003 (as amended), as follows: MOTION: Chairman Chiniaeff moved to approve inclusion of the gas station use in the project subject to the following revisions: Add- That the design plan be brought back to the Planning Commission for review; That the hours of operation would be limited; That alcohol sales be prohibited, That the signage plan be brought back to the Planning Commission for review; and That the reference in the associated approving documents be revised to delete denial of the gas station use (as had been recommended by star0. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Telesio. (Ultimately this motion passed; see page 15.) Commissioner Mathewson relayed that he still had concerns regarding the lighting impacts, and the potential for signage to be placed on the canopy of the gas station use. Chairman Chiniaeff R:\D P~000~00-0140 Village of Ternecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 27 noted that during the design review the Planning Commission could deny approval of the plan if it was not satisfactory. At this time voice vote was taken, reflecting approval of the motion with the exception of Commissioners Guerriero and Mathewson who voted no, MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the General Plan Amendment (PA00- 0138). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved approve the Zoning Map Amendment (PA00- 0139); and to adopt the PDO document subject to the previously noted recommendations and removal of any references to plastic channel lettering on signage, ergo restricting this particular use on signage. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. For Director of Planning Ubnoske, Chairman Chiniaeff clarified that it was not the Planning Commission's desire to have the applicant bring back the redesign of the architectural plan for the apartments prior to City Council approval, advising that it would be the Planning Commission's recommendation that the project be approved in conceptual form by the City Council, and be subject to Planning Commission approval of the design plan prior to construction. For Commissioner Olhasso. Commissioner Guerriero relayed that it was his desire that the signal be eliminated and that either left-turn movements in and out be restricted, or that an alternative be discussed with the Kading Project representatives, relaying that both projects could be accessed onto Moraga Road; and advised that in his opinion a community amenity would be attained if the signal was eliminated and the Kading's project's access was shared. Director of Public Works Hughes advised that if the Planning Commission was considering approval of the project without the signal, that staff had not analyzed the impacts associated with this recommendation (i.e., the U-turn motions created), relaying that from a stacking impact standpoint, there would need to be off-site improvements to mitigate the added U-turn movements; advised that while staff would support the elimination of any signals, if feasible, that this project had not been analyzed without the installation; noted alternatives that while could be considered, would cause impacts that would need to be mitigated; for Commissioner Telesio, relayed that the signal may, or may not, be warranted at the first of occupancy; for Commissioner Guerriero, provided additional information regarding the need to analyze the project if the signal was not included; and with regard to the existing signals on Rancho California Road, confirmed that the phasing was not synchronized due to the varying capacities on this particular street, advising that at as future point, the signals would be synchronized. MOTION: Chairman Chiniaeff moved to approve the construction of the Multi-family Residential units and Retail/Office buildings (PA00-0140) subject to the following revisions: Add- That the conditions added regarding the gas station use (as noted in the first motion) be imposed. That the architectural design of the apartments be brought back to the Planning Commission for review with a style consistent with the Commercial area. R:\D P~2000\00~0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 28 That the building (i.e., Building No. 3), which was proximate to the Starlight Ridge Development, and the building proximate to Lot Nos. 36 and 37 (which needs to be decreased in height on the back side) be re-designed to reduce the negative view shed impacts. That the inclusion of a tot lot be investigated by staff, and included in the project plan, if determined appropriate by staff. Recommendation that the City Council consider imposing a separate amenity fee to satisfy the GMP requirements for amenities (Assistant City Attorney Curley relaying that staff would investigate the feasibility of this recommendation) since the Planning Commission cannot determine the City Council's definition of a qualifying community amenity. That the project be subject to participate in the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program. That the trees on the eastern portion of the project be increased in size. That there be a walkway installed for pedestrian access on the easterly portion of the project. (Mr. Markham noting that a driveway could be added on the eastern portion in order for pedestrians to avoid the existing necessity to cross, and could instead be directed to the sidewalk.) The motion was seconded by Commissioner Telesio and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero and Mathewson who voted n_go. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the Tentative Parcel Map (PA00-0152). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Telesio and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Commissioner Olhasso moved to close the public hearing; and to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 29 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 ADOPTED PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 11 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL REFERENCES TO A SERVICE STATION USE; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL ! OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, WHICIH EXCLUDES THE SERVICE STATION BUILDING AND RELATED PUMP ISLANDS; AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0152, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBDIVIDING 3 LOTS AND CREATING 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,014. WHEREAS, MJW Property Group, filed Planning Application No(s). PA00-0138 General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139 Change of Zone (Planned Development Overlay), PA00-0152 Tentative Pamel Map and PA00-0140 Development Plan "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on February 20, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approving of the R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Reporl and COAs.doc 12 Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F and Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: Development Plan (Section 17.05.010) The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop an office/retail center and 160 apartment units is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Office Professional and Medium Density Residential for the site, provided the service station is deleted from the plan. A service station at this location would introduce a vehicle-oriented use that is not compatible with the residential character of the surrounding area. The overall development of the land as conditioned, is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the Development Code and related Planned Development Overlay document. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Tentative Parcel Map (Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district, and as permitted by the Planned Development Overlay zone, may have parcels with access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping are maintained by a Property Owner's Association. 4. 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 The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Conditions of approval have been added to ensure that final soils reports are submitted with the construction plans. 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. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared which will provide conditions and requirements to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. City staff will ensure compliance of the mitigation measures as provided in the Monitoring Plan. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 9. 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. As conditioned, the project will be required to provide access easements across each lot to provide for parking and on-site circulation. 10. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of February 2002. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-~was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February, 2002, by the following vote of the Commission: R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 14 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:'~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA00-0140 Development Plan PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map Project Description: PA00-0140 Construct 160 attached single-family residential units on approximately 15.26 acres and a 71,100 square foot office/retail center on approximately 7.71 acres. PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map subdividing the current three parcels, which are a portion of lot 24 of Tract 3334, into 8 individual parcels. Development Impact Fee Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: Residential Attached and Retail Commercial 944-290-012, 013,and 014. TBD TBD PLANNING DIVISION Within 1. General 2. Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resoumes Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. Requirements The pamel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, 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. 3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, R:~,D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 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 damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. 5. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten linear feet. 6. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C, D, and E, prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Rancho California Road frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box London Plane (Plantus Acerfoiia 'Bloodgood'). 8. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. 9. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 10. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 11. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits A through ff and the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 12. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer, Property Owner's Association, or any successors in interest. 13. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 14. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department- Planning Division. Primary wall exterior: Entry Doors, Railing, Shutters Roof Fascia, Trim and Garage doors La Habra Stucco "Cortez" (Base 200) La Habra Stucco "Meadow Brook" (Base 100) Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 Lifetile California "Mission Blend" Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 R:',D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc ]8 15. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. 16. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the commercial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape surfaces within those parcels. Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit 17. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Rancho California Road landscape planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the first certificate of occupancy. 18. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 19. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 20. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 21. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 6.24 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. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 22. The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed bythe Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. General Requirements 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to issuance of a grading permit: 27. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Planning Department ,Department of Public Works Riverside County Health Department R:'~D P',2000~00-0140 Village of Ternecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc f. Verizon g. Southern California Edison Company h. Southern California Gas Company Development Plan 28. 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. 29. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 30. A Geotechnical 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. 31. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. 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. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 20 d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400, 401 and 402. e. All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303. g. 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. i. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensu re adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 37. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Street "A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with 50-ft. right- of-way. b. The driveway at the main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. c. The eastedy driveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a loop road. 38. 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. 39. The westerly and easterly driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. 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 Parcel 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 R:'~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 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 City prior to commencement of the appraisal shall have approved the appraiser. 43. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 44. 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. 45. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 46. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 47. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 48. Parcel Map 29140 shall be approved and recorded. 49. 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. 50. 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. 51. 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. 52. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 53. A bus bay within the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 54. 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R,NV) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimbu me the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their property. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc b. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane. c. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equipment, loops, and interconnect. d. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 55. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 56. 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 57. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required.by the Department of Public Works. 58. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 59. 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. Parcel Map Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 60. 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. Cable TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon k. Southern California Edison Company I. Southern California Gas Company 61. 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane. R:\D P'v?.O00\O0-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 62. 63. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimburse the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their properly. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equipment, loops, and interconnect. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 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. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303. g. 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. i. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensu re adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 64. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Street "A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft within a 50-ft. right-of-way. b. The driveway at the.main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ft. with a 6' sidewalk for each. o. The easterly driveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shalt have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 24 g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a Iccp road. 65. 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. 66. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Rancho California Road on the Parcel Map with the exception of three (3) openings, as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. a. The westerly and easterly driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements. 67. 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. 68. 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 bythe Department of Public Works. 69. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision, which is part of an existing Assessment District, must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 70. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 71. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning 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. Aroheological resources found on the site. 72. 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. 73. 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 Parcel 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. 74. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 75. 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. 76. A bus bay within the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 77. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 78. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 79. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 80. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 81. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. 82. 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 shallbe kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 83. 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 84. 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. 85. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 86. A Geotechnical 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 R:\D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnicai 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. 87. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 88. 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. 89. 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. 90. 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. 91. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 92. Pamel Map shall be approved and recorded. 93. 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 e~evation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 94. 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. 95. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 96. 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 d. Southern California Edison R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 27 97. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 98, All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 99. 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 100. Prior to installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into the respect!ve TCSD maintenance program. 101. All parkway landscaping, slope areas and interior streetlights shall be maintained by the property owner or private maintenance association. 102. The Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 103. 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. 104. Class II bike lanes shall be included on the street improvement plans for Rancho California Road. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Rancho California Road as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. Prior to the issuance of buildin,(! permits: 105. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to .97 acres of parkland, based upon the City's the current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro-rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of each building permit requested. BUILDING AND SAFETY 106. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations end the Temecula Municipal Code. 107. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 108. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 109. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 110. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 111. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) R:\D P~2000~)0-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 112. All building and facilities must complywith applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 113. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 114. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 115. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 116. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 117. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Obtain the Division of the State Architect recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the Building Official, to implement in the building design. 118. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 119. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 120. Provide electrical plan including Icad calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 121. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 122. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 123. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 124. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 125. Show all building setbacks. 126. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 127. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes that are in fome at the time of building plan submittal. 128. The Fire Prevent[on Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1875 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2725 GPM with a 3-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 129. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 29 Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 130. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 131. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum tu ming radius on any oul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.03.020) 132. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 133. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 134. Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 135. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 136. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 137. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 138. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 139. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) 140. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 141. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecu~a\Staff Report and COAs,doc 3O buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 142. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. 143. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 144. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 145. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located in locations approved by the Fire Department. (CFC 902.4) 146. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 147. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site'plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 148. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 149. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 150. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland- vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 151. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) 152. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life R:\D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Reporl and COAs.doc 31 safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 153. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or buiiding final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 154. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 155. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 158. The applicant shall comply with ail the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 157. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services dated May 31,2000. (Attached letter) 158. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the Pechanga Cultural Resoumes dated January 10, 2002. (attached letter) By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Date Name printed R:\D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc ATFACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA Project Site CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 VICINITY MAP R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 34 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B -GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION -(LM) LOW MEDIUM AND (PO) PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ect Site EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION - (LM) LOW MEDIUM AND (PO) PROFESSIONAL OFFICE CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 20, 2002 R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula'~Stafl Repor~ and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA SEE ATrACHED DOCUMENT CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - D INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 R:',D P~2000~0-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA SITE PLAN AND SUB AREAS CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 SITE PLAN R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\St~ff Report and COAs.doc 37 CITY OF TEMECULA CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 GRADING PLAN R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA SITE SECTIONS PA#00-0~&0 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - G GRADING PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT PLAN PA#O0-OI4.0 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 GRADING PLAN R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA TATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. Z91&O CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Ternec~Jla\Staff Report and COAs.doc CiTY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 LANDSCAPE PLANS R:~D F~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 42 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - K PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 43 CITY OFTEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - L PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ElEVATIONS R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Slaff Repo[t and COAs.doc 44 CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - M PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATiONS R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 45 CITY OFTEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - N PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATiONS R:~D P~000\00-0140 Vit~age of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA I , TEMECULA VlLt. AGE CENTER CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0t39, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - O PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 47 CITY OF TEMECULA CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN 3750 sq.ft. VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00'0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - P PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLANS R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 48 CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA~ CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - Q PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 CLUBHOUSE ELEVATIONS FI:\D P~2000~0-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Reporl and COAs.doc 49 CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '1' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA .... ~b_"~ [] A-a CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- R PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 50 CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '1' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOME8 FOR LEAS;E TEMECUI.A, CALIFORNIA ...... ~--~ [] A' CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- S PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~0-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs,doc 5! ClTY OFTEMECULA M VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ~,~ A'5 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - T PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~00-O140 Village of Temecula\Staff Reporl and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'lla' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - U PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~0-O140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 53 CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'lla' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOME8 FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - V PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 54 CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TE~ECULA HOME8 FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CAL~ORNIA ~ ~ ~ ,.c.~c~._,~__,~...~. ~ ~ A-8 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - W APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- Februaw 20, 2002 illllilllllllllll t ~ ~ ~ ~ 5ilflm® ~:::::: ...... ~::.::: R:'~D 1:~2.000',D0-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Reporl and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '111' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - X PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '111' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA .... ~..'~ [] A-1¢ CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - Y PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA BUIt. D[NG TYPE III FRONT AND REAR ELEVATION BUILDING TYPE III SIDE ELEVATION VILLAGE OF TEMECULA FOR LEASE TEME~ULA, CALIFORNIA ...... ~'~j'~.~"~[] A'11 CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - Z PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATiONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'IV' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LI~A$11~ TEI4ECUL&, CALIFORNIA .... ~_'~_~ [~. A-12 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - aa PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'IV' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - bb PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~E) P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs,doc 60 CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ,--,--~'--'-- A'14 CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - cc PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D FA2000\00-0140 Village Of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OFTEMECULA PLAN B'I PLAN B-2 PLAN B-3 ~..~ *~. m~ ~o... PLAN B'4 VILLAGE OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE II - TYPICAL 4-CAR GARAGE UNDER B'4 UNIT TYPICAL 4'CAR GARAGE PLAN HOME8 FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ..... *-'~'~.,~ [] A'15 CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT -dd PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temec~Jla~Staff Report and COAs.doc 62 CITY OF TEMECULA PLAN A-1 _PLAN A-2 PLAN A'~ PLAN Ao4 VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ~'" ...... '~,-~,,. ,~. '.~.-.~_=._~ ~ A-~O CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - ee PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA SEEATTACHED DOCUMENT CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - ff PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 PDO DOCUMENT R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc ~4 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 12 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION February 20, 2002 Planning Application No(s). PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0t52 Prepared By: Don Hazen, Senior Planner 1. RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL,'ADOPTION of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program based on the initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED. DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL / OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0152, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP RE- SUBDIVIDING THE SITE FROM 3 LOTS INTO 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 0t 3,014. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: The MJW Property Group, Barton L. Buchalter PROPOSAL: PA00-0138: General Plan Amendment to realign the Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (M) land-use designation boundaries, and increasing the gross acreage of the Residential area by 5.03 acres, with a corresponding decrease in the Professional Office area. PA00-0139: A Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Office (PO) Medium Density Residential (M) to Planned R:~D p~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc Development Oveday (PDO) and adoption of the standards and regulations contained in the PDO document. PA00-0140: Construct 160 multi-family residential units on approximately 15.26 acres and nine (9) retail/office buildings totaling approximately 71,100 square feet on 7.71 acres. PA00-0152: A Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the site into eight parcels. LOCATION: South side of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Rancho California Road / Moraga Road Intersection EXISTING ZONING: Medium Density and Professional Office SURROUNDING ZONING: North: High Density South: Low Medium East: Low Medium West: Medium Density GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density and Professional Office EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: BACKGROUND North: Portofino Apartments (16.5 alu/ac) South: Starlight Ridge Residential Tract (4.82 du/ac) East: Starlight Ridge Residential Tract (included) West: Vacant; approved apartments (11.8 du/ac) March 03, 2000 March 30, 2000 May 1, 2000 May 5, 2000 May 25, 2000 June 8, 2000 September 21, 2000 February 8, 2001 June 5, 2001 July 5, 2001 January 14, 2002 Project submitted Project deemed incomplete First Development Review Committee (DRC) Project deemed incomplete Second DRC Deemed incomplete Third DRC First Community Meeting Received resubmittal from third DRC comments. Project deemed complete Second Community Meeting PROJECT DESCRIPTION Environmental Determination The following technical reports were submitted with the application as reference documents for the environmental review: · 1999 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey, 45-Day Letter Report, Rancho California Road Project (Merkel & Associates, Inc., June 10, 1999) R:~D P~2000~00q)140 Village of Temecula~.~taff Report and COAs,doc · Kading/Rancho California Road City of Temecula Biological Constraints Report (Merkel & Associates, Inc., June 4, 1999) · Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Temecula Village/Temecula Ridge Development Temecula, California (VVilbur Smith Associates, August 28, 2000) · Drainage/Hydrology Study for Tentative Parcel Map No. 29140 Village Commemial and Apartments · Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment -Temecula Ridge (PA99-0371)(Jean A. Keller) · Preliminary Noise Analysis for Temecula Ridge (Mestre Greve Associates, February 2000) · Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Residential/Commercial Development City of Temecula (CH J, Inc., June 8, 1999) Staff has prepared an Initial Study and determined that the project could potentially result in significant environmental impacts, unless mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval. Based on those findings, staff has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan as summarized below, will satisfactorily comply with the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Villages of Temecula Environmental ImpactJMitigation Summary Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Responsible Party Biological Resources Potential removal of The project developer shall Prior to the Department of Public California acquire compensatory Issuance of a Works and the gnatcatcher, mitigation acreage off the grading permit Planning Department Quino checkerspot project site as discussed with butterfly, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Stephen's kangaroo Service. rat habitat Hazards and Hazardous materials Create a significant Provide the City with a Prior to the Riverside County Fire hazard to the public or Business Plan that outlines issuance of a County Fire the environment :he management of building Department, Building through routine hazardous materials, permit, and Safety transportation, use, or Department, Public disposal of petroleum Works Department materials such as and Planning gasoline and oil. Department Cultural Resources Potentially cause a During initial grading and Pdor to the Department of Public substantial adverse ground disturbance activities, issuance of a Works and Planning change in the a qualified cultural resources building permit Department significance of an monitor (and Pechanga rep.) archaeological shall be present and shall resource pursuant to have the authority to stop and Section 1506.5 redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. R:~D p~2000~0~0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 3 Could directly or During excavation and Prior to the Department of Public indirectly destroy a hillside cutting activities, a issuance of a Works and Planning unique paleotolgical qualified paleontological grading permit Department resource or site or ~onitor shall be present and unique geological shall have the authority to feature stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontolgical resources exposed during the grading activity. Disturb any human If any human remains are During any Department of Public ' remains, including encountered during initial ground Works And Planning those interred outside grading activities, all ground disturbance Department of formal cemeteries disturbing activities in the and prior to vicinity of the discovery shall the issuance be terminated immediately of a building and the County's Coroner's permit. office shall be contacted to manage such remains. General Plan Amendment The applicant requests a General Plan amendment to realign the Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (M) land use plan boundaries from a vertical alignment to horizontal. This will result in office/retail uses on the northerly portion of the site along Rancho California Road, and the residential use on the southerly "uphill" portion of the lot furthest from the street. The amendment will also have a net effect of increasiag the residential acreage by 5.03 acres. Because General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes require City Council approval, the Planning Commission will be reviewing the entire project proposal and making a recommendation to the City Council for final action. Zone Change The applicant proposes to change the zoning designation of the site from PO and M to Planned Development Overlay (PDO). Chapter 17.22 of the Development Code specifies the procedures and land use flexibility that is possible with a PDO designation. In this case, the applicant desires a PDO zone in order to broaden the range of retail uses than would otherwise be permitted with the current PO zoning designation; and to create parcels that do not have frontage on public streets and/or cannot "stand alone" with respect to parking/access and approval. The applicant has also submitted an accompanying PDO document that contains development standards, a use matrix, and architectural design standards that supercede the Development Code. Development Plan The applicant requests Development Plan approval for nine (10) office/retaii buildings and 160 apartment units on the site. If approved, this would require no further design review of the individual buildings prior to submittal of a building permit application, except for Pads C (service station), D (restaurant), and E (daycare), which will require subsequent architectural review as Development Plan applications, because the applicant wishes to defer designing the buildings until actual tenants are known. Following is a proposed land use summary for the site: R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 4 BUILDINGS PLANNING AREA PROPOSED USE SQUARE FOOTAGE PAD ~A" Sub Area B Retail 6,000 SF PAD ~B" Sub Area B Retail 11,100 SF PAD "C" Sub Area B Service Station 2,400 SF PAD "D" Sub Area B Restaurant 6,000 SF PAD "E" Sub Area B Daycare 9,600 SF PAD "F" Sub Area B Two-story Office 20,000 SF PAD "G" Sub Area A Office 4,500 SF PAD "H" Sub Area A Office 6,000 SF PAD "1" Sub Area A Office 5,500 SF (10) two-story Sub-Area C 160 Apartment Units, 700-1151 sq.ft. residential buildings 80-1 bdr./80-2bdr. containing 16-units ea. Office/Retail Plan The office/retail portion of the site will be located along the Rancho California Road frontage and extend southward, approximately 260-400 feet. The site will be graded so that the office/retail portion of the site is generally level with Rancho California Road (+/- 2 feet). The plan shows the offices to be located along the southeast and easterly portions of the site (adjacent to Starlight Ridge subdivision). The retail buildings will be located along the street frontage and the westerly portion of the site. All buildings along the perimeter will have a minimum 25-foot landscaped setback from the property lines. Residential Plan The residential development of the site will consist of 160 "stacked" apartment units located in ten (10) two-story buildings. The site will be graded so that the building pads are approximately 45 feet above the office/retail grade, and 20 feet below the pad elevations of the adjacent homes on the uphill slope to the east and rear. The rooftop-to-rooftop grade difference between the apartment buildings and the adjacent homes will be approximately the same if the adjacent homes are single-story; and the apartment roofs will be approximately 5-8 feet lower if the adjacent homes are two-story. The nearest apartment buildings to the adjacent residences will be set back a minimum 45-feet from the east property line; 65-feet from the rear property line; and 52-feet from the private access street along the west property line. Detached carports and uncovered parking will be sited in proximity to the units they are intended to serve. The B-4 unit type will have lower level garages with units above. A pool and clubhouse will be located in the interior courtyard as project amenities. Architecture The application includes a Development Plan for all proposed buildings, except for Pads C, D, and E. The amhitectural style of the buildings can be described as "Eclectic Mediterranean", which is characterized by clay tile roofs, arches, heavy use of stucco, and fiat cornice parapets. The commercial buildings will also incorporate canvas awnings and wood trellises as accent treatment. Each retail/office building will have custom tower elements as distinguishing features. The residential buildings will have a complementary architectural style, but have a distinctive "look" that is different from the commercial development. The colors and materials proposed for the development will consist of earth tones similar to colors used throughout Temecula and typical for the architectural styles. R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 5 Landscaping All exposed graded surfaces and setbacks will be landscaped with a combination of trees and shrubs. Trees planted along Rancho California Road will include a condition for 24-inch box London Plane (Condition #7). The setback areas along the easterly and westerly portions of the site will include rows of 15-gallon Pepper Trees. The graded slope between the commercial site and the residential site will be planted with Peppers, Mondell Pine, Chinese Flame trees, and assorted shrubbery. The slope will be approximately 80-feet in depth and 40 feet high. The rear of the site will have similar landscaping and include an 8-foot high tubular steel "view fence" along the perimeter. A large portion of the rear of the site at the southwesterly corner will remain in its natural state with native vegetation. Access and Circulation Three (3) access points to the project will be provided. The primary access (which will be 740 lineal feet west of the center line of Cosmic Drive, and opposite the intersection across the street) will be signalized. The remaining two access points will be "right-in", "right-out" unsignalized driveways located to the east and west of the primary entrance. An internal drive will extend uphill to the residential project and terminate as a circular loop. For the most part, internal circulation through the residential project will consist of loop drives, with parking accessed directly off of those drives. Tentative Parcel Map The Tentative Parcel Map application proposes to create the following eight (8) parcels out of three (3) existing parcels: Parcel 1 0.93 acres (Office) Parcel 2 1.83 acres (Office) Parcel 3 0.99 acres (Day Care) Parcel 4 1.35 acres (Restaurant) Parcel 5 0.78 acres (Gas Station) Parcel 6 0.86 acres (Retail) Parcel 7 0.97 acres (Retail) Parcel 8 15,25 acres (Apartments) ANALYSIS 1. Environmental Determination Staff has conducted an environmental assessment of the project in accordance with CEQA, and determined that no significant environmental impacts will occur if properly mitigated. Therefore, staff recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan be adopted for the project. The mitigation measures have been included in the Exhibit^, Conditions of Approval. 2. General Plan Amendment The request to re-align the Professional Office and Medium Density Residential land use boundary is logical from a land use compatibility standpoint. The current General Plan land use map shows the Professional Office designation extending from Rancho California Road to the rear of the site for the westerly half of the site; and the Medium Density Residential designation extending the full depth of the lot on the easterly half of the site. By realigning the land use boundaries in a "horizontal" fashion, the commercial uses are located R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc along Rancho California Road and the residential use is located on the rear half of the site, which serves as a buffer use between the commercial uses and the adjacent Low-Medium residential density to the rear and easterly portion of the site. Additionally, developing the site according to its current land use map configuration would likely create the need to level the entire site to avoid split-level development projects extending the full depth of the lot and causing handicap accessibility problems. At the first community meeting, theirs was some public concern expressed about the type of residential use and density being proposed. The General Plan states that the Medium Density designation is intended for "attached and detached residential development. Typical housing types may include single family zero lot line, patio homes, duplexes, townhouses, and multi- family garden apartments" (Land Use Element, pg. 2-24). Staff supports the proposed use, because it provides an opportunity to diversify the housing stock and help meet the City's long- term housing needs. The density range specified by the General Plan for the Medium Density designation is 7-t2 du/ac. The application proposes 160 units, which equates to 10.48 du/ac. While the City Council Growth Management policies encourage housing projects to develop at the lower end of the density range, the traffic analysis indicates that the total peak hour traffic for the site will actually be reduced with the proposed zone change. The Traffic Engineer determined that the plan to increase the retail intensity of the site is actually more beneficial than office uses, from a peak- hour traffic standpoint. Therefore, staff can support the proposed density because the concern about traffic has been satisfactorily addressed. 3. Zone Change The request for a PDO zoning designation will permit flexibility in the development of the site. The primary benefit for the applicant is it will allow a broader range of retail uses than would otherwise be permitted with the Current PO designation. Staff is concerned that an excessive amount or intensity of retail use would be inconsistent with the intent of the Professional Office General Plan designation, and that issues of neighborhood compatibility would arise. Staff supports the proposed mix of retail and office uses being proposed in the PDO document, however the inclusion of a service station increases the vehicle-orientated retail intensity of the site, which staff believes is not compatible with the residential character of the surrounding area. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant, and the applicant has advised staff that he wishes tO proceed to public hearing with the plan as proposed, The intent of the City's Growth Management policy is to discourage zone changes that will result in higher traffic levels. The City Traffic Engineer has analyzed the projected traffic impacts resulting from the proposed mix of uses permitted by the PDO, and has determined that the project would generate approximately 1,455 fewer daily trips and 78 fewer PM peak hour trips then is projected for uses with the current zoning designation. 4. Development Plan a. Site Plan The project conforms to the requirements of the City of Temecula's Development Code, Design Guidelines, and intent of the General Plan. The project proposes a village design concept, which will provide a pedestrian-scale commercial project (with the elimination of the service station), and will provide pedestrian access from the apartment complex to the commercial center. The orientation of the buildings will also allow for various pedestrian amenities between buildings, as well as serve to minimizing the potential for monotonous views of buildings from adjacent vantage points. P~2000~00~140 Village of Temecula~Slaff Report and COAs.doc 7 The residential project complies with the development standards for multiple-family projects. The building orientation, building separation, open space, and recreational amenities planned for the project will enhance the livability of the project. The grading plan, landscaping, and building placement will also help create view corridors to reduce the visual impact of the site. It should be acknowledged that there would be view impacts regardless of whether the application is approved. The applicant proposes lowering the grade of the southerly rear of the site in order to reduce the height of the residential units--but not to the extent that neighbors are looking down on an entire site of roofs. b. Architecture The proposed architectural styles for each building conform to the City's Design Guidelines and will be compatible with the architectural character of the surrounding area. The project proposes the use of various architectural elements designed to break up the building mass. Techniques such as varying the roof planes, introducing unique elements to each building, and varying the color and materials will help to create "visual interest" in the site. Staff concurs with the basic design guidelines outlined in the PDO document and recommends approval of the building designs. c. Landscaping The project effectively utilizes landscaping to buffer the adjacent land uses and visually "soften" the appearance of the structures and parking lot. The plan will continue the landscape design theme along the Rancho California Road frontage, particularly by using the London Plane Tree. The overall percentage of site landscaping is 38% of the total site area---or more specifically, 30% coverage for the commercial area (which exceeds the minimum required 25% for the PO district); and 38% for the residential site (17% exclusive of the slope area). There is no minimum requirement for landscape coverage in the M zoning district, but there is a minimum open space standard. Landscaping will also be an integral part of the open space area for the residential project. The Medium Density Residential zone requires 25% of the site area to be open space. The plan provides approximately 25% open space, excluding the major slope portions of the site. d. Access and Circulation Staff has reviewed the access and circulation of the proposed project and finds that the proposed project will meet the requirements set forth in the City of Temecula's Development Code. The proposed access points off of Rancho California Road have minimized the effect of traffic conditions by providing ~right-in" and "right out" driveways at two locations, and a signalized intersection at the pdmary entry. The City of Temecula's Traffic Engineer has reviewed the access and circulation plan for the project and supports the proposed design as conditioned. 5. Tentative Parcel Map The tentative parcel map proposes to subdivide three lots into eight lots. The residential area will be on one lot, and the commercial development will be on seven other lots. The tentative map conforms with the intent of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. A condition to establish reciprocal access and parking easements across all lots will ensure that the site functions as one integrated project. Because the commercial site will be developed over multiple parcels, staff R:~D P~2000~00q)140 Village of Temecula~Staff Repo~l and COAs,doc 8 has added a condition (Condition #16) requiring the formation of a Property Owner's Association to provide for maintenance of the landscaping and hardscape surfaces throughout the commercial site. CONCLUSION I RECOMMENDATION Staff has concerns about the neighborhood compatibility of the proposed office/retail portion of the plan if a service station is approved. Since state law prohibits placing conditions on zone changes, staff recommends that the applicant be required to delete all references to service stations before the application is approved. With that change, staff can make the necessary findings for project approval. All other aspects of the proposal are consistent with the General Plan land use policies and staff recommends approval with the attached conditions and environmental mitigation measures. The Planning Commission will need to forward its recommendation to the City Council for final action. FINDINGS: General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes are "legislative acts" and do not require specific findings to be made, other than the changes will be consistent with other portions of the General Plan. Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F) The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop an office/retail center and 160 apartment units is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Office Professional and Medium Density Residential for the site, provided the service station is deleted from the plan. A service station at this location would introduce a vehicle-oriented use that is not compatible with the residential character of the surrounding area. The overall development of the land as conditioned, is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the Development Code and related Planned Development Overlay document. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and ail phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Tentative Parcel Map (Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district, and as permitted by the Planned Development Oveday zone, may have parcels with access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping are maintained by a Property Owner's Association. 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 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Conditions of approval have been added to ensure that R:'~D P~2000~00~140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 9 final soils reports are submitted with the construction plans. 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. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared which will provide conditions and requirements to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. City staff will ensure compliance of the mitigation measures as provided in the Monitoring Plan. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 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. As conditioned, the project will be required to provide access easements across each lot to provide for parking and on-site circulation. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. 02- - Blue Page 11 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 16 Exhibits - Blue Page 34 A Vicinity map B General Plan map C Zoning map D Initial Study / Mitigation Monitoring Plan E Site plan F-H Grading plans I Tentative Parcel Map J Landscape plans K-O Commercial floor plans / elevations p Clubhouse floor plan Q Clubhouse elevations R-ee Apartment floor plans/elevations ff PDO document R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Staff Reporl and COAs.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 02- R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A 23 ACRE SITE; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 160 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EIGHT RETAIL I OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0152, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBDIVIDING 3 LOTS AND CREATING 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,0t4. WHEREAS, MJW Property Group, filed Planning Application No(s). PA00-0138 General Plan Amendment, PA00-0139 Change of Zone (Planned Development Overlay), PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map and PA00-0140 Development Plan "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on February 20, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approving of the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F and Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: R:~D p~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc Development Plan (Section 17.05.010) The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop an office/retail center and 160 apartment units is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Office Professional and Medium Density Residential for the site, provided the service station is deleted from the plan. A service station at this location would introduce a vehicle-oriented use that is not compatible with the residential character of the surrounding area. The overall development of the land as conditioned, is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the Development Code and related Planned Development Overlay document. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Tentative Parcel Map (Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district, and as permitted by the Planned Development Oveday zone, may have parcels with access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping are maintained by a Property Owner's Association. 4. 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 The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Conditions of approval have been added to ensure that final soils reports are submitted with the construction plans. 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. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has.been prepared which will provide conditions and requirements to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. City staff will ensure compliance of the mitigation measures as provided in the Monitoring Plan. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 9. 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 R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Repod and COAs.doc those previously acquired by the public will be provided. As conditioned, the project will be required to provide access easements across each lot to provide for parking and on-site circulation. 10. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. ,Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of February 2002. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-__.was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February, 2002, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: R:~D P~.000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 15 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA00-0140 Development Plan PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map Project Description: PA00-0140 Construct 160 attached single-family residential units on approximately 15.26 acres and a 71,100 square foot office/retail center on approximately 7.71 acres. PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map subdividing the current three parcels, which are a podion of lot 24 of Tract 3334, into 8 individual parcels. Development Impact Fee Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: Residential Attached and Retail Commercial 944-290-012, 013,and 014. TBD TBD PLANNING DIVISION General 2. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. Requirements The parcel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, 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. 3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs,doc 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 damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. 5. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten linear feet. 6. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C, D, and E , prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Rancho California Road frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box London Plane (Plantus Acerfolia 'BIoodgood'). 8. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. 9. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 10. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 11. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits A through ff and the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 12. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer, Property Owner's Association, or any successors in interest. 13. AIl mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view bY being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 14. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Board on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Primary wall exterior: Entry Doors, Railing, Shutters Roof Fascia, Trim and Garage doors La Habra Stucco "Cortez" (Base 200) La Habra Stucco "Meadow Brook" (Base 100) Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 Lifetile California "Mission Blend" Frazee "Old Porch" LRV 10 R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Slaff Report and COAs.doc 15. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 16. The applicant shall submit the architectural design of the apartment buildings for Planning Commission review. The architecture of the apartment shall be consistent with the amhitecture of the office/commemial buildings. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 17. The apartment building on the east edge of the property in proximity to Lot numbers 36 and 37 of the Starlight Ridge Development shall be redesigned to the satisfaction of the Planning Department in order to reduce the negative view shed impacts. {Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 18. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the commemial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape surfaces within those parcels. 19. The applicant shall provide a pedestrian access from the east portion of the Apartment Complex to Rancho California Road. A Site Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. {Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 20. The applicant shall insure that all trees planted along the east property line of the subject development be a minimum size of 24" box trees. The applicant shall revise the landscape plans and resubmit the plans for Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 21. The applicant shall add various tot lots throughout the apartment complex. The size, content and location shall be incorporated in the landscape plans and submitted to the planning Department for approval. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) 22. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for all (9) nine apartment buildings, garages, carports and clubhouse proposed in this project. The applicant shall revise the architecture of the apartment buildings by incorporating the elements found in the retail / office buildings proposed. The elevations shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and be approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. (Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit 18. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Rancho California Road landscape planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, pdor to the first certificate of occupancy. 19. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 20. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 21. The applicant and owner of the real property represented by this approval shall join and maintain active membership in the Crime Free Multi-housing Program. {Added by the Planning Commission at the February 20, 2002 public hearing) R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 20. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shell be submitted and epproved by the Planning Depertment. 21. The epplicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipel Code (Hebitet Conservation) by peying the eppropriate fee set forth in that ordinence or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 22. The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to issuance of a grading permit: 27. 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. Verizon g.. Southern California Edison Company h. Southern California Gas Company Development Plan 28. 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. 29. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 30. A Geotechnical 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 R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs,doc 20 including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 31. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, .drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate ouffall 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. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. 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. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303~ g. 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 ufility provider. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33ky or greater, shall be installed underground. i. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 37. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: R:'~) P~000\00~140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc a, Street "A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with 50-ft. right- of-way. b, The ddveway at the main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. c. The easterly ddveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a loop road. 38. 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. 39. The westedy and eastedy driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. 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 Parcel 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 City prior t(~ commencement of the appraisal shall have approved the appraiser. 43. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 44. 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. 45. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 46. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 47. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval R;~) P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc of the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 48. Parcel Map 29140 shall be approved and recorded. 49. 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. 50. 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. 51. 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. 52. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Pamel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 53. A bus bay within the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 54. 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/VV) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane.. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimburse the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their property. b. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane, c. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equipment, loops, and interconnect. d. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 55. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 56. 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 Distdct c. Department of Public Works R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 23 57. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 58. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 59. 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. Parcel Map Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 60. 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. Cable TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon k. Southern California Edison Company I. Southern California Gas Company 61. 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 Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median, deceleration lane. (i) The Developer shall reimburse the City the cost for the construction of half width of the raised landscape median (yet to be built along Rancho California Road) at a rate not to exceed $50.00 per lineal foot. (ii) The Developer is to reimburse the City for their fair share of the cost of the existing median built by adjoining properties along Rancho California Road. The Developer is responsible for the frontage along their property. b. Install a 200' long deceleration lane on Rancho California Road at the proposed main entrance, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for the deceleration lane. c. Provide an easement at the main entrance for the maintenance of traffic signal equipment, loops, and interconnect. d. Design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and the main entrance. 62. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. R:~D P~000~0-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs~doc 24 63. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum cdteda 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. All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303. g. 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. i. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the. project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. 64. Pdvate roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum cdteda shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Street "A" (private street) shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft within a 50-ft. right-of-way. b. The driveway at the main entrance shall have a minimum paved width of 76-ft. with a 6' sidewalk for each. c. The easterly driveway shall have a minimum paved width of 30-ft. with a 6' sidewalk on each side. d. The driveway leading to the residential section shall have a minimum paved width of 28-ft. with a 5' sidewalk on each side. e. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. f. 90 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. g. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn-around ability will need 1o be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. h. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). i. All driveways providing access to two or more buildings shall be designed as a cul- de-sac or a loop road. 65. 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. 66. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Rancho California Road on the Parcel Map with the exception of three (3) openings, as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. a. The westerly and easterly driveways shall be restricted to right-in/right-out. The main driveway shall have full turning movements~ R:~) P~000~00~140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 67. Comer 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. 68. 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. 69. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision, which is part of an existing Assessment District, must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 70. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 71. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning 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. 72. 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. 73. 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 Parcel 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 pdor to commencement of the appraisal. 74. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 75. 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. 76. A bus bay within the property frontage will be provided on Rancho California Road, as determined by the Department of Public Works. 77. A minimum 24' easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 78. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 79. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 80. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 81. A reciprocal ingress/egress access easement shall be provided for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. 82. 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 shallbe kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 83. 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 84. 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. 85. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 86. A Geotechnical 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. 87. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 88. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No R:'~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 27 grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 89. 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. 90. 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. 91. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 92. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 93. 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. 94. Grading of the subject properly 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. 95. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 96. 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 d. Southern California Edison 97. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 98. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 99. 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 100. Prior to installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into the respective TCSD maintenance program. 101. All parkway landscaping, slope areas and interior streetlights shall be maintained by the property owner or private maintenance association. R:~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 102. The Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 103. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of · construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debds. 104. Class II bike lanes shall be included on the street imprevement plans for Rancho California Road. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Rancho California Road as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. Prior to the issuance of buildin.q permits: 105. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to .97 acres of parkland, based upon the City's the current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities previded on-site and shall be pre-rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of each building permit requested. BUILDING AND SAFETY 106. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 107. Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 108. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 109. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 110. Obtain street addressing for all preposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 111. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cress slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Previde all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 112. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Previde all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 113. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 114. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 115. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of imprevement. 116. Provide house electrical meter previsions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 117. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Obtain the Division of the State Architect recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the Building Official, to implement in the building design. 118. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 119. Provide apprepdate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Ternecula~Staff Report and COAs,doc 29 to permit issuance. 120. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 121. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 122. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 123. A pre-construction meeting is requirod with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 124. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 125. Show all building setbacks. 126. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 127. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes that are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 128. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-I. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1875 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2725 GPM with a 3-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 129. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2,903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 130. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 131. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Oral 16.03.020) 132. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) R:~D P~000~00~140 Village of Temecula\Staff Repot[ and COAs.doc 30 133. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are'to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 134. Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 135. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 136. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 137. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 138. Pdor to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 139. Pdor to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) 140. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 141. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 142. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. 143. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 144. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for R:'~D P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula'~,Staff Report and COAs.doc monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 145. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located in locations approved by the Fire Department. (CFC 902.4) 146. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 147. Pdor to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 148. Pdor to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 149. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 150. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevenfion Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland- vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 151. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II~A) 152. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau, This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA- 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 153. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 154. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 155. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) R:~) P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Repod and COAs.doc OUTSIDE AGENCIES 156. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 157. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services dated May 31,2000. (Attached letter) 158. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements set forth in the letter from the Pechanga Cultural Resources dated January 10, 2002. (attached letter) By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Date Name printed R:~D P~2000\00-0140 V~llage of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA _ Project Site CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 VICINITY MAP R:~D P~.000~00A) 140 Village of Temecula~Staff Repo~ and COAs.doc 34 CITY OF TEMECULA Project Site EXHIBIT B -.GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION -(LM) LOW MEDIUM AND (PO) PROFESSIONAL OFFICE EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATIQN- (LM} LOW MEDIUM AND (PO) PROFESSIONAL OFFICE CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 R:'~D P~2000'~00-0140 Village of Temecula'~Staff Report and COPs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - D INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 R:~D P~2000~,00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CiTY OF TEMECULA SUB AREAS CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 · EXHIBIT - E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 SITE PLAN R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs,doc 37 CITY OF TEMECULA CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 GRADING PLAN R:~D FA2000~0-0140 Village of Tem~cula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA SITE SECTIONS CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - G PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 GRADING PLAN R:~D P/2.000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs,doc CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT PLAN PA#00-01/~0 m CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 GRADING PLAN R:~ P~2000\00-0140 Village of TemeculakStaff Report and COA.s.doc CITY OF TEMECULA TATIVE FARCEL MA~ NO. 291/.0 CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP R:~D F52000\00-0140 V~llage of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 LANDSCAPE PLANS R:~D P~000~00-O140 Village of Temec~la~Slaff Report and COA,s.doc 42 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139~ 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - K PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D 1~2000~;)0-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - L PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~) P~-000\00-O 140 Village of Temecula~Slaff Report and COAs.doc 44 CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO. - PAO0-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - M PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- FebruarY 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS P,:'~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 45 CITY OF TEMECULA J I I I I-I1.11111 obJ~.l~l I~ I I 111 I't I ~~' TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - N PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000\00-O 140 Village oI.Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA VILLAGE CENTER CASE NO. - PA00~)138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - O PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temec~la~Staff RepoR and COAs.doc 47 / CiTY OF TEMECULA CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN 3750 sq.ft. VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - P PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLANS R:'~D 1~2,000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\$taff Report and COAs.doc 48 CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOM~S FOR LEASE TEMECULAi CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - Q PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 CLUBHOUSE ELEVATIONS R:~D P~000~00~O140 Village of Temecu[a~Staff Report and COAs.doc 49 CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '1' FIRST'FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMEOULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA · CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - R PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D F~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc 50 CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '1' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE 'oF TEMECULA HOME8 FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - S PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D FA2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~taff Report and COAs.doc 51 CITY OFTEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASi= TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ""'"' "'-- ~.~--' [] A'5 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT-T PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~ P~000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Repod and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECUI~A BUILDING TYPE 'lla' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE 'OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR [.EASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA .... ~..~ [] A' CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- U PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P"2000"DO-0140 Village of Temecula',Staff Report and COAs.doc 53 ClTY OFTEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'lla' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - V PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~} P~2000~00-O140 Village of Temecula~taff Report and CO^s.doc 34 CITY OF TEMECULA Illilllllllll[ VILLAGE OF TEMI:'CULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA CAUFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - W PLANNING COMMISSION DATE' February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:',D P~000~,00-0140 Village o! Temecula~Stafl Report and COAs.doc 55 CITY OF TEMECULA -BUILDING TYPE °Ill" FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CASE NO. - PA00-O138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - X . PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P'~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~.Staff Report and COA, s.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE '111' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE · TEMECULA, CAUFORHIA .... '"-~'...~.~ [] A-1¢ CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- Y PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~000\00q)140 Village of Temecula\Staff Repod and COAs.doc 57 CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA BUtt,DING TYPE III TEUEC~LA, CAI~IFORNIA ..... ~'{~ A~11 CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - Z PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2.000VX)-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'IV' FIRST FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HQMES FOR LEASE. TEMECtJLA, CAI. IFOI~NIA CASE NO. - PA00...0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - aa PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:'~) P~.000~00-0140 Village of Temecula\Staff Report and COAs.doc 5O CITY OF TEMECULA BUILDING TYPE 'IV' SECOND FLOOR PLAN VILLAGE OF TEMECULA TEMI=CUILA, C:ALIFOR~IA CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - bb PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~00-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGE OF TEMECULA HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CAUFORNIA .... ~ [] A'14 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT - cc PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~000\00~140 Village Of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA PLAN B'l · PLAN B-2 PLAN 8-4 VILLAGE OF .TEMECULA BUILDING ~YPE II - TYPICAL 4'CAR · GARAGE UNDER B'4 UNIT. TYPICAL 4'CAR GARAGE PLAN HOMES FOR LEASE TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ..--.~'----- A-15 CASE NO. - PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT -dd PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR pLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~) 1:~2000~00-0t40 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA PLAN A-' VILLAGE OF TEMECULA T~'MI:CULA, CALiFO~IIA .... ~ [] A'lO CASE NO.- PA00-0138, 0139, 0140 & 0152 EXHIBIT- ee PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- February 20, 2002 APARTMENT FLOOR PLANS/ELEVATIONS R:~D P~2000~)0-0140 Village of Temecula~Staff Report and COAs.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 8 LETTERS RECEIVED R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 31 2/19102 Temecula City Planning Commission 43174 Business Park Ddve Temecula, CA 92591 To Whom It May ConCern: Subject: SEE ATTACHED My name is Debra Moreno I am a homeowner in the Starlight Ridge my address is 42767 Twilight Court. I am one of the Twenty-one homeowners that border the proposed project. I have been a resident of Temecula for 11 years. When I first moved here it was groat, no traffic, no noise you could sit in your backyard and only hear cdcketts chirpping. I have lived at my current address for 8 years. 6 of the years I rented the home I currently reside in. I bought my home two years ago because of the groat view that I have from my backyard and the open space between my home and or homes in the vicinity, the noise 2 years ago was minimal and the traffic was minimal. That has all changed. The traffic as we all know is horrible now and the noise from the traffic goes on until late in the night. The proposed project will: 1)..Obstruct my view and the view of the other bordering residents. 2). Lower the value of my home/property. 3). Increase traffic (which the city does not need). 4). Noise levels will double due to increased traffic and people. These are the main reasons I oppose the project. Please view this as if it were your home. Thank you, . Debra Moreno 2-13-02 Temecula City Planning Commission 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92591 The People of A1ta Vista, Star Light Ridge North, Star Light Ridge S0uth~ and the Villages homeowners associations are disappointed in the design acceptance and handling of matters regarding the Temecula Village project located on the south side of Rancho California Road approximately 200 feet west of the intersection at Cosmic Dr. The first neighborhood meeting .regarding the project brought opposition to more apartments and a rezoning to commercial of the bottom half of the properties in question. 'David Hogan recorded citizens' expectations and promised .no impact to the single-family homes adjoin~g the project. Recently another neighborhood meeting was held. The project concept-had not changed. Attending residents again raised similar opposition to the project. .Unfortunately the mailed notice for the meeting identified the wrong day. Many impacted residents were unable to voice their concerns. Twenty-one homeowners directly border the proposed project on the eastem and southern sides. Several hundred surrounding homeowners will be impacted as well. Other Temecula residents currently needing to use the Rancho California corridor will also feel the consequences of Temecula Villages. Correct planning is essential to benefit residents, developer, and the city. Our concerns address several issues. Plans for Temecula Villages show apathnents blocking View sheds of single home residents along the eastem border. Commercial buildings are 10 feet from the fence line of Cosmic Dr. residences. Parking lots are visible from Rancho California Road. No Buffer exists between residential and commercial. Commercial buildings and apartments are not the proper transitional structures to single home neighborhoods. Lay out of commercial structures does not encourage a sense of community. Another stop light on Rancho Califomia road at the Portofino Apartments will be a'necessity not an amenity if traffic is to gain access to businesses in Temecula Villages. Commercial buildings will add to the volume of noise, light, and traffic in our neighborhoods. The current Temecula Villages project is in vi°lation of the General Plan and places neighborhoods in direct conflict with developers. Noted violations of the General Plan are included in the following document. Planning still has the ability to remedy the current violations and provide a long term, beneficial situation to all residents, developer, and the city of Temecula. Sincerely, Scott Hanson, President Starlight Ridge North Homeowners Association Ray Johnson, Presidem Starlight Ridge South Homeowners Association Burlie Cole, President Alta Vista Homeowners Association Clark Cegley, President The Villages Homeowners Association 2 2-13-02 Temecula City Planning Commission 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92591 The people of Alta Vista, Star Light Ridge North, Star Light Ridge South, and the Villages homeowners associations are disappointed in the design acceptance and handling of matters regarding, the Temecula Village project located on the south side of Rancho California Road approximately 200 feet west of the intersection at Cosmic Dr. The first neighborhood meeting regarding the project brought opposition to more apartments and a rezoning to commercial of the bottom half of the properties in question. David Hogan recorded citizens' expectations and promised no impact to the single-family homes adjoining the project. Recently another neighborhood meeting was held. The project concept had not changed. Attending residents again raised similar opposition to the project. Unfortunately the mailed notice for the meeting identified the wrong day. Many impacted residents were unable to voice their concerns. Twenty-one homeowners directly border the proposed project on the ea~stem and southern sides. Several hundred surrounding homeowners will be impacted as well. Other Temecula residents currently needing to use the Rancho California corridor will also feel the consequences of Temecula Villages. Correct planning is essential to benefit residents, developer, and the city. Our concerns address several issues. Plans for Temecula Villages show aPamnents blocking view sheds of single home residents along the eastem border. Commercial buildings are I 0 feet'from the fence line of Cosmic Dr. residences. Parking lots are visible from Rancho California Road. No Buffer exists between residential and commercial. Commercial buildings and apartments are not the proper transitional structures to Single home neighborhoods. Lay but ofcoinmercial structures does not encourage a sense of community. Another stop light on Rancho California road at the Portofino Apartments will be a necessity'not an amenity if traffic is to gain access to businesses in Temecula Villages. Commercial buildings will add to the volume of noise, light, and traffic in our neighborhoods. The current Temecula Villages project is in violation of the General Plan 'and places neighborhoods in direct conflict 'with developers. Noted violations of the General Plan are included in the following document. Planning still has the ability to remedy the current violations and provide a long term, beneficial situation to all residents, developer, and the city of Temecula. Sincerely, Scott Hanson, President Starlight Ridge North Homeowners Association l~urlie Cole, President Alta Vista Homeowners Association Ray~ohnson, l~sident Starlight Ridge South Homeowners Association C'l~'l~(~egley, [~re~dent~ The Villages ~ ~ Homeowners Association 1-29-2002 Temecula City Planning Commission 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92591 Dear Planning Commission, Alta Vista, Starlight Ridge North, Starlight Ridge South and the Villages homeowners associations are very disappointed in the design acceptance and handling of matters regarding the Temecula Village project. The first neighborhood meeting regarding this project was held about a year ago and brought great neighborhood opposition to more apartments and a potential up zoning to commercial in this area. Notes were made by Dave Hogan regarding citizens expectations and the project was to be redesigned to meet land use compatibility issues. A recent neighborhood meeting was held. The project concept did not change from a year ago and the advertised meeting notice sent out by mail to impacted residences identified the wrong day for the meeting. This has not allowed a group of impacted residents opportunity to voice their concerns. However, this letter is meant to do so. This project directly impacts 21 homes on the eastern and southern borders. Impact creates a ripple effect through all homeowners associations as like properties become a comparable.' This project violates zoning consistency requirements, land use compatibility requirements, CEQA requirements, transitional density requirements, growth management requirements, noise requirements, traffic impact requirements, air quality requirements, basic design Standards and multiple general planning guidelines as out lined in the City General Plan. It was clearly stated at both community meetings by the developer and Planning that owners view sheds would not be obstructed and that roof tops would never be above the existing ridge line. After reviewing the grading, plot and site plans, it clearly shows that roof lines are well above the existing ridge line and between 15-30 feet of building will be blocking view sheds of houses along the easterly border of this project. This is a direct'violation of ch'apter 10 of the General Plan and ruins our quality of life after purchasing our homes. ....~ Project Background and Violations of the General Plan If you drive around Temecula and look at structures within the 'M" zoning designation, with the exception of the inappropriately passed Temecula Ridge Apartment complex, you will see the new Richmond and Ryland single family home developments as well as the other completed single family home developments of California Summit, 1 Country Glen and La Serena. These projects are consistent in housing type, old or new, and live up to the General Plan 'guidelines for zoning consistency requirements as required by law. It is ordered by the State that day to day actions by the City be · consistent. If personal judgment of a planner is outside of what is consistently built within the City, then it is wrong. A developer suggesting incompatible land use that is not consistent with other structure types within a zoning designation is wrong. The General Plan calls for "transitional density, transitional structure types, open buffers and protection to surrounding single family homes". The land use element ensures a quality of life to the citizens of Temecula. Land use goals emphasize compatibility. The community has expressed a desire for lower densities with an adopted Growth Management Plan. Due to single family homes being classified as a sensitive receptor, commercial and apartments fail to meet land use compatibility issues and produce an overall negative impact in terms of light pollution, noise pollution, traffic pollution, and undesirable visual effects as defined in the Land Use Element. Apartments fall short of meeting Goal 3 of chapter 2 that requires planning 'to protect and enhance residential neighborhoods". The size, bulk and out-of-scale configuration of this project violates policies 3.1,3.2 and 3.3 of this element. These policies clearly protect single family homes from apartments and commercial developments. Goal 4 of the land use element says 'to preserve and enhance the environmental ~esources of the study area. This includes retaining open space, natural landscape, enforcement of hillside grading standards, habitat conservation and trail system development". Chapter 3 of the General Plan strives to "maintain a traffic level better than Service Level D during peak hours and better that Service Level C during non peak hours". Policies 1.1 - 1.5 will not be met with up zoning and increased density. Failure to update and implement traffic studies per our General Planis wrong, clouds planning decisions and ultimately hurts the community. · Chapter 4 of the General Plan wants to 'conserve" existing housing and remain 'responsive to the unique concerns of the community". The City has the opportunity and power to do so rather than to let a developer dictate a land use. Chapter 5-of the General Plan states that 'open space is one of the key features that defines the character of Temecula and contributes to the quality of life that residents want to maintain. Open space performs a multitude of functions that are beneficial to the community. Open space functions to: provide for outdoor recreation areas; protect view sheds; preserve important natural resources; provide flood control; protect public health and safety; and establish buffers between incompatible land uses". Goal 1 states that 'It is important that land use and development decisions capitalize on and maintain the natural assets of a given location. The preservation of the remaining 2 hillsides and ridge lines of the city and.of the surrounding area is important to many residents and results in a more enjoyable and satisfying urban environment. The transition between the urbanized areas and rural areas is particularly important in creating a cohesive image of the community. There is a need for hillside development standards that encourage innovative site and building design to enhance the visual quality of development and preserves significant natural features or special habitat areas. The city also has the opportunity to create a positive urban design element with enhancement and linkage between its parks, water features and other open space lands". Chapter 6 of the General Plan-states "properly designed and implemented, a comprehensive 'growth management program provides a framework that will enable Temecula to balance and accommodated diverse and competing interests, WHILE ENSURING THE QUALITY OF LIFE EXPECTED BY THE CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY". Chapter 8 of the General Plan states that "It is intended that the noise exposure information developed for the Noise Element be incorporated into the General Plan to serve as a basis for achieving land use compatibility. It is also intended that noise exposure information be used to provide BASELINE information". 'tNoise sensitive land uses include, but are not limited to residences, schools, libraries, hospitals and churches These typify land uses where suitability is restricted by intrusive noises". "Many jurisdictions consider residential uses particularly noise Sensitive because families and individuals expect to use time in the home for rest and relaxation, and intrusive noise can interfere with those activities, single family uses are frequently considered the most sensitive". This sensitivity to noise is reflected in the guidelines for acceptability provided in Figure 8-1 of the General Plan. Noise measurements were taken during a typical week day at 19 locations throughout the City of Temecula. Noise levels exceeded the 65 CNEL criteria at seven of the nineteen locations. Six of these locations are noise sensitive receptors. One site location was from Cosmic Drive at a house ,5 feet above grade. The noise level was 66.8 CNEL. This was a baseline test in 1993. Chapter 8 states that "the 65CNEL is generally considered the maximum exterior level acceptable for these uses". If a residence fronts along a roadway, the noise exposure. in this area would be considered excessive. Goal 1 of chapter 8 wants "land use planning that provides for the separation of significant noise generators from sensitive receptor areas. Proper planning will ensure that sensitive receptors are not impacted by noise hazards by locating these land uses distant from each other". Policy 1.1 "discourages noise sensitive land uses in noisy exterior environments". Policy'1.8 says "to minimize noise conflicts between land uses". Goal 2 of chapter 8 wants the 'control of noise between land uses". Policy 2.1 "limits 3 the maximum permitted noise levels which cross property lines and impact adjacent land uses". Goal 3 says to "consider noise issues in the'planning process. Noise issues should always be considered during the planning process so that needed measures are incorporated in design and location of land uses". Policy 3.4 says to "evaluate potential noise conflicts for individual sites and projects". Goal 4 says to "minimize noise impacts from transportation noise sources". Policy 4.1 says to "develop a Program to construct barriers to mitigate sound levels where necessary or where feasible to ensure the peace and quiet of the community". Goal 1 of chapter 9 wants 'the improvement of air quality through proper land use planning in Temecula". Policy 1.3 says 'to minimize land use conflicts between emission sources and sensitive receptors". Policy 1.4 says 'to reduce air pollution emissions by mitigating air quality impacts associated with development projects to .the greatest extent feasible". Chapter 9, under land use, says "to locate sensitive receptors" away from major air pollution sources and require full buffering of sensitive receptors from air pollution sources through the use of landscaping, open space and other separation techniques". Chapter 10 of the General Plan states that 'the goals, policies, and design concepts of the community design element are an integral part of all the elements of the General Plan. Community design objectives contribute to how we perceive the community, what we experience and those characteristics that we want to preserve. Temecula has a rich tradition and an outstanding natural environmental setting. New development can enhance this character or it can destroy it. Through effective community design and land planning, the important spatial considerations for the land use; circulation patterns and the details of design can be directed into 'the most effective and beneficial community design for the City". Goals and policies of Chapter 10 state that 'many residents are concerned about the height and bulk of recently constructed structures in the City. Standards need to be carefully developed for the Development Code to achieve a scale of development that is in balance with the surrounding area". Policy 2.1 says 'to establish and consistently apply design standards and guidelines for residential and non-residential development". Policy 2.2 says 'to promote a cohesive and integrated pattern of development for large undeveloped areas". Policy 2.3 says "to provide development standards to ensure higher quality design that is well integrated". Policy 2.5 says 'to Limit light / glare pollution". Goal 3 of chapter 10 says wants "preservation and enhancement of the positive qualities of individual districts or neighborhoods. While there is a major concern about the overall city-wide character of Temecula, it is also important to preserve and et~hance the character and identity of the neighborhood.areas or special districts of the community. Of particular importance, is the preservation of the character._ for the sinqle family neiqhborhoods and their protection from intrusions from buildinqs that are "out of scale", incompatible land uses and 4 excessive vehicular traffic". Policy 3.2 says "to preserve the scale and character of residential development by creating appropriate transitions between lower density, rural areas, and higher density development".' Goal 5 of chapter 10 wants the 'protection of public views of significant natural features. One of Temecula's most important resources is its environmental setting.. The community desires to protect and enhance the views to these natural features". Policy 5.1 says to "work with the County of Riverside to protect the surrounding hillside areas". Chapter 10 states that 'hillside design should result in minimal disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation". Chapter 10 states that "the compatibility between the character of existing single family neighborhoods and adjacent proposed projects is also an important consideration within the community. Key considerations in the planning and design of. projects adjacent to existing single family neighborhoods includes the following: 1. Proposed land use densities should provide a density transition or buffer to improve compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods. 2. prOposed projects should be designed in terms of height, architectural style, bulk, location of parking and vehicular and non- vehicular access, to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods". When we became a General Law City, inappropriate up zoning and mistakes by the county should have been changed. A City has the power to do so. We became a City to make our community a better place. The General Plan states that 'a potentially effective tool that will be examined is the feasibility of a TRANSFER OF · DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM. This is a critical component of the General Management Plan due to the significance of the resources to the long-term . quality of life within the community. Prior to incorporation, the City experienced a severe loss of open space, and shortage of parks and recreation facilities due to deficient park planning. Repetition of this situation, as Temecula continues to grow, can be avoided through proactive growth management planning". Conclusions On February 8th, 2001, Planning should have stated to the developer that commercial and more apartments were not acceptable for this area. With proper ground rules from planning regarding proper transitional structure type and density, the MJW Property Group could choose not to purchase this property for their project design. The developer could then choose to move on to another piece of land or offer the correct · product for the neighborhood. Planning has again failed to eliminate conflict between the development and the adjoining neighborhoods. 5 All "H" or high density apartment zones are "built out" except for a redevelopment area in Old Town. Planning "build out" should simply mean "no more". To up zone this area at the expense of an entire neighborhood to benefit a developers pocket book is wrong. To place apartments next to single family homes is poor planning and wrong according to the General Plan. A summary and preponderance of evidence from the General Plan stating why this project is w~ong for this area is enclosed. This raw land, although up zoned "M" and "PO" from a hillside residential density .horse ranch, is currently a proper buffer for the single family homes of the Starlight Ridge and Alta Vista Tracts. By description, this includes steep terrain, natural watercourses, natural coastal sage vegetation and natural habitat. The uniqueness of this property makes it impossible to mitigate the damages of another apartment project and commercial uses :in this area. The General Plan states that all chapters of the General Plan are equal in stature and weight equally when considering a projects' land use. One chapter cannot be mitigated over another because it is against Government Code Sections 65860 and 65567 to do so. In review of the General Plan, we find that the Temecula Village project violates 9 chapters of the General Plan in concepts, goals and policies. In doing so, this project violates California State laws and Government Codes governing our General Law City. We also feel that the Temecula Village Apartments do not meet the goals of the Growth Management Plan and should not be allowed increased density over 7 units per acre. Apartments or commercial can never enhance the design or character of a single family neighborhood. ,Close proximity, high density, extreme height or bulk, out-of- · scale buildings, light or glare pollution, noise pollution, air pollution, blocked views or unsightly views of large buildings next to 'a single family home development make the single family homes unattractive to potential buyers and unlivable for the occupants. Privacy of a single family home is so obviously disturbed that a potential buyer may not pumhase the home if it was offered for sale. This devalues a long term investment for the Citizens and hurts them financially. If homes in a tract are devalued then all of the tract is devalued due to comparable sales of like kind and quality of home. This creates a ripple affect lowering all values in the tract and ultimately lowering the City's tax base. An example of a City on the verge of bankruptcy due to the erosion of the property value base due to an overabundance of apartments is the City of Upland. You should speak with them about the mistakes that they made by giving developers what they want. Obvious effects to the quality'of life include increased gridlock past level "D", overcrowded schools and a potential for increased crime. High density without the proper infrastructure or facilities only hurts a community. The increased density of this project will increase the cost to maintain the City services in this area. Approving high density projects of any kind before new schools can be built only worsens our current condition of ovemrowded schools and hurts our children. Our City has grown very 6 rapidly and the schools claim that they cannot keep up with the educational demands placed on them. By passing the Temecula Village Apartments, the developer has not ensured the quality of life expected by the citizens of the community. Temecula Village · will create a total of 400 new families in this area in conjunction with Temecula Ridge. Commercial traffic will add significantly more trips on top of the residential trips in this immediate area. Logically, a few thousand additional car trips between Cosmic and Moraga per day added to the current traffic levels is not in the best interests of the City or the neighboring tracts. The General Plan is very clear about noise and the effects on single family homes. Land use and type of structure is highly stressed in chapter 8 of the General Plan. The 65 CNEL level was exceeded in this general area and corridor in 1993 as stated in the General Plan baseline data and can only be higher in 2002. Increased housing density makes noise intolerable in this general area. The noise study submitted by the Temecula Ridge Apartment Project is highly suspect. Highly suspect because the level stated was lower than the baseline study at Cosmic Drive in 1993. How can this be? We suspect that the same study was used for Temecula Village. General Plan traffic data is supposed to be updated every 3 years as stated in the enclosed excerpts for review. Citizens would like to have a current independent noise study done in this area as well as the other areas stated in the General Plan. New studies would probably yield this whole area unsuitable for residential units. The Temecula Village project fails to meet guidelines of the Design Element of the General Plan. Commercial and apartments are not how the citizens of Temecula perceive our community. The' City markets Temecula with a picture of rural residential rather than a picture of an apartment complex. Why is that? Commercial and apartments show no spatial considerations for land use. Commercial and apartments, by nature, are never really compatible with single family homes and not intended to be due to the many reasons stated in the General Plan. The developer did not own the land at the time. Responsibility went to the Planning Department to discourage the project due to land use compatibility issues and should have ensured the right product for the neighborhood. At the time, Dave Hogan stated a great concern over not creating impact to adjoining single family homes and promised citizens no impact to their adjoining neighborhoods, In a neighborhood meeting approximately a year ago regardingTemecula Ridge, citizens asked about Temecula Village and Dave Hogan denied the existence of an application or what was actually being planned for this area. Based on the concerns at the Kading meeting, Mr. Kading told us that he wished that he owned the Temecula Village project land so that he could fully develop the area into a compatible as well as suitable project to not impact himself as well as the other neighborhoods. Citizens asked him if he owned the land if a medium density project like a Ryland or Richmond project would economically work to protect our single family homes. He said yes and then stated that he did not own the land. 7 We want the City to choose the right type of structure and land use for this area. Citizens feel that the proper Land use in this area is single family or single family detached condominiums such as the Ryland or Richmond projects in order to preserve the property values of the existing single family homes with ownershiP as'well as to mitigate all other issues~ We ask that you reject this project as proposed. We expect the City to follow the guidelines of the General Plan. The Citizens of Temecula have the right to maintain their quality of life as this is provided for them in the City General Plan if followed. The City Planning Department is chattered to protect the Citizens of Temecula and have failed to do so regarding this particular land use. It is important that this information be a part of the public record. If our property values diminish over time, potential class action litigation may or may not arise based on your final decisions. Please choose to protect our quality of life and property values. Sincerely, Scott Hanson, President Starlight Ridge Homeowners Association Homeowners Association Burlie Cole, President .Alta Vista Homeowners Association CC ~,la~'k Cegley, Pr-~-'~'~'-'t//~'- The Villages Hom(~ow~,t'~ Association Susan Jones, City Clerk Sam Pratt, City Council Mike Naggar, City Council Jeff Comerchero, City Council Ron Roberts, City Council Jeff .Stone, City Council Dennis Chiniaeff, Planning Commission Ron Guerriero, Planning Commission David Mathewson, Planning Commission John Telesio, Planning Commission Mary Jane Ohlasso, Planning Commission Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning Dave Hogan, City Planning Department Rolfe Preisendanz, Planning 8 TEN~CULA CITY PLANNING~ISSION ~I,:~TING JANUARY 14th 2002 AT 7 P.M. We the undersigned residents/homeowners of Starlight Ridge directly imp~ed by the proposed change in zoning,are vehemently opposing the change to Retail zoning,planned for this property,if granted this chan- ge will lower the property values in our area by at least 30%. We respectfully ask to n0% validate this zoning change ...... Homeowners ~Jacob. J.Hes '~Charlot~e~Mo Donald · Mike and T~rry Nagy ~-- Bob.and·Denise Grimsey -- Carmella Last~ 30336 " · --Biitand Billy Chamberlain 30330 ,l --~Kedrick and Laura Sadler _~im and Lisa Fulle~ --~ Darrel and Jackiee Stillman ---Giovanni Calabresa 30290: Il Il '/l~(l-JJ:J~ 30260 "I ~~ '~v - ~ 42050 Cosmic ~ 42059 " ,, ATTACHMENT NO. 9 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT (JUNE 25, 2002) R:~D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 13 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIN~rNC...E ~:;~2~- CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning June 25, 2002 Villages of Temecula General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138); Change of Zone (PA00-0139); Development Plan (PA00-0140); Tentative Parcel Map (PA00- 0152) PREPARED BY: Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant 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 ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. 2~' ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0138, A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REALIGN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) LAND-USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARIES OF A. 23 ACRE SITE; GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL No(S). 944-290-0t2, 013, AND 014, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 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 PLANNING APPLICATION PA00- 0139, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO), AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-012, 013,0'14. 4. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0140, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A t60 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX 'AND EIGHT RETAIL I OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 68,700 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0'12, 013, AND 014. 5. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0'152 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29'140 SUBDIVIDING THE SITE FROM 3 LOTS INTO 8 LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD~ WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S). 944-290-0t2, 0t3, AND 0t4. BACKGROUND: The Villages of Temecula project is located south of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Road and east of the Moraga Road / Rancho California Road intersection. The project includes three (3) Assessor Parcel number(s), 944-290-012, 013 and 014. In 1993, upon adoption of the City's General plan the property was designated Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (7-12 du/ac). In 1995, the City adopted the City of Temecula Official Zoning Map R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 2 and Development Code, which designated Assessor Parcel number(s) 944-290-012 and 013 as Professional Office (PO) and 944-290-014 as Medium (M) Density Residential. The first application, PA00-0138, is a proposal for a General Plan Amendment to realign the Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (M) land-use designation boundaries, which will also increase the gross acreage of the residential area by 5.03 acres (with a corresponding decrease in the Professional Office area). The second application, PA00-0139, is a request for a Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Office (PO) and Medium Density Residential (M) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO) and the adoption of the standards and regulations contained in the PDO document. The third application, PA00-0140, is an application to construct a 160 unit multi-family residential complex on approximately 15.26 acres (which equates to 10.5 du/ac) and nine (9) retail/office buildings, totaling approximately 68,700 square feet on 7.71 acres. The final application, PA00-0152, is a proposal for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the site into eight parcels. Summary of Public Participation The Planning Department has held two Community Meetings for this project. The first Community Meeting was held on February 9, 2001. Approximately 30 people attended this meeting. A second Community Meeting was held on January 14, 2002 to review revised plans. Approximately 20 people were in attendance, including City Staff and project representatives. Both meetings were open for questions and there was some concern expressed about neighborhood compatibility. On February 20, 2002 the Planning Commission held a public hearing, and all property owners and tenants within 600 feet of the project site were notified via a mailed public notice. A number of issues were raised dudng the hearing procedures as summarized below. On March 18, 2002, planning staff met with two homeowners from the Starlight Ridge subdivision. A number of issues and concerns were voiced by these two residents regarding lighting, sound attenuation, sight, grading and property boundaries. These concerns have been transmitted in writing to the applicant. On May 7, 2002, staff met again with two neighborhood representatives to discuss the project. DISCUSSION Planning Commission Hearing and Issues At the Planning Commission headng, three members of the public spoke in favor of the project and five members of the public spoke against the project. After dosing the public hearing and discussing the applications, the Planning Commission voted to recommend the following approvals by the City Council: Environmental: Unanimous recommendation to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan. General Plan Amendment: Unanimous recommendation to approve. Zone Change: Unanimous recommendation to approve. R:\D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report,doc 3 Development Plan: Three to two (3-2) recommendation to approve. (Commissioner Guerriero and Commissioner Mathewson voting against because of the gas station) with the following conditions: · Approve the Service Station as proposed. · Planning Commission to review architectural design of the apartments at a future public hearing. · Residential Building #3 (Adjacent to Starlight Ridge) be redesigned to reduce negative view impacts. · That a tot lot be added to the residential project as deemed appropriate by staff. · That the project participate in the Crime Free Multi- Housing Program. · That the trees on the easterly portion of the site of the .site be increased in size. · That a walkway be constructed for pedestrian access on the eastedy portion of the site. · And, as a separate request, for staff and the City Attorney to develop an amenity fee to satisfy the Growth Management Plan requirements for amenities, to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Tentative Map: Unanimous recommendation to approve. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Draft Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration/Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment Draft Ordinance approving Zone Change and PDO document Draft Resolution approving Development Plan Draft Resolution approving a Tentative Parcel Map Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits Letters received R:~D P~000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Agenda Report.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO.10 REVISED AND NEW EXHIBITS R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\10-8-02 CC Staff Report.doc 14 eft). W CC DIRECTOR OF FINA/~C~E. ~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/~il Debbie Ubnosk(U~Planning Director October 8, 2002 General Plan Amendment: 2000-2005 Housing Element (Planning Application No. 99-0186) PREPARED BY: David Hogan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA' APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADOPTING THE 2000-2005 HOUSING ELEMENT (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0186) BACKGROUND: State Law requires that local jurisdictions periodically update their Housing Element every five years. The original City Housing Element was approved in 1993. In the late 1990's, the State deferred Housing Element updates because of funding shortfalls. The current draft Housing Element will meet the State-mandated requirements through 2005. The City hired Cotton Bridge Associates in June of 1999 to assist in the development of an updated Housing Element. Since that time, staff and the consultant have been working with the State Depadment of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to prepare a Housing Element that HCD feels meets the requirements of state law. The City finally received a conceptual approval of the draft Housing Element on July 2, 2002. The Planning Commission considered this item on September 18, 2002 and unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the Housing Element with no additional changes. A copy of the Draft Housing Element and minor Errata changes, are contained in Attachments No. 2 and 3, respectively. A copy of the Planning Commission Resolution is contained in Attachment No. 4. The purpose of a housing element is to address local and regional housing needs. A housing element is expected to: (1) assess local housing needs, resources, and constraints; (2) identify sites to meet future housing needs; (3) provide goals and objectives to maintain, improve and develop local housing; and (4) provide a five-year plan to meet the City's share of regional housing needs based upon the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) targets for Very Low, Low, Moderate, and Upper income categories. R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 1 The key aspects of the Housing Element are: To provide housing opportunities to meet the needs of existing and future residents; To provide affordable housing; To remove governmental constraints in maintaining and developing housing; To conserve the existing housing stock; and, To provide equal access to local housing opportunities and prohibit discrimination. The Draft Housing Element has been circulated to the Department of Housing and Community Development as required by Sate Law. The Department has reviewed the Draft and provided a number of comments that were addressed in each subsequent submittal A description of the general comments provided by HCD are shown below. Copies of HCD's comment letters are contained in Attachment No. 6. 1/18/01 5/21/01 7/2/02 Issue Areas Letter Letter Letter Status Housing Needs, Resources ,,' Resolved and Constraints Quantified Objectives ,,' Resolved Housing Programs/Adequate Sites v' ,,' Conditionally Approved and Density Provisions Public Participation v' Resolved As of July 2, 2002, the key remaining issue to be addressed will be resolved in the General Plan Update process that is currently underway. The proposed Mixed Use provisions that will be added to the General Plan, and later the Development Code, have demonstrated to the Department of Housing and Community Development that the City will be providing adequate sites and adequate densities. The Mixed Use concept constitutes a future program under the General Plan and is not under consideration at this time. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has prepared an Initial Environmental Study (lES) for the 2000-2005 Housing Element. Based upon the analysis contained in the lES, the adoption of an updated Housing Element will not have impacts on the environment beyond those envisioned in the environmental impact report for the City General Plan. The Study indicated that no additional environmental impacts would result from this update. The Planning Commission considered this matter and is recommending that the City Council approve a Negative Declaration, with De Minimus Impact Finding. A copy of the Initial Environmental Study is contained in Attachment No. 5. FISCAL IMPACT: None. R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 2 ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. CC Resolution -Page 4 Draft 2000-2005 Housing Element -Page 7 Errata Sheet with Recommended Changes - Page PC Resolution 02-038 -Page 4 Initial Study - Page 8 HCD Comment Letters -Page 9 R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 02- R:\GENPLA~Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 4 RESOLUTION NO. 02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADOPTING THE 2000-2005 HOUSING ELEMENT (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0186) WHEREAS, State Planning and Zoning Law requires that cities adopt a Housing Element; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has prepared a draft Housing Element and received a conditional approval from the State Department of Housing and Community Development; WHEREAS, this 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 proposed negative declaration and the draft Housing Element on September 18, 2002, 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, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and the draft Housing Element; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to the Application on October 8, 2002, at which time interested persons had opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to the Application; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Approval of the Housin~l Element. The City Council hereby approves the 2000-2005 Housing Element as shown in Exhibit A, with the identified corrections as shown in Exhibit B, and directs staff to forward a copy of the signed resolution and corrected copy of the Housing Element to the State Depadment of Housing and Community Development. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An initial Study prepared for the 2000-2005 Housing Element. The Initial Study indicated that there would be no significant effects on the environment. As a result, the Council hereby approves a Negative Declaration for Planning Application 99-0186. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of October, 2002. Ron Roberts, Mayor R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC,doc 5 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 October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Repor[ CC,doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 2000 - 2005 HOUSING ELEMENT R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 7 City of Temecula 2000-2005 Housing Element July 2002 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Consultants to the City Cotton/Beland/Associates 6336 Greenwich Drive, Suite F San Diego, CA 92122 1100.00 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Section Page Section I. Introduction .................................................................................................... 4-1 A. Com_~tmity Context ......................................................................................................... 4-1 B. State Policy and Authorization ........................................................................................ 4-2 C. Organization of the Housing Element .............................................................................. 4-2 D. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements ................................................................. 4-3 E. Public Participation .......................................................................................................... 4-3 F. Data Sources and Glossary .............................................................................................. 4-3 Section II. Housing Needs Assessment ........................................................................ 4-5 A. Population Characteristics ........................................................................................ , ...... 4-5 B. Employment Characteristics ............................................................................................ ~-7 C. Household Characteristics ............................................... ~ ............................................... 4-9 D. Special Needs Populations ............................................................................................. 4-12 E. Housing Stock Characteristics ....................................................................................... 4-15 Section III. Constraints on Housing Production ......................................................... 4-26 A. Market Constraints ......................................................................................................... 4-26 B. Governmental Constraints ............................................................................................. 4-28 C. State Tax Policies and Regulations.: ...................................................................... : ....... 4-36 D. Infrastructure Constraints ............................................................................................... 4-37 E. Environmental Constraints ............................................................................................. 4-37 Section IV. Housing Resources ................................................................................... 4-39 A. Sites for Housing Development ..................................................................................... 4-39 B. Financial Resources ....................................................................................................... 4-47 C. Housing Developers ................................................................ i ...................................... 4-49 D. Infrastructure and Facilities ........................................................................................... 4-50 E. Energy Conservation ...................................................................................................... 4-50 Section V. Accomplishments under Adopted Housing Element ............................. 4-51 A. Provision of Adequate Housing Sites ............................................................................ 4-51 B. Assist in Development of Affordable Housing ............................................................. 4-54 C. Government Constraints ................................................................................................ 4-53 D. Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing .................................................... 4-54 E. Equal Housing Opportunity ........................................................................................... 4-58 F. Housing Element Monitoring and Reporting ................................................................. 4-58 Section VI. Housing Plan ........................................................................................................... 4-60 A. Goals and Policies .......................................................................................................... 4-60 B. Housing Programs .......................................................................................................... 4-63 Appendix A: Housing Element Glossary TOC.doc · July 2002 Page 4-i CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Figure Figure 4-1 Figure 4-2 Page 990 A§e Distribution ................................................................................................... 4-6 Temecula Housin§ Stock Composition ..................................................................... 4-]6 Table Table 4-1 Table 4-2 Table 4-3 Table 4-4 Table 4-5 Table 4-6 Table 4-7 Table 4-8 Table 4-9 Table 4-10 Table 4-11 Table 4-12 Table 4-13 Table 4-14 Table 4-15 Table 4-16 Table 4-17 Table 4-18 Table 4-19 Table 4-20 Table 4-21 Table 4-22 Table 4-23 Table 4-24 Table 4-25 Table 4-26 Table 4-27 Table 4-28 Table 4-29 Page Population Growth Trends ............................................................................................ 4-5 1990 Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................... 4-7 Employment of Residents by Occupation ..................................................................... 4-7 Employment by Industry: 1996 .................................................................................... 4-8 Household Growth Trends ............................................................................................ 4-9 Average Number of Persons per Household - 1990 & 2000 ...................................... 4-10 1998 Household Income by Income Group ...... : ......................................................... 4-11 1990 Households Overpaying for Housing ................................................................ 4-12 Total Housing Units .................................................................................................... 4-15 1990 Housing Tenure .................................................................................................. 4-16 Age of Housing Stock ................................................................................................. 4-17 Median Home Prices ................................................................................................... 4-18 Housing Sales - January 1999 through June 2000 ...................................................... 4-19 Affordable Housing Costs by Income Category - Riverside County ......................... 4-19 Assisted Housing Inventory and At-Risk Status ......................................................... 4-21 Value of At-Risk Housing Units - Rancho California Apartments ............................ 4-23 Rent Subsidies Required ............................................................................................. 4-24 Disposition of Conventional Loan Applications - 1997 ............................................. 4-27 Disposition of Government Backed Loan Applications - 1997 .................................. 4-27 Residential Development Standards ........................................................................... 4-30 Parking Space Requirements ...................................................................................... 4-31 Planning Fee Schedule - City of Temecula ................................................................. 4-34 Development Fees - City of Temecula ....................................................................... 4-35 Residential Development Potential of Vacant Land Outside Specific Plan Areas ..... 4-39 Remaining Approved Residential Development for Existing Specific Plans ............. 4-40 Regional Housing Growth Need by Income Group .................................................... 4-44 Summary of Residential Development Potential ........................................................ 4-46 Housing Program Summary ........................................................................................ 4-76 Summary of Quantified Objectives ............................................................................ 4-80 TOC.doc · July 2002 Page 4-ii CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element I. INTRODUCTION A. Community Context The City of Temecula is a growing community located along Interstate 15 in southwestern Riverside County, just north of the San Diego County line. Located in Temecula Valley, the City is surrounded by gentle rolling hills. Surrounded by this attractive natural setting and located with access to both Orange and Los Angeles Counties to the north and San Diego County to the south, the City population almost doubled during the past ten years, increasing fi.om 27,099 persons in 1990 to 53,791 persons in 2000. With its European history beginning in the 1800's, Temecula has played an important role locally for over ace. ntury. Old Town Temecula is the historic core of the City and is located in its western portion. Change from a small agricultural community to an urbanized city began in 1964 when Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical purchased the 87,500- acre Vail Ranch. Development of the ranch occurred under the design of a master plan that continues to influence the land use pattern and circulation system of Temecula today. Much of the remaining vacant land within the City will be developed under the control of approved specific plans. The majority (79%) of the existing housing in Temecula consists of single-family houses, with the remainder consisting of multi-family units. The high number of single-family homes is reflective of the City's young family-oriented population and desire to maintain its rural traditions. In comparison to the surrounding communities, the cost of purchasing a new home in Temecula is high, with a 1999 median price of $19~,000. In the neighboring communities of Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Murdeta, and Perils the 1999 median home price ranges from $79,250 to $169,000, while the median home price in the County is $130,000. In recent years, the housing market in Temecula has very much been influenced by the growth pressure in San Diego County. As housing prices in San Diego County began catching up with prices in south Orange County, many people who work in San Diego have chosen to live in Temecula, placing significant pressure on the Temecula housing market. Employment opportunities exist within Temecula, allowing residents to work and live within the City. In 1990, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimated an average of 1.66 jobs was available in Temecula for each household, approximating the City average of 1.62 wage earners per household. The jobs/housing ratio in Temecula is anticipated to decrease to only 1.06 jobs per household by 2005, as the construction of new housing outpaces employment growth. I. Intro.doc * July 2002 Page 4-1 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element B. State Policy and Authorization The Califomia State Legislature has identified, the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as the State's major housing goal. Recognizing the important role of local planning programs in the pursuit of this goal, the Legislature has mandated that all cities and counties prepare a housing element as part of their comprehensive General Plans. State Housing Element Law requires all cities and counties to updlte their Housing Elements at least every five years to reflect a community's changing needs. However, the current housing element cycle has been extended to cover a ten-year period due to the lack of state budget for the Regional Councils of Governments (such as the Southern Califomia Association of Governments) to generate the regional housing growth allocations. Temecula's most recent Housing Element was prepared in 1993 and is currently being updated to cover the period of July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2005. C. Organization of the Housing Element The City of Temecula is facing important housing issues such as: preserving the historic traditions of the community; ensuring that new development is compatible with the existing character; providing a range of housing that meets the needs of all residents; ensuring that the affordable housing is available to all segments of the community; and balancing employment with housing opportunities. This Housing Element evaluates housing needs in Temecula based on its demographic and housing characteristics. The Element also compiles an inventory of resources available to address identified housing needs, assesses the effectiveness and appropriateness of existing housing programs being implemented by the City, and crafts a housing strategy that would effectively address the housing issues relating to availability, adequacy, and affordability within the limitations of the City. This Housing Element represents a policy statement indicating that Temecula will continue to strive toward maintaining and enhancing its housing quality and its desirability as a place to work and live. The Temecula Housing Element is comprised of the following major components: · An analysis of the City's population, household and employment base, and the characteristics of the City's housing stock (Section II); · Review of potential constraints to meeting the City's identified housing needs (Section III); · An evaluation of oppommities and resources that will further the development of new housing (Section IV); 1. Intro.doc · July 2002 Page 4-2 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element · An evaluation of accomplishments under the adopted Housing Element (Section V); and · A statement of the Housing Plan to address the City's identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs (Section VI). D. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements The Temecula General. Plan is comprised of the following 10 elements: 1) Land Use; 2) Circulation; 3) Housing; 4) Open Space/Conservation; 5) Growth ManagementYPublic Facilities; 6) Public Safety; 7) Noise; 8) Air Quality; 9) Community Design; and 10) Economic Development. Background information and policy direction presented in one element is also reflected in other General Plan elements. For example, residential development capacities established in the Land Use Element are incorporated within the Housing Element. The General Plan goals and policies were reviewed for consistency with proposals recommended in this Housing Element update. This Housing Element builds upon other General Plan elements and is consistent with the goals and policies set forth by the General Plan. City staff maintains a conscious effort to ensure that revisions to any element of the General Plan achieve internal consistency among all General Plan elements. Specifically, the City will be undertaking a comprehensive General Plan update in 2001. As part of that update, all General Plan goals, policies, and programs will be reviewed for intemal consistency. E. Public Participation Residents of Temecula have several opportunities to provide input during the development of the Housing Element. On August 1, 2000, the City conducted a publicly noticed study session before the Planning Commission and City Council to discuss housing needs in the City and to provide policy directions for the drafting of the Element. During its 45-day review of the Draft Housing Element by the California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the Draft Element is available for review by interested individuals and organizations. Notice of Availability of the Draft Element was published in The Press Enterprise and direct mailing sent to the following organizations representing the interests of low and moderate income households and persons with special needs: · Coachella Valley Housing Coalition · Rancho-Temecula Valley Senior Center · Fair Housing Council of Riverside · Riverside Center for Independent Living · Catholic Charities · Housing Authority of the County of Riverside I. Intro.doc · July 2002 Page 4-3 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element In addition, public heatings will be held on the Housing Element before both the Planning Commission and City Council. Notification will be published in the local newspaper in advance of each hearing. Housing developers and organizations representing the interests of residents with special housing needs will be directly notified of the availability of the Draft Element and the public heating dates. F. Data Sources and Glossary The data used for the completion of this Housing Element comes from a variety of sources, including the 1990 Census, various studies produced by the City of Temecula, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the California Department of Finance, local newspapers, local real estate agents, as well as professional' associations. The data sources represent the best data available at the time this Housing Element was prepared. This Housing Element, along with the state-mandated requkements, includes a Glossary of terms used in the Element. This Glossary has been included to allow readers to better understand the terminology used in the Housing Element discussion, and can be found in the appendix of the Element. 1. Intro.doc * July 2002 Page 4-4 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element II. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT This section of the Housing Element describes the supply and demand for housing in Temecula and is broken into five subsections, addressing the characteristics of population, employment, households, special needs populations, and housing stock. This analysis provides the basis for developing a successful housing program that meets the needs of the community. A. Population Characteristics I. Population Growth Trends Temecula is the fifth largest city among the 24 cities in the County of Riverside. According to the Census, Temecula had a population of 27,099 in 1990. During the period from 1990 to 2000, the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates that the City 'population almost doubled. As depicted in Table 4-1, Temecula experienced the largest growth in the last ten years in comparison to surrotmding communities, and almost three times the growth that the County as a whole experienced. Table 4-1 Population Growth Trends % Change Projected Projected % Change Jurisdiction 1990' 2000 1990-2000 2005 2000-2005 Temecula 27,099 53,791 98% 72,080 34% Hemet 36,094 62,751 74% 75,646 21% Lake EIsinore 18,285 30,370 66% 53,261 75% Murrieta* 24,264 43,989 81% ** " Perds 21,460 32,369 51%; 55,062 70% Riverside County 1,170,413 1,522,855 30% 1,976,938 30% As Munieta was not incmporated in 1990, 1992 Depadment of Finance popula§on estimates are utilized for this analysis, SCAG estimates that Temecula will continue to experience substantial growth during the next five years. The level of growth however, is anticipated to be less than that experienced during the last ten years, with a projected growth of 34% to about 72,000 persons. For Riverside County, an overall 30% growth is expected for the next five years. The neighboring cities of Lake Elsinore and Pen'is are expected to experience greater growth in comparison to Temecula in the coming years. Temecula's share of the total population in Riverside County is projected to remain at slightly below 4% in 2005. II. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page 4-5 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element 2. Age Characteristics The age structure of a population is an important factor in evaluating housing needs and projecting the distribution of future housing development. Traditionally, both the young adult population (20-34) and the elderly population (65+) tend to prefer low to moderate cost, smaller units. Persons between 35 to 54 years old usually reside in higher cost, larger units because they typically have higher incomes and a larger household size. As shown in Figure 4-1, the 1990 population of Temecula contains a younger population than the County as a whole. The median age of Temecula residents was 29.1, while the County median age was 31.5. While the City population has grown significantly since 1990, the City has remained as a family-oriented community and mostly likely has mainta'med a similar age. structure as in 1990. This. age structure indicates that the City may require larger single-family homes to meet the needs of families with their school age children, as well as smaller, moderately priced houses and multi-family units for those younger individuals who do not have children, or are just beginning their families. Figure 4-1 1990 Age Distribution 45% 40% 35% 3O% 25% 2O% 't5% 10% 5% O% i [ [] Tememla I1 Riverside County ]i,i,,,,I, <5 5-17 18-20 21-24 25-44 45-54 55-59 60-64 65-74 75-84 85+ Age Groups Source: 1990 Census 3. Race/Ethnicity Characteristics The racial and ethnic composition of a population affects housing needs because of the unique household characteristics of different racial/ethnic groups. These characteristics tend to correlate with other factors such as family size, housing location choices, and mobility. As shown in Table 4-2, the large majority (81%) of the 1990 population in Temecula was White, with Hispanics making up the next largest ethnic group (15%). In comparison, Riverside County contains a much more diverse population. Only 64% II. Needs.doc ~ July 2002 Page 4-6 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element of the County's 1990 population was White. The next largest ethnic group was the Hispanic population at 26%. Table 4-2 1990 Race and Ethnicity Race/ Number of Temecula % of Temecula's Number of Riverside % of Riverside Ethnidty Residents Population County Residents County's Population White 21,882 80.7% ~ 754,140 64.4% Black 395 1.5% 59,966 5.1% Asian/Other 883 3.3% 48,793 4.2% Hispanic 3,939 14.5% 307,514 26.3% Total 27,099 100.0% 1,170,413 100.0% Since 1990, the racial and ethnic composition of Temecula's population has changed. This is reflected in the school enrollment data obtained t~om the State Department of Education. Enrollment data for the 1997/98 school year in the Temecula Valley Unified School District showed that only 71 percent .of the students were White, 18 percent were Hispanic, 7 percent were Asian and others, and 4 pement were Black. B. Employment Characteristics 1. Employment Growth According to the 1990 Census, 13,932 Temecula residents were in the labor force, representing a labor participation rate of 74%. (The labor force includes employed and tmemployed persons aged 16 years and above.) As shown in Table 4-3, most of the residents were employed in two categories of occupation: managerial and professional specialty (29%) and sales, technical, and administrative support (33%). In 1990, the unemployment rate was 3.1%. According to the State Employment Development Department, Temecula's unemployment rate in June 2000 was 2.9%, much lower than the countywide rate of 4.7%. Table 4-3 Employment of Residents by Occupation Occupation Number of Jobs % of Total Managerial/Professional 3,753 28.6% Sales/l'echnical/Administrative (Support) 4,349 33.1% Service Occupation 1,303 9.9% Precision Production, Craft & Repair 1,861 14.2% Operators, Fabrications, Laborers 1,537 11.7% Farming, Forestry, Fishing 339 2.6% Total 13,142 100.0% So,me: 1990 Census Il. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page 4-7 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element A City study of employment opportunities indicated that there were 19,714 jobs in Temecula in 1996. Employment by industry is tabulated in Table 4-4. As shown, manufacturing and retail trade were the primary industries in Temecula. Table 4-4 Employment by Industry: 1996 Induslry # of Jobs % of Total Manufactu~ng 5,455 27.7% Retail Trade 4,370 22.2% Government, Education, Utilities 1,910 9.7% Distribution & Transportation 1,445 7.3% Agriculture & Mining 1,193 6.1% Support Services 1,048 5.3% Construction 1,130 5.7% Hotel & Amusement 860 4.4% Business Services 777 3.9% Finance & Real Estate 571 2.9% Health Services 563 2,6% Engineering & Management 393 2.0% Total 19,714 100.0% According to SCAG, the City had an employment base of 15,184 jobs in 1990, which is projected to increase by 53% to 23,179 by the year 2005, representing an average annual growth of 3.5%. With this projected increase in employment, there will likely be an associated increase in the demand for housing in the City. However, SCAG employment estimates over the last ten years have proven to be consistently below actual in-City employment levels. 2. Jobs-Housing Ratio A general measure of the balance between a community's employment opportunities and the housing needs of its residents is through a "jobs-housing ratio" test. According to the Census, Temecula had an average of 1.62 wage-earners in a family while SCAG estimated that the City had 1.66 jobs per household in 1990. These figures generally indicated that adequate employment opportunitiesexisted in the City, potentially allowing a portion of its residents to work there. In comparison, Riverside County had 1.50 wage-earners per family, but offered only 0.89 jobs per household in 1990. Overall, more residents in other parts of the County worked outside of their place of residence than in Temecula. However, by the year 2005, the jobs-housing ratio in Temecula is projected to decrease substantially to 1.06, indicating that employment growth in the City is not projected to keep pace with household growth. If SCAG employment estimates prove to be accurate, by the year 2005, an increased number of Temecula residents will commute to other places in the region for employment. The majority of Temecula residents commute to outside of the City to work in San Diego and Orange Counties. As a result, 1I. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page 4-8 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element the Temecula housing market is directly tied to the San Diego and O~ange County markets. C. Household Characteristics 1. Household Growth Trends Parallel to the population growth trends shown in Table 4-1, household growth in Temecula exceeded that of the surrounding communities and the County as a whole. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of households in Temecula increased by 74% while that in the County only increased by 20%. Comparing the City population growth (98%) with its household growth (74%) indicates that the City has become more family-oriented with increasing household size. Overall, Temecula is expected to grow at a faster pace than the County as shown in Table 4-5. However, the discrepancy is expected to shrink by 2005 when Temecula's household growth is projected at 37% and the County's at 32%. Table 4-5 Household Growth Trends % Change Projected Projected % Change Jurisdiction 1990' 2000 1990-2000 2005 2000-2005 Ternecula 9,130 15,875 74% 21,816 37% Hemet 17,397 27,241 57% 33,645 , 24% Lake Elsinore 6,066 8,844 46% 16,199 83% Murrieta* 6,849 10,296 50% ** Perris 6,726 8,850 32% 16,811 90% Riverside County 402,067 483,580 20% 640,311 32% As Murdofa was not incorporated in 1990, 1992 Depar{ment of Finance househokr eslimates are ~lized ~ this analysis, 2005 SCAG growth projections for households ae nol available for Murrleta. Sourc,~: 1990 Census, Caiifornia {}epatment of Finance, Januar/1,1992 and January 1, 2000 aed SCAG 8aseline G-oedh Projection, adopted A0d116, 1998. 2. Household Composition and Size The characteristics of the households in a city are important indicators of the type of housing needed in that community. The Census defines a household as all persons who occupy a housing unit, which may include families related through marriage or blood, unrelated individuals living together, or individuals living alone. People living in retirement or convalescent homes, dormitories, or other group living situations are not considered households. According to the 1990 Census, 80% of the 9,130 households in Temecula were considered families~. Among the 1,861 non-family households, 1,264 (68%) were Families are defined by the Census as people who live together in a household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. I1. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-9 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element single people living alone, including 259 (14%) elderly persons living alone. Overall, only 12 Temecula residents lived in group quarters in 1990. Household size is an important indicator for identifying sources of population growth as well as overcrowding in individual housing units. A city's average household size may decline in communities where the population is aging. As depicted in Table 4-6, the average persons per household increased by 14% in Temecula during the period of 1990-2000. This is consistent with the large number of families with school age children living in Temecula. Average household sizes in Lake Elsinor and Perris experienced similar growth as that in Temecula and are currently at similar levels as Temecula, reflecting similar household trends in these three neighboring cities. However, household trends in Hemet and Murrieta are drastically different than those in Temecula as indicated by the growth in average household sizes. Table 4-6 Average Number of Persons per Household 1990 & 2000 Average Persons/Household % Change Judsd]ction 1990 2000 1990 - 2000 Temecula 2.97 3,39 14.1% Hemet 2.04 2,27 9.7% Lake Elsinore 2.99 3.41 14,1% Murdeta* 3.53 4.27 21.0% Perris 3.16 3,63 14.9% Riverside County 2,85 3.09 8.4% · As MurTieta was not incorporated in 1990, 1992 Depadment of Finance pemons per household estimates a~e utilized f~' this analysis. Source: 1990 Census and California Department of Finance, Ja~ua7 1, 1992 and Januay ~, 2000. 3. Household Income The income earned by a household is an important indicator of the household's ability to acquire adequate housing. While Upper Income households have more discretionary income to spend on housing, Low and Moderate Income households are more limited in the range of housing that they can afford. Typically, as the income of households decreases the incidence of overpayment and overcrowding increases. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has developed the following income categories: · Very Low Income Households earn between 0 and 50% of the Median Family Income (MFD, adjusted for household size; · Low Income Households earn between 51 and 80% of the MFI, adjusted for household size; II. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-10 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Moderate Income Households earn between 81 and 120% of the MFI, adjusted for household size; and, · Above Moderate/Upper Income Households earn over 120% of the MFI, adjusted for household size. As part of thc Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), SCAG has developed estimates on income distribution for all jurisdictions within the SCAG region in 1998. The income distributions for Temecula and Riverside County are presented in Table 4- 7. Overall, household incomes in Temecula are higher than Countywide, with about 22% of households in the City earning Very Low and Low incomes, while more than 35% of the households in the County were lower incomes. Median household income in Temecula was estimated at $56,946 in 1998, which continued to be higher than the Countywide median income of only $46,500. One reason for the higher median income in Temeeula is that many of Temeeula's residents work in San Diego and Orange Counties where the median income and associated wages are higher. Table 4-7 1998 Household Income by Income Group City of Temecula Owner- Renter- Total Western Riverside Income Group Households Households Households County Vep/Low Income 4.6% 19.8% 10.1% 19.9% Low Income 7.1% 18.6% 11.3% 15.5% Moderate Income 17.3% 27.7% 21.1% 20.9% Upper income 71,0% 33.9% 57.5% 43.7% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: Regional Housing Needs Assessment, SCAG, 1998. 4. Overcrowding An overcrowded household is typically defined as one with more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways, and porches. A severely overcrowded household is defined as one with more than 1.5 persons per room. Overcrowding in results from either a lack of affordable housing and/or a lack of available housing units of adequate size. According to the 1990 Census, only 117 (2%) of the owner-households and 321 (9.7%) of the renter-households were overcrowded. In comparison, overcrowding was a more prevalent issue Countywide, with 6% of the owner-households and 18% of the renter- households living in overcrowded conditions. 5. Overpayment State and Federal standards consider a family as overpaying for housing if it spends more than 30% of its gross income on housing. A household that is spending more than it can afford for housing has less money available for other necessities and emergency 1I. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-11 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element expenditures. Very Low Income households overpaying for housing are more likely to be at risk of becoming homeless than other households. Renter-households overpay for their housing costs more often than owner-households because of their typically lower incomes. Compared to renters, overpayment by owners is less of a concern because homeowners have the option to refinance the mortgage, or to sell the house and move into rentals or buy a less expensive home. As shown in Table 4-8 below, among the City's overpaying households, 40% were Very Low and Low Income households and 60% were Moderate and Upper Income households. The majority of the Moderate and Upper Income households with housing overpayments were homeowners. Overall, lower income renter-households were more impacted by housing overpayment than other groups. Similarly, Countywide, approximately 35% of the households experiencing housing overpayment in 1990 earned lower incomes. Table 4-8 1990 Households Overpaying for Housing Total Households Renter-Households Overpaying Overpaying Owner-Households Overpaying Income Group # % # % # % Very Low Income 850 21.3% 669 45,2% 181 7.2% Low Income 757 19.0% 434 29.3% 323 12.9% Moderate/Upper Income 2,385 59.7% 378 25.5% 2,007 79,9% Total Overpaying Households 3,992 100.0% 1,481 100.0% 2,511 100.0% Source: CHAS Databook, Hue, 1993. D. Special Needs Populations Certain segments of the population may have a more difficult time finding decent, affordable housing due to their special circumstances or needs. These "special needs" population include elderly persons, disabled persons, large households, single parent households, farm workers, and the homeless. 1. Agricultural Workers Agriculture is a predominant industry in Riverside County and the area is divided into four distinct agricultural districts. The City of Temeeula is located within the San Jacinto/Temecula agricultural district. The 1990 Census reported 339 Temecula residents employed in farming, forestry, and fishing occupations. While there is no agricultural operation in the City, nearby wineries represent an employment base for agricultural workers. The City study indicates that 1,193 agriculture-related jobs were located in Temecula in 1996. Agricultural workers face various housing issues due to their typically lower incomes and the seasonal nature of their work. Il. Needs.doc ,, July 2002 Page 4-12 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element 2. Single Parents Single-parent families with children often require special attention due to their needs for affordable childcare, health care, and housing assistance. Female-headed families with children particularly tend to have lower incomes, thus limiting housing availability for this group. According to the 1990 Census, 750 households in Temecula were headed by single- parents, 70% of which were headed by females. Among the female-headed households, 43% were living below the poverty level. Elderly The special needs of the elderly are a function of their often lower or fixed income. In addition, housing for the elderly often requires special attention in design to allow greater access and mobility. Housing located within the vicinity of community facilities and public transportation also facilitates mobility of the elderly in the community. According to the Census, Temecula had 1,709 residents age 65 or older, representing slightly more than 6% of the total population. In Temecula, about 14% of all owner- householders in 1990 were over 65 years of age. Furthermore, approximately 30% of the elderly residents were reported to have self-care and mobility limitations and/or work disabilities. 4. Persons with Disabilities In 1990, about 9% of the Temecula residents age 16 or over were recorded by the Census as experiencing self-care and mobility limitations and/or work disabilities. Physical and mental disabilities can hinder a person's access to traditionally designed housing units (and other facilities) as well as potentially limit the ability to earn income. Housing that satisfies the design and location requirements of disabled persons is limited in supply and often costly to provide. Housing opportunities for disabled persons can be addressed through the provision of affordable, barrier-free housing. In addition to the development of new units, rehabilitation assistance can also be provided to disabled residents to make necessary improvements to remove architectural barriers of existing units. 11. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-13 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element 5. Large Households. Large households are defined as those with five or more persons. The 1990 Census reported 1,336 households in Temecula had five or more members, 70% were owner- households and 30% were renters. Typically, the availability of adequately sized and affordable housing units is a major obstacle facing large households. In 1990, Temecula had 3,528 three-bedroom housing units and another 3,166 housing units with four or more bedrooms. Thus, the City has an adequate supply of large-size housing units. The issue for large .households is related to affordability, particularly among renters. According to the Census, 48% of the large renter-households were overpaying for housing. Homeless The homeless population refers to persons lacking consistent and adequate shelter. According to the 1990 Census, there were no homeless persons reported visible at street locations in Temecula. The Temecula Police Department indicated that approximately 20 to 22 homeless persons were estimated to be living in the Old Town retail area. A program was put into place to find housing for these persons and all were placed. Since then, only a few homeless persons travelling through are found in the City. Outside of the City in the agricultural areas, rural homeless persons such as migrant farm workers are occasionally identified. A number of facilities and service agencies serve the homeless in the Temecula Valley area: Corner Stone Outreach, Inc. (Perris) - A one-year supervised residential structured program for males aged 18 to 60. This program offers shelter, food, clothing, Christian education, and assistance in legal matters. Mustard Seed (Lake Elsinore) - Transitional housing facility for women and their children. Mustard Seed operates a four-bedroom facility that can accommodate up to 15 women and children. The maximum stay is six months and education on parenting skills, finance, and other life skills is provided. Valley Restart Shelter (Hemet) - Drop-in center for homeless people offering showers, meals, telephone, counseling, transportation, temporary mailing address, laundry facilities, job information and referral. II. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page 4-14 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element E. Housing Stock Characteristics A housing unit is defined as a house, apartment or single room, occupied as a separate living quarter Or, if vacant, intended for occupancy as a separate living quarter. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other persons in the building and that have direct access from the outside of a building or through a common hall. 1. Housing Growth Trends As shown in Table 4-9, the housing stock in Temecula increased by almost 74% during the period of 1990 to 2000. Tcmecula had thc greatest increase in its housing stock compared to the surrounding communities. However, over the next few years, Temecula is expected to experience only moderate housing growth, while a substantial housing increase is anticipated for Lake Elsinore and Pen-is. 2. Housing Type The majority (78%) of the existing housing stock in Temecula consists of single-family detached 'and attached homes (see Figure 4-2). Single-family housing units are dispersed throughout the City. Multi-family developments of five or more units represent the next largest segment (19%) of the housing stock, and the greatest concentration of apartment complexes is located along Margarita Drive. Currently consisting of 197 units, Heritage Mobilehome Park located in the northeastern comer of the City is the only mobilehome park in Temecula. The City has recently approved an additional of 13 spaces to be provided in that park. Table 4-9 Total Housing Units % Change % Change Jurisdiction 1990' 2000 1990-2000 2005 2000-2005 Temecula 10,659 18,534 74% 21,816 18% Hemet 19,692 30,802 56% 33,645 9% Lake Elsinore 6,981 10,150 45% 16,199 60% Murdeta* 9,664 14,528 50% ** Pen~s 7,761 10,444 35% 16,811 61% Riverside County 483,847 582,419 20% 640,311 10% II. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-15 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Figure 4-2 Temecula Housing Stock Composition M u~!ti Family (24 un~) 327 units (2%) Slngla Faatl7 (detached) 14,287 units ~7%) Source: California Department of Finance, January 1,2000. 3. Tenure Table 4-10 illustrates the tenure distribution of occupied housing in Temecula and in the surrounding communities. Compared to the surrounding communities Temecula has an average rate of homeownership. Correlating the high percentage of single- family homes that exist in Temecula and the average proportion of renters in the City indicates that many single-family homes are used as rentals. Table 4-10 1990 Housing Tenure Occupied Dwelling Units % of Total Occupied Jedsdiction Owner Occupied % of Total Renter Occupied Total Occupied Units Occupied Units Units Temecula 5,806 63.6% 3,324 36.4% 9,130 Hemet 10,844 62.3% 6,553 37.7% 17,397 Lake 3,565 58.8% 2,501 41.2% 6,066 Elsinore Murrieta* 424 74.6% 144 25.4% 568 Perds 4,703 69.9% 2,023 30.1% 6,726 Riverside County 270,876 67.4% 131,191 32.6% 402,067 1990 Census da~a applied to ~he unincorporated Munieta CDP, which did not include al~ of Ifm area incorporated into the City of Murrleta. Source: 1990 Census and California Departmeof of Fhance, Ja~uay 1,1999. I1. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-16 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element The rate of vacancy is a measure of housing availability in a community. A vacancy rate of 5% generally indicates an adequate supply of housing with room for mobility. According to the 2000 DOF data, the overall vacancy rate in Temecula was 14.4% while that in the County was recorded at 17.0%. The relatively high vacancy rate in Temecula and in the County is attributed to the high level of new residential development in the area, with many housing units continually coming on the market. 4. P~ge and Housing Stock Conditions The age of housing is commonly used as a measure of when housing may begin to require major repairs. In general, housing units over 30 years old are likely to exhibit signs of rehabilitation needs, such as new roofing, foundation work, and new plumbing. As depicted in Table 4-11, the majority of the housing units in Temecula (92%) were built between 1980 through 2000 and most likely are in excellent condition. Only about 1% of the existing housing stock is over 30 years old. While approximately 7 percent of the units were built in the 1970s and will be approaching 30 years old during this Housing Element cycle, these units were built in compliance with modem building standards and will not likely to deteriorate rapidly. According to City staff, no housing unit will need to be demolished or replaced due to dilapidated conditions. (However, the Agency has a few units that may be removed in order to facilitate intensification of the sites. The Agency will ensure that any applicable replacement/relocation requirement is met.) Also, based on the housing age and condition in the City, only a small portion of the City's 1,600 older housing units would require rehabilitation (not more than 20% or 320 units) and only some households would require assistance in making the needed repairs or improvements. The City estimates a rehabilitation assistance need for 150 households over the next five years. Table 4-11 Age of Housing Stock Year Built Number of Units % of Total April 1990 - January 2000 7,875 43% 1980 to March 1990 9,073 49% 1970 to 1979 1,361 7% 1960 to 1969 170 <1% 1950 to 1959 13 <1% 1940 to 1949 0 0% 1939 or eadier 42 < 1% Sources: 1990 Census and 20~ Population and Housing EstJmate~, (}epatment of Finance I1. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-17 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element 5. Housing Costs Ownership Housing Temecula is one of the fastest growing and most prosperous communities in the Inland Empire. With its setting amidst the wine country and location along 1-15 mid-way between San Diego and Orange counties, Temecula experiences growth from both directions. As a result, Temecula was one of the first communities to see its residential real estate market recovering from Southern California's steep recession. As evidenced in Table 4-12, median home price in Temecula increased significantly between 1998 and 1999 while median prices in surrounding communities even declined slightly or increased only nominally. Since 1999, housing price increases have stabilized in Temecula. According to the California Association of Realtors, housing prices in Temecula are higher than in some surrounding communities but lower than in Corona, Murdeta, Norco, and Rancho Mirage as of December 2001. While Temecula is one of the highest cost housing markets in Riverside County, compared to San Diego and Orange Counties, where the majority of the City's residents work, the City's housing costs are substantially lower. For example, for the first quarter of 2001, new homes in Temecula sold for an average of $226,000, while new homes in north San Diego County sold for an average of $415,000. Table 4-12 Median Home Prices Jurisdiction June 1999 June 1998 % Change Temecura $195,000 $157,637 23.7% Hemet $79,250 $79,500 -0.3% Lake Elsinore $114,000 $114,500 -3.95% Murdeta $169,000 $158,000 7.0% Perris $85,000 $84,500 0.6% Riverside County $130,000 $126,0~0 3.2% Source: Califomia Association of Realto~ Reflective of the housing stock, most housing sales in Temecula are for three- and four- bedroom single-family homes. During the 18-month period between January 1999 and June 2000, 1,188 housing sales were executed, of which 85% were three- and four- bedroom single-family homes. Housing units in Temecula are sold for a wide range of prices. As shown in Table 4-13, four-bedroom homes are sold from $95,000 to $645,000, indicating that some older housing units are sold for much lower prices while newer and custom homes are priced much higher. Condominium sales in Temecula exhibited similar patterns of wide price ranges. II. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page ~-18 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-13 Housing Sales January 1999 through June 2000 Sing[e-Family Median Pdce Price Range Units Sold % of Total 2~edroom $126,250 $47,000-.,$750,000 52 4.5% 3-bedrcorn $153,000 $68,181-$560,000 553 48.2% 4-bedroom $190,000 $95,000-$645,000 456 39.8% 5-bedroom $254,000 $152,000.$740,000 81 7.1% 6-bedroom $252,000 $198,0005400,000 5 0.1% Condominiums Median Pdce Pdco Range Units Sold % of Iota[ 2-bedroom $107,000 $72,000-$165,854 15 36.6% 3-t)edroom $120,000 $69,500-$142,500 25 61.0% 4Jaedrcom $148,000 $148,000 1 0.4% Source: Los Angeles Times, Dataquick Se[vice Housing affordability is dependent upon income and housing costs. According to the HUD guidelines for 2000, the median family income (MFI) for a family of four in Riverside County is $47,400. Based on this median income, the following maximum income limits for a four-person family can be established: · Very Low Income households (0 to 50% of MFI) earn a maximum of $23,700 · Low Income households (51 to 80% of MFI) earn a maximum of $37,900 · Moderate Income households (81 to 120% of MFI) earn a maximum of $56,900 · Median Income households earn $47,400 Table 4-14 Affordable Housing Costs by Income Category Riverside County Maximum Monthly Affordfible Affordable Taxes/ Affordable Income Category Income Housing Cost Utility Rent Maintenance Home Price Very Low $23,700 $592 $50 $542 $50 $70,300 Low $37,900 $947 $100 $847 $100 $106,900 Moderate $56,900 $1,422 $150 $1,272 $150 $178,400 Median $47,400 $1,185 $100 $1,085 $100 $148,600 Maximum affordable home price based on a 30-year loan at 7.5% inlerest, assuming that the homebuyer can afford to pay a 10% downDayment and dosing costs. Assuming that the potential homebuyer within each income group has sufficient credit, downpayment (10%), and maintains affordable housing expenses (i.e. spends no more than 30% of their gross income on the mortgage, taxes, and insurance), the maximum affordable home price can be determined for each income group. Table 4-14 shows the maximum housing prices affordable to the various income groups. Based on the median home prices shown in Table 4-13, housing ownership opportunities are available in Temecula for some LOw Income and most Moderate Income households, although Very Low Income households would not be able to afford median prices housing in the City. Most small condominiums and some small single-family homes are affordable to Low Income households. In addition, most two-bedroom houses and II. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-19 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element some three- and four-bedroom houses, as well as all condominium units are affordable to Moderate Income households. Rental Housing Current rental information for private rental units in Temecula was obtained through the 1998 Old Town Temecula Market Assessment that surveyed 13 apartment complexes throughout the City containing a total of 3,120 units. The large majority (70%) of the units in Temecula are two-bedroom un/ts. In 1998, the average rent in Temecula was $515 for a one-bedroom unit, $625 for a two-bedroom unit, and $695 for a three-bedroom unit. An internet search of limited apartments for rent in Temecula indicates that rents have gone up by about 15 to 20% for most one- and two-bedroom units. Based on the household income limits identified in Table 4-14, a Low Income household can afford to pay $847 per month, while a Moderate Income household can afford to pay up to $1,272 per month. Based on these limits, Low and Moderate Income households can afford to live in Temecula even if rents have increased significantly by 20% since the survey. As Very Low Income households can only afford to pay $542 a month in rent, they will not be able to afford market rate rents without paying in excess of 30% of their gross income under most circumstances. Often large households with Very Low Incomes have to resort to smaller units in order to save on housing costs, but overcrowding typically occurs. 6. Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion Inventory of Assisted Housing State Housing Element law requires cities to prepare an inventory including all assisted multi-family rental units which are eligible to convert to non-low income housing uses due to termination of subsidy contract, mortgage prepayment, or expiring use restrictions. Under Housing Element law, this inventory is required to cover an evaluation period following the statutory due date of the Housing Element (July 1, 2000). Thus, this at-risk housing analysis covers the period from July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2010. Table 4-15 provides an inventory of the City's assisted multi-family housing stock by various government assistance programs. This inventory includes all multi-family rental units assisted under federal, state, and/or local programs, including HUD programs, state and local bond programs, redevelopment programs, and local density bonus or direct assistance programs. Il. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-20 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-15 Assisted Housing Inventory and At Risk Status Total Project Earliest # of Units At Project Units Pro~rarn Conversion Date Risk Ternecula Villas 96 Section 8 New Const. 6/1999 48 (28837 Pujol St.) (expired) Woodcreek 344 Mortgage Revenue 3/31/2003 71 (4220 Morago Rd.) Bond Rancho California 55 Seclion 8 New Const. 3/15,2004 55 (29210 Stonewood Section 221(d)4 Rd.) Rancho West 150 RDA Revenue Bond 4/8/2026 150 (4220 Main St.) HOME Rancho Creek 30 RDA Loan 9/30/2026 '30 (28464 Felix Valdez Rd.) Mission Village 76 RDA Revenue Bond 7/16/2028 76 Apartments (28497 Pujol St.) Oaktree 40 FmHA New Const 8/8/2004 40 (42176 Undley Lane) Section 515/Section 8 Creekside 48 FmHA New COn. 8/22/2036 43 (28955 Pujol St.) Section 515 Source: City of Temesula, September 1999. The Section 8 contract for one apartment complex, Temecula Villas (28837 Pujol Street), expired in June 1999. The owner has not entered into an agreement with the Temecula Redevelopment Agency to accept additional' funding in exchange for preserving the affordability of the units, nor are Section 8 vouchers accepted at the complex. The owner plans on renting the units at market rate. At-Risk Housing Conversion Potential Oaktree, Woodcreek, and Rancho California complexes are the only housing developments that may be at risk between July 1, 2000 and June 30, 2010. The details of each project are discussed below. Oaktree: The 40-unit Oaktree project was financed through FmHA-New Construction Section 515 loans. While this project has the potential to expire in 2004 with prepayment of the loan, the nature of the program makes it extremely tmlikely that the Oaktree project will he permitted to prepay and convert to market-rate ~:ents. To qualify for prepayment and conversion, the owner of the project must prove that the affordable housing provided by the project is not needed. Discussions with FmHA representatives indicate that few farm housing projects have ever been able to document that affordable, farm housing is no longer needed. Therefore, the affordable housing restrictions on Oaktree are expected to continue for the entire duration of the loan. Also, additional incentives are often offered to owners of affordable housing financed under the FmltA New Construction Section 515 program to encourage the continued affOrdability of the units. Since the Oaktree project is unlikely to convert during the Housing Element planning period due the constraints described above, preservation of this affordable housing complex is not analyzed below. n. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-21 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Woodereek: The 344-unit Woodcreek project was financed with a multi-family mortgage revenue bond. Under the bond program, 20% (71) of the project units are required to be reserved for Low Income tenants for the greater of 15 years or as long as the bond is outstanding. The Low Income use restriction on the 71 units is due to expire in March 2003. Rancho California: This 55-unit project was developed with a HUD-insured Section 221(d)4 mortgage loan. This mortgage loan maintains a market rate interest and places no deed reslxicfion on the project to maintain the units as affordable housing. To ensure affordability of these units, HUD provided a 20-year Section 8 contract for the 55 units subsidizing the rent payments by tenants. This Section 8 contract is due to expire in March 2004. Preservation and Replacement of At-Risk Housing Cost Analysis Preservation of the at-risk projects can be achieved in four ways: 1) facilitate transfer of ownership of the at-risk properties to non-profit organizations; 2) purchase of affordability covenants; 3) provide rental assistance to tenants using funding sources other than Section 8; and 4) construct or purchase replacement affordable units. Transfer of Ownership: By transferring ownership of at-risk projects to non-profit housing organizations, long-term, low income use of those projects can be secured, and the project will be eligible for a greater range of govemment assistance programs. Of the two at-risk housing development within Temecula, transferring ownership to a non- profit is only appropriate in the case of Rancho California. Since only 20% of the Woodcreek complex is affordable to lower income households, it is not cost-effective to purchase the entire apartment complex. Table 4-16 presents the estimated market value for the Rancho California project to establish an order of magnitude for assessing preservation costs. According to development experts, current market values for the at-risk project can be estimated on the basis of the project's potential annual income, operating expenses and building condition. As shown in Table 4-16, the estimated market value of the Rancho California project is $4 million. However, unless some form of mortgage assistance is available to the non-profit organizations, rental income from the lower income tenants would not likely be adequate to cover the mortgage payment, and rental subsidy would be required. Il. Needs.doc · July 2002 Page 4-22 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-16 Value of At-Risk Housing Units Rancho California Apartments Size of UnitsNumber of Units in Project 2-Bedroom 22 3-Bedrcorn 22 4-Beclroom 11 Total 55 Gross Operating Income $373,065 Annual Operating $37,307 Net Annual Income $335,759 Market Value $4,029,102 Market value for Rancho California Apartments is esSmated with lhe following assumpfiues: I. Old Town Temecula Market Study - averege market rant for a 2-l~edreom is $515, 2- bedroom is $625,3-bedroom is $695, a~ a 4-bedreom is esSm~ted to lie 10% higher than a 3-bedrcore for an average rear of $765. 2. Vacancy Rate = 5% 3. Annual operating expenses = 10% of gross revenues 4. Market Value = Annual net projant income * mul~iplica§on factor. 5. Multiplication fanfor for buiElings in ~lued to excellent condilJon in 12. Purchase of Affordability Covenant: Another option to preserve the affordability of at-risk projects is to provide an incentive package to the owners to maintain the projects as low income housing. Incentives could include writing down the interest rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or supplementing the tenant's rent payment or Section 8 subsidy amount from HUD to market levels. To purchase the affordability covenant on the at-risk projects, an incentive package should include interest subsides at or below what the property owners can obtain in the open market. To enhance the attractiveness of the incentive package, the interest subsidies may need to be combined with additional rent subsidies. Rent Subsidy: A total of 55 traits in the Rancho California project currently maintain Section 8 contracts that are due to expire within the time frame of this Housing Element. Should annual renewal of project-based S6ction 8 contracts become unavailable in the future, tenant-based rent subsidies such as Section 8 vouchers and certificates may be used to preserve the affordability of housing. Also, should the owner of Woodcreek decide to convert the 71 units into market rate housing, Section 8, or other forms of rent subsidies may be required to assist the existing tenants. Under the HUD Section 8 program, assistance is only available to Very Low Income households (up to 50% of the County Median Family Income). Thus the discrepancy between the Fair Market Rent for a unit and the housing cost affordable to a Very Low Income household is used to estimate the amount of rent subsidy required for that unit. Table 4-17 estimates the rent subsidies required to preserve the affordability of the assisted units to Very Low Income households. Based on the estimates and assumptions shown in this table, approximately $191,664 in rent subsidies would be required annually to preserve the Rancho California units, and approximately $168,246 in annual rent subsidies would be required to preserve the Woodcreek units, for a total of $359,910. Il. Needs.doc ,, July 2002 Page 4-23 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-17 Rent Subsidies Rec uired Section 8/Subsidized At-risk Units Rancho California Wondcreek 2-Bedronm 22 58 3-Bedronm 22 13 4-Bedroorn-' 11 0 Total 55 71 Total Monthly Rent Income Supported by Affordable $26,180 $31,383 Housing Cost of VePJ Low Income Households Total Month Rent Allows by Fair Market Re,ts $42,152 $45,403 Total Annual Subsidies Required $191,664 $168,246 Notes; 1. Unit mix of Woodcreek Apartment units is based on proportions in the enlire project. 2. A two-bedroom unit is assumed to be occupied by a three-person household, a throe- bedroom unit by a four-person household, and a four-bedrcom unit by a five~rson household. 3. Based on 19S9 Median Family Income in Riverside County, affordable monthly housing cost for a three-parsos Very Low Income household is $431, for a four-person household is $490, and a five-persoo household is $538. 4. 1999 Fair Market Rents in Riverside County is $597 for a two-bedroom unit, $829 for a three-bedroom unit, and $980 for a roar-bedroom unit. Replacement Cost Analysis/Purchase of Similar Units: The cost of dcvclopi~ housing depends on a variety of factors such as density, size of units, location and related land costs, and type of construction. Based on discussions with ~ local developer with recent experience building multi-family housing within Tcmccu]:% it would be difficult to develop multi-family rental housing for less than approximately $100,000 per unit. This cost estimate includes all costs associated with development. To replace thc 126 affordable units in Rancho California and Woodcrcek apaaments would therefore require at least $12,600,000 ($5.5 million, for Rancho Califoruia $7.1 million for Woodcreek), provided that vacant or underutilized multi-family residential sites would be available for construction of replacement housing. Instead of constructing new at-risk affordable units, similar existing units may be purchased to replace those units. Based on'the value analysis for the Rancho Califot~ia apartments, an existing unit would cost approximately $73,250. To replace the 126 affordable units in Rancho California and Woodcreek through the purchase of similar existing units, the total cost would be approximately $9.2 million ($4 million for Rancho California and $5.2 million for Woodcreek). Cost Comparison The cost to build new housing to replace the 126 at-risk units within the Rancho California and Woodcreek projects is high, with an estimated total cost of close to $12.6 million. This cost estimate is higher than the cost to preserve the units by transferring ownership to a non-profit (in the case of Rancho California) or purchasing 126 similar existing traits, which is estimated at approximately $9.2 million. Il. Needs.doc * July 2002 Page 4-24 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Use of other forms of rent subsidies to replace rental assistance, such as Section 8, does not ensure long-term unit affordability. The cost associated with rent subsidies is lower, requiring a total of approximately $359,910 annually. Overall, transferring project ownership to non-profit organizations combined with financing techniques to lower the mortgage payment, as well as purchase of affordability covenants, are probably the most cost-effective means to preserving the at- risk housing projects in Temecula. II. Needs.doc · July 2002 ' Page 4-25 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element III. CONSTRAINTS ON HOUSING PRODUCTION Market, governmental, and infi-astructure factors pose constraints to the provision of adequate and affordable housing. These constraints may result in housing that is not affordable to Very Low, Low, and Moderate Income households, or may render residential construction economically infeasible for developers. A. Market Constraints 1. Land and Construction Costs A major cost associated with developing new housing is the cost of land. Most vacant residential parcels in Temecula have been subdivided, while others are contained within planned communities. In the Meadow View area, where parcels begin at ½ acre and increase in size, the average price of a vacant parcel ranges from $60,000 to over $100,000. Larger tracts of raw land are available in the surrounding sphere of influence at a lower cost per acre. However, the potential development of this raw land is constrained by the City's desire to preserve the agricultural lands, as evident in the General Plan. Another major cost associated with building a new house is the cost of building materials, which can comprise up to 50% of the sales price of a home. Construction costs for wood frame single-family construction of average to good quality range from $50 to $70 per square foot, while custom homes and units with extra amenities may nm higher. Costs for wood frame, multi-family construction average about $50 per square foot excluding parking. Both the costs of land and construction of a new house are passed on to the homebuyer. As a result, an increase in the cost of land or construction materials will result in a higher housing price for the purchaser. 2. Availability of Mortgage and Rehabilitation Financing Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications. Overall, financing is generally available to homebuyers and homeowners in Temecula. As depicted in Table 4-18, in 1997 overall, 73% of the 1,031 applications submitted for conventional home' purchase loans were approved (though not all applicants accepted the loan [i.e. originated the loan]), and only 12% were denied, with the remaining 14% of the applications withdrawn or closed, for incompleteness. However, lower income applicants had a lower rate of approval in comparison to the higher income applicants. The disparity between income groups with the availability of funding is also apparent in the approval rate for conventional home improvement loans. Overall, home improvement loans have lower approval rates. In 1997, only 54% of the 430 applications submitted for conventional improvement loans were approved, indicating IlL Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-26 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element the continued need for City assistance in providing home improvement loans, especially for lower income applicants. Table 4-19 illustrates the disposition of government-backed home purchase and home improvement loans. Government-backed loans include those insured by the FHA, FmHA, and VA, but do not include those provided through the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. Comparing Table 4-19 with Table 4-18 indicates that more Low and Moderate Income households in Temecula rely on government-backed loans than on conventional loans to achieve homeownership. This further substantiates the continued need for homebuying assistance in order to facilitate homeownership among Low and Moderate Income households. Few households applied for home improvement loans under either conventional or government-backed lending. This is reflective of the overall sound conditions of the City's housing stock. Nevertheless, Low and Moderate Income households seeking home improvement financing had comparative lower approval rates under both conventional and government-backed lending than Upper Income households. Locally assisted home imprbvement loans and grants are important to assisting the Low and Moderate Income households in making the necessary repairs. Table 4-18 Dis )osition of Conventional Loan Applications: 1997 Home Purchase Loans Home Improvement Loans % % % % Other Applicant Income Total Originated/ % % Total Originated/ Denied Appl'ns Approved* Denied Other Apprns Approved* Low Income 106 68.9% 14.1% 17.0% 34 55.9% 32.4% 11.8% (<80% MFI) Moderate Income 183 70.5% 16.4% 13.1% 108 38.0% 56,5% 5,6% (80-119% MFI) Upper Income 686 76.7% 10.8% 12.5% 288 60.1% 34.4% 5.6% (>+120% MFI) Not Available 56 51.8% 16.1% 32.1% 0 0 0 0 Total 1,031 73.4% 12.4% 14.1% 430 54.2% 39.8% 6.0% * Originated Loan is a loan that has been approved and accepted by the applicant. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for 1997. Tabulated with the Centrex software. Table 4-19 Disposition of Government Backed Loan Applications: 1997 Home Pumhase Loans Home Improvement Loans % % % % Applicant Income Total Odgicated/ % % Total Originated/ Denied Other Appl'ns Approved* Denied Other Appl'ns Approved* LOW Income 116 74.1% 12.1% 13.8% 12 0% 66,7% 33.3% (<80% MFI) Moderate Income 328 80.8% 10.7% 8.5% 58 36.2% 39.7% 24.1% (80-119% afl) Upper Income 380 76.8% 14.2% 8.9% 101 45.5% 33.7% 20.8% (>+120% MFI) Not Available 37 59.5% 13.5% 27.0% 6 16,7% 83.3% 0% Total 861 77.2% 12.5% 10.2% i 177 38.4% 39.5% 22.0% * Originated Loan is a loan that has been approved and accepted by the applicant. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for 1997. Tabulated with the Centrex software. III. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-27 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element B. Governmental Constraints 1. Land Use Controls The Land Use Element of the Temecula General Plan and corresponding Development Code provide for a range of residential types and densities dispersed throughout the City. The current Land Use Element has designated 10,295 acres (63%) of the City's total land inventory for residential uses, including: single-family homes, multi-family units, and mobile homes. Residential densities in Temecula cover a wide spectrum, including the following categories: Hillside Residential (HR) (0-0.1 mt/net ~cre) Very Low Density Residential (VL) (0.2-0.4 mt/net acre) Low Density Residential-1 (L-l) (0.4-1 unit/net acre) Low Density Residential-2 (L-2) (1-2 units/net acre) · Low Medium Density Residential (LM) (3-6 units/net acre) · Medium Density Residential (M) (7-12 units/net acre) · High Density Residential (H) (13-20 units/net acre) These residential categories provide for a range of housing types to be developed in Temecula. The City has set target levels for density for the Hillside (0.1 unit/acre); Very Low (0.3 units/acre); Low (1.3 units/acre); and Low Medium (4.5 units/acre) Density Residential designations. Only projects that provide amenities or public benefits will be allowed to exceed the target level. The types of amenities or public benefits may include providing road connections, parks, or fire station. These amenities typically apply to large-scale planned development projects. The City has not set density target levels for the Medium and High Density Residential categories in order to facilitate the development of affordable housing. 2. Residential Development Standards Temecula's residential development and parking standards are summarized in Tables 4- 20 and 4-21. Residential standards have been adopted by the City to protect the safety and welfare of its residents. The Development Code and General Plan allow for modification and flexibility in the development standards through the provision of a Village Center Overlay and Planned Development Overlay. Flexibility in planning for overlay areas is allowed to promote a greater range of housing opportunities within the City. Diversity of housing, including affordable housing is one of the performance standards for the Village Center Overlay. The Planned Development Overlay Zoning District also encourages the provision of additional housing oppommities for the community. Additional flexibility in development standards is also provided in the Development Code through the use of variable setbacks. This flexibility allows for creative site planning, especially for irregular sites. III. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-28 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element To provide for additional opportunities for affordable housing, the Development Code and General Plan also allow senior, congregate care, and affordable housing in some non- residential zoning districts. Senior housing is allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts. Congregate care facilities are allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts. Affordable housing projects are allowed in the Professional Office zoning district. For example, the City has recently adopted a Planned Development Overlay district for the Temecula Creek Village to provide for mixed-use commercial/residential development. Temecula Creek Village will develop 32,6 vacant acres within the Professional Office (PO) zone with 20 acres of residential and 12 acres of commercial uses. Residential uses envisioned for the Planned Development Overlay district include medium and high density multi-family uses. I11. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-29 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4~20 Residential Development Standards HR VI. L-I L-2 LM M H Minimum Net Lot Ama (square feet) .... 7200 7,200 7,200 Minimum Average Net Lot Ama per Dwelling Unfl 10acres 2.5acres 1.0ac~e 0.5acre -- -- -- Ma~drdum I~lling Units Per Acrer ..... 12.0 20,0 LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum LOt Frentage at Fro~t Property Une 50ft. 40fL 40fL 30ft. 30ft. 30fL 30fL Minimum LOf Freetage fa' a Rag Lot at Froof Propody Line 40fl, 30ft. 30ft. 25fl, 20ft. 20fL 20ft. Minimum Width at Required Front Setback Area 100 ft. 100 fL 70 fL 50 ft. 50 ft. 40 fl, 30 ft. Minimum Average W~[h 100 ft. 80 ft. 70 ft. 60ft. 50 ft. 50 fl, 50 ft. Minimum LOt Depth 150fL 120fL 100 ft. 90fL 80ff. 100fL 100ff. SETBACKS Minimum Frent Yard2 40fL 25fL 25ft. 25ft.2 20ft.2 20fL2 20ft.2 Minimum Comer Side Yard 40fL 15fL 15ft. 15ft. 15fL 15ft. .150. Minimum I nt~or Side Yard3 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ~ 10 ft. Variable3 Vadable~ Vaiable~ Minimum Rear Yard 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 fL 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Height 35ft. 35~. 35ft.I 35ft. 35ft. 40~. 50ft. Maximum % of LOt Coveroge 10% 20'/. 25% 25% 35% 35Yo 30% Open Space Required 90 % 70 % 60% 60% 25 % 25% 30% Private Open Space/Per Unit NA NA NA NA NA 200 150 Notes: 1. Affordable housing and congregate care facilities may exceed lhe stated densities pursuant to the provisions of Section 17.06.050.H, 2. Variable front yard setbacks: In order to allow for a moro interesting visual image and more flexible site planning variable setbacks may be permitted in the L2, LM, M and H districts. Front yard setbacks shall have an average of at least twenty feet, Garages with entrances not facing the front yard area may be setback a minimum of ten feet. Other portions of a structure may have a front yard setback of a minimum of ten feet; however, the average setback of Iwenty feet shell be maintained. 3. Variable side yard setbacks: in the LM zoning district, the combined side yard setback for both sides must equal at least fifteen feet with one side having at least ten feet to provide potential vehicular access to the roar of the property and shall be located on the same side as the driveway. In the M and H zoning districts, variable side yard setbacks may be permitted provided the sum of the side yard setbacks is not less than ten feet and the distance between adjacent structuros is not less than ten feet. This permits a zero lot line arrangement with a zero setback on one side yard and ten feet on the opposite site yard. Source: The City of Tereeeula Development Code. Ill. Constraints.doc ,, July 2002 Page 4-30 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-21 Parking Space Requirements Land Use Required Parking Spaces Single-family Unit 2 enclosed spaces Duplex, T~plex 2 covered spaces/units, prus 1 guest space/4 units Multi-family Units (12 units or less) - 3 or fewer· 2~5 units: 2 covered spaces/units, plus 2 guest spaces bedrooms · 6-12 units: 2 covered spaces/unit, plus 3 guest spaces Multi-family Units (13 or more units) - 3 or fewer· I covered space and % uncovered space for each 1 ~,droom unit; bedrooms · 1 covered and 1 uncovered space for each 2-bedroom unit; · 2 covered spaces and % uncovered space for each 3-bedrcom (or more) unit; plus 1 guest spaco/6 units, with a minimum of 4 guest spaces, Mobilehome Park 1 covered space/trailer site, plus 1 guest space/2 trailer sites Second Unit · I covered space for each 2-bedroom (or smaller) unit; · 2 covered spaces for each 3-bedroom (or larger) unit, Granny Flat 1 uncovered space/unit Senior Citizens Housing Complex/Congregate '/, covered space/unit, plus 1 uncovered guest space per 5 units Care Source: City of Ternecula Development Code 3. Provisions for a Variety of Housing Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions must identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including mobile homes, congregate care facilities, senior housing, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. The following paragraphs describe the City's provision for these types of housing. Mobile Homes/Manufactured Housing: Temecula allows for the provision of manufactured housing in all of its residential zoning districts. Mobile home parks are allowed with a conditional use 'permit in all of the residential zoning districts. Manufactured housing must be certified according to the National Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 and conform to all other development and use requirements applicable to .the primary units in the zoning district. The units must stand on a permanent foundation and the materials used for the siding must be approved by the Pianning Director. Senior Housing/Affordable Housing: Senior and affordable housing are permitted in the High, Medium, and Low Medium Density Residential zoning districts, with approval of a development plan. The maximum density allowed for senior housing that complies with the City's affordable housing provisions, including the density bonus, is: 30 units/acre for High Density Residential, 20 units/acre for Medium Density Residential, and 8 units/acre for Low Medium Density Residential. For the approved specific plans, the maximum density bonus cannot exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area. Senior housing is also allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, and Professional III. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-31 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Office zoning districts. Senior housing constructed in the Neighborhood Commercial ' zone will be developed consistent with the development and performance standards allowed in the Medium Density Residential zoning district. For the Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts, senior housing will be developed consistent with the development and performance standards allowed for the High Density Residential zoning district. Affordable housing developments are entitled to receive at least a density bonus of 25% in each residential zoning district. The maximum densities for affordable housing projects, including the density bonus, are: 30 units/acre for High Density Residential, 18 units/acre for Medium Density Residential, and 8 units/acre for Low Medium Density Residential development. For the approved specific plans, the maximum density, including the density bonus, is not allowed to exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area, as discussed above. Affordable housing projects are also allowed in the Professional Office zoning district up to 30 units/acre with a conditional use permit. Affordable housing projects, including affordable senior projects may also be granted at least one development concession by the City as an incentive for the provision o f affordable housing. The potential concessions include: · An increase in the amount of required lot coverage; · A modification to the setback or required yard provisions; · An increase in the maximum allowable building height;. · A reduction in the amount of required on-site parking; · A reduction in the amount of on-site landscaping, except that no reduction in on-site recreational amenities may be approved unless the affordable housing is in close proximity with easy access to a public park with recreational amenities; · A reduction in the minimum lot area; or · Approval of an affordable housing project in the Professional Office zone with the approval of a conditional use permit. Congregate Care: Congregate care facilities are not limited specifically to density requirements as long as all of the development standards for the zoning district are met. Congregate care facilities are allowed in the Low-2 Density Residential, Low Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, and Professional Office zoning disthcts. Second Units: The City of Temecula allows second units in all of the residential districts where a detached single-family unit e>fists and the owner occupies either the primary or secondary unit. Second units cannot be sold, but may be rented. The second unit must be compatible with the design of the primary dwelling unit and meet the size and parking requirements identified in the Development Code. 1II. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-32 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Emergency SheRers/Transitional Housing: The City facilitates the development of emergency shelters and transitional housing by permitting the development of such facilities in the Medium Density and High Density Residential districts by right. These uses are also permitted in other residential districts with a conditional use permit. Emergency shelters are also permitted with a conditional Use permit in thc Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, and Light Industrial zoning districts. Currently, Temecula has two group homes for teenagers with a total capacity of 18 persons. In addition, two residential facilities in the City offer housing for up to 12 developmentally disabled persons. 4. Development and Planning Fees The cost of development is a constraint to the implementation of affordable housing projects. Typically, the cost of developing raw land is significantly increased by the various regulations and fees local governments impose on developers. The City of Temecula charges various fees and assessments to cover the cost of processing permits and providing certain services and utilities. Table 4-22 summarizes that City's planning fee requirements for residential development, while Table 4-23 depicts the City's development fees for residential development. Comparing the cost of one jurisdiction's development and planning fees to another is difficult since each jurisdiction calculates and applies its fee schedule in its own unique way. While no recent studies available to the general public have been completed in Riverside County to compare the fees charged by various jurisdictions, a 1991 County of Riverside Administrative Office (CAO) study compared the cXost of developing a 50- unit subdivision in various communities. In this study, Temecula ranked in the top three jurisdictions for development fees charged. 1II. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-33 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-22 Planning Fee Schedule City of Temecula Project Type I City of Temecula Fee ] Department of Environmental I Health Fee Planning and Zoning. Conditional Use Pe~nit- New Building ~,z3.4 $5,837 $234 Conditional Use Permit- Existing Building~ $888 $234 Development Agreement $4,550 N/A Development Plan - Less than 10,000 sf (Administrative) $190 N/N Development Plan - Less than 10,000 sf ~,2,4 $3,540' $136 Development Ran -Over 10,000 sf ~,z3,4 $5,880 $136 General Plan Amendmeet~,z3 $5,587 $59 Single Family Residence and Additions $30 N/A Variance~ $1,954 $120 Zoning Amendment (Text Changes, Map Changes) ~,s $3,617 $61 Zoning Amendment {Specitic Plan) ~,zs $15,578 $197 Subdivisions Cedificate of Land Division Compliance (fee per parcel) $1,093 $138 Certificate of Land Division Compliance w/Waiver of Final Parcel $837 N/A Map (fee per parcel) Lot Une Adiustment $834 $72 Merger of Continuous Parcel $714 N/A Minor Change (Parcel Map) $729 N/A Minor Change {Tract Map) $741 N/A Parcel Map - Tentative (Residential) w/Waiver of Final Map~,z3,s $3,735 $389 Parcel Map - Tentative (Residential) w/o Waiver of Final Map~,z3,s $3,346 $675 Pamel Map - Vesting Tentative Map~,z3,s $7,734 $424 Tract Map- Multi-Family-Tentative Statutory Condo Subdivision $7,085 $528 Map Filin~~,z3.s Tract Map- Multi-Family-Revised Statutory Condo Subdivision Map $6,007 $203 Filing~.Z3,s Tract Map- Single Family Residential Tract (Sewers) ~,~,3.s $6,000 $528 Tract Map- Single Family Residential Tract (Sub~Su~face Disposal) $6,000 $424 Tract Map- Single Family Residential Tract (Revised Tentative $3,86I $528 Subdivision Map) Tract Map Besting Tentative Single Family Residential Tract1,2,3,5 Miscellaneous Charges CEOA (Draft EIR) ~ I $7,120 $395 Old Town Architectural ReviewI $20 N/A 1. Add CEOA Fee of $613+$5/gross acre (if required) 2. Add UC Regents Fee of $25 (if required) - not applicable to duplicate applications 3. Add Traffic Study Fee of $780 (if required) 4. Add DRC Landscape Fee of $200 5. Add per lot and per gross acm fee (depends on specific project) Source: Temecula Abridged Application Fee Schedule (June 4,1998) IlL Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-34 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-23 Developmen. t Fees City of Temecula Development Fee Land Use Fee/Unit ' Street System ImprovementsResidential Attached $517 Residential Detached $737 Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems Residential Attached $78 Residential Detached $110 Corporate Facilities Residential Attached $119 Residential Detached $224 Fire Protection Facilities Residential Attached $42 Residential Detached $56 Parks and Recreational Improvements Residential Attached $1,222 Residential Detached $1,629 Ubrafies Residential Attached $158 Residential Detached $210 Total Residential Attached $2,136 Residential Detached $2,966 Source: City of Temesula, 1999 5. Building Codes and Enforcement The City of Temecula has adopted the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and has not made any additional modifications to the UBC. This Code is considered to be the minimum necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The City is responsible for enforcement of the UBC. Only 1% of the housing stock in Temecula is older than 30 years. Overall, the housing stock is in excellent condition. The City's Code Enforcement program is complaint- based, and will not constrain the development or preservation of housing. When housing code violations are cited for units occupied by low and moderate income households, the Code Enforcement staff routinely offers information regarding the City's rehabilitation programs. 6. Local Processing and Permit The evaluation and review process required by City procedures contributes to the cost of housing in that the holding costs incurred by developers during the review period are ultimately manifested in the unit's selling price. The administrative approval process (which includes development projects that are less than 10,000 square feetin building floor area and are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA]) is administered by the Community Development Department and other involved agencies, and does not require review by the City Council nor Planning Commission. The average time for administrative approval is five weeks. Once approval is given, the property owner must submit the approved plans to the Community Development and Public Works Departments to obtain the required permits. Discretionary projects require review and approval by City staff, affected agencies, City Council, and Planning Commission. The average period until a discretionary project III. Constraints.doc · July 2002 Page 4-35 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element reaches the public hearing stage is 11 weeks. An additional five weeks may be required after the public hearing until the final approval with associated conditions is given. This processing time flame is not considered excessive. The City has not adopted any special design or environmental review processes that would add additional time to the processing period. In addition, since much of the remaining vacant residential land is contained in specific plan areas, the environmental review required under CEQA has been completed and the development standards required have been identified, expediting the approval process of projects within the specific plan area. C. State Tax Policies and Regulations 1. Article '34 of the California Constitution Article 34 was enacted in 1950. It requires that low rent housing projects developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner by any State or public agency, including cities, receive voter approval through the referendum process. The residents of Temecula have not passed a referendum to allow the City to develop, construct, or acquire affordable housing. While California Health and Safety Code further clarifies the scope and applicability of Article 34 to exclude housing projects that have deed-restriction on less than 49% of the units or rehabilitation/reconstruction of housing projects that are currently deed- restricted or occupied by lower income persons, Article 34 still constitutes an obstacle for local governments to be directly involved in production of long-term affordable housing. 2. Environmental Protection State regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, etc.). Costs resulting from fees charged by local government and private consultants needed to complete the environmental analysis, and from delays caused by the mandated public review periods, are also added to the cost of housing and passed on to the consumer. However, the presence of these regulations helps preserve the environment and ensure environmental safety to Temecula's residents. In addition, much of the remaining vacant residential land is located within approved specific plan areas for which the required environmental reView has akeady been completed. III. Constraints.doc * July 2002 Page 4-36 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element D. Infrastructure Constraints Another factor adding to the cost of new construction is the cost of providing adequate infrastructure (major and local streets; curbs, gutters, and sidewalks; water and sewer lines; and street lighting) which is required to be built or installed in new development. In most cases, these improvements are dedicated to the City, which is then responsible for their maintenance. The cost of these facilities is borne by developers, and is added to the cost of new housing units, and is eventually passed on to the homebuyer or property owner. In addition, two areas of the City, designated for residential uses, are partially developed and do not have sewer service. Development of this land is limited to Very Low Density Residential uses. The majority of the remainder of future residential development within the City will occur in master planned communities, or on sites adjacent to existing infrastructure. As a result, residential development will not be constrained by the lack of sufficient infrastructure in the remainder of the City. The Rancho California Water District (RCWD) is the retail supplier of potable water to the City. According to the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element of the General Plan, the RCWD has adequate water supply to meet current demand and is investigating a number of sources to meet long-range demands. Upgrading existing wells, adding new wells, implementin~ a water recharge program, and increasing the use of reclaimed water are among the major strategies devised by the RCWD. Wastewater facilities in Temecula are provided by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). The EMWD has adequate capacity to meet current treatment demand. A planned expansion to the Rancho California Treatment Plant by 2003 will further increase the District's wastewater treatment by 10 million gallons per day. By closely working with the RCWD and EMWD in developing supply options; conservation techniques, including the use of reclaimed water; and development monitoring systems, the City can ensure that development does not outpace the long-term availability of water and adequacy of wastewater treatment capacity. E. Environmental Constraints The City is impacted by various environmental hazards that include active fault traces, liquefaction and subsidence, steep slopes, and flooding. These natural hazards form environmental constraints to residential development by threatening the public safety. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of residents in Temecula, the City has adopted regulations that limit development within areas of high risk, and/or require design standards that can withstand natural hazards. Flood Plain (FP) Overlay District: The City has applied a Flood Plain Overlay District to portions of the City that are threatened by flooding hazards. The overlay district includes design requirements that must be met for new construction and substantial improvement of III. Constraints.doc * July 2002 Page 4-37 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element structures within the district. These design standards have been adopted to reduce the flooding hazards threatening people and structures within the overlay district. The Flood Plain Overlay District affects primarily the Hillside and Business Park areas at the western edge of the City. Residential development in the hillside area is akeady constrained to one unit per ten acres to reflect the various environmental hazards and the high costs associated with the mitigation techniques. A handful of vacant residential sites at the southern edge of the City are also affected by flood hazards. Most of these sites are infill vacant lots designated for Very Low Density Residential (0.2 to 0.4 unit per acre). One vacant property zoned for Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 units per acre) is located within the Flood Plain Overlay District. Development on this property must comply with specific structural design standards that raise the cost of construction. However, this property represents only a fraction of the City's vacant Medium Density Residential land. The environmental constraints and the associated cost factor impacting this property will not compromise the City's ability to provide adequate sites to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (KHNA). Alquist Priolo: Temecula is located within a highly active seismic region. Three Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zones are located in Temecula - Wildomar, Willard, and Wolf Valley. These zones have been delineated by the State Geologist and encompass the area on either side of potentially or recently active fault traces where the potential for surface- rupture exists. The Wildomar Fault is the predominant fault in the City. This fault trends in a northwest direction and transects the length of the City. The Willard fault is located southwest of the Wildomar fault zone. South of the Willard fault is the Wolf Valley fault zone. Within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone, habitable structures must maintain a minimum 50-foot setback distance from the fault trace per State law. The presence of three Alquist-Priolo zones in Temecula limit the amount of land and intensity for the development of residential uses. However, only a few vacant residential sites designated for Very Low Density Residential use are impacted by these Alquist-Priolo zones. nl. Constraints.doc * July 2002 Page 4-38 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element IV. HOUSING RESOURCES A. Sites for Housing Development 1. Vacant Sites An important component of the Temecula Housing Element is the identification of sites for future housing development, and evaluation of the adequacy of this site inventory in accommodating the City's share of regional housing growth as determined by the Western Riverside Cotmcil of Governments (WRCOG). As part of this Housing Element update, the City conducted a parcel-by-parcel vacanl residential site analysis, for land outside of approved specific plans, based on data obtained from the City's geographic information system (GIS). Table 4-24 quantifies the number and type of housing units that could be accommodated on the City's vacant residential sites located outside of approved specific plan areas. The C. ity ~'4so conducted a records search and visual survey using aerial photos and site w~si~$ ~,.: estimate the remaining residential development capacity by number and type ofl'~ousnxg within the approved specific plans. Table 4-25 summarizes the housing developm(:~ potential remaining in the specific plan areas. Table 4-24 Residential Development Potential of Vacant Land Outside Specific Plan Areas Vacant Net Dwelling General Plan Designations Density Range Target Density Acreage Units Hillside 043.1 DU/AC 0.1 DU/AC 47 ~ Very Low 0.2-0.4 DU/AC 0.3 DU/AC 1,089 327 Low 0.5-2 DU/AC 1.3 DU/AC 218 283 Low Medium 3-6 DU/AC 4.5 DU/AC 539 2,426 Medium 7-12 DU/AC 12 DU/AC* 171" 2,004'* · High 13-20 DU/AC 20 DU/AC* 48** 1,029'* Total 2,112 6,074 * The City of Temesula allows the development of Medium and High Density residential land at the maximum density. "Nine parcels, a total of approximately 5.33 acres of land (1.67 acres Medium Density and 3.71 acres High Density), acquired or under contract by the Redevelopment Agency is included. Development of these parcels will produce approximately 89 units affordable to Low and Ve~/ Low Income households. Source: City of Temecula, September 1999. IV. Housing Resources.doc ,, July 2002 Page 4-39 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-25 Remainin ~, Approved Residential Development for Existing Specific Plans Low Medium/ Medium High Very High Specific Plan/Land Low Density Medium Beosity Density High Density2 Density2 Total Use DesignationsI (.4-2 DU/AC) (2-5 DU/AC) (5-8 DU/AC) (8-14 DU/AC) (14-20 DU/AC) Units Campos Verdes 16 226 0 0 0 242 Maqjadta Village 19 351 764 175 0 1,309 Paloma Del Sol 0 917 941 0 590 2,448 Rancho Highlands 0 0 0 0 383 383 Harvesten 0 0 0 0 300~ 300 Total 35 1,494 1,705 175 1,273 4,682 ~ Land use categories for specific plans vary from those used in the Development Code. 2 The antidpatad density in adopted specific plans, except for the Westside Specific Plan, is 11.6 units/acre for High Density Residential and 15.8-16.2 units/acre for Very High Density Residential The antidpated density in a spedfic pies area refers only to an overall average density across the specific plan when a range of housing types is provided within a residential category. It does not prevent individual projects from achieving the maximum density permitled. 3 The Harvosten Specific Plan allows 13 to 20 units/acre. * The Old Town Specific Plan is a redevelopment plan for the Old Town Distdct and does not identity a spedfic number of housing units that will be built. Source: City of Temecula, September 1999 Three specific plans have remaining potential for Very High Density residential development - Paloma Del Sol, Rancho Highlands, and Harveston. Paloma Del Sol is under active'constmction. The City Council is considering removing certain conditions for approval to facilitate the development of high density housing in this specific plan area. Harveston is currently being graded for construction. This specific plan has a remaining capacity to develop approximately 300 units at Very High Density. Rancho Highlands is approaching buildout with the exception of the Very High Density area. Infrastructure is already in place within the Rancho Highlands Specific Plan area. The Temecula Development Code allows for an increase in density in the High, Medium, and Low Medium residential designations if the development is senior housing, affordable housing or a congregate care facility. Densities for senior housing may be increased in High Density to 30 units/acre, in Medium Density to 20 units/acre, and in Low Medium Density to 8 units/acre. Density bonuses of at least 25% may also be granted for affordable housing projects, potentially increasing the maximum density, including density bonus, to 30 units/acre in High Density, 18 units/acre in Medium Density, and 8 units/acre in Low Medium Density. The density bonuses offered by the City exceed the State density bonus requirements. Density bonuses may also be granted to specific plan areas, as long as the maximum density bonus does not exceed 50% of the target density in such areas. For example, in the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan area, the target density for Very High density is 16.2 units per acre, with a maximum range of 20 units per acre. An affordable housing project can potentially receive a maximum density bonus of 8.1 units per acre, resulting in a maximum density of 28.1 units per acre. In addition, the City offers flexibility on standards for front and rear yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage, open space requirements, parking requirements, and lot IV. Housing Resources.doc * July 2002 Page 4-40 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element size. The approval authority for the project may approve any combination of concessions to the extent needed to facilitate the development of affordable housing. Overall, the vacant site inventory yields an estimated development capacity of 10,758 units as of September 1999. The abundance of less expensive land in Riverside County has allowed for the development of housing that sells for less than housing in Orange, Los Angeles, and San Diego Counties. 2. Targeted Sites Within the Old Town Specific Plan area, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has identified several sites with the potential for residential redevelopment. Currently, the Redevelopment Agency has secured site control of three parcels and is securing site control of six additional sites through acquisition and tax default, totaling 5.33 acres. While the scope of housing development to occur on all of these sites has not been determined, given the Agency involvement, some form of affordable housing development can be expected. Based on the allowable density, an estimated 89 houses affordable to lower income households can be constructed. The allowable density may be increased if density bonuses are utilized. 3. Mixed Use Development As discussed in the Constraints section of this Housing Element, the Temecula Development Code and General Plan also allow housing in some non-residential zoning districts. The City has recently adopted a Planned Development Overlay district for the Temecula Creek Village to provide for mixed-use commercial/residential development. Temecula Creek Village will develop 32.6 vacant acres within the Professional Office (PO) zone with 20 acres of residential and 12 acres of commercial uses. A key component of this project is the provision of a high density residential project, with integrated commercial development in the Professional Office areas.--The 20 acres of residential use have not been included in the City's residential sites inventory. The City is in the process of updating its General Plan. As part of the update, the City has identified four additional areas with mixed-use opportunities. These areas, located within the City boundary and generally surrounding the 1-15 corridor, total 448 acres and are characterized either by aging commercial centers, traditional commercial development, or vacant/under-utilized land. Specifically, in the area south of Old Town, many lots are currently vacant and present great opportunities for mixed use development. Such reuse has become popular among developers and residents alike in recent years. Currently, a mixed-use project has been proposed in Village of the Old Town, immediately outside one of the identified mixed-use overlay areas. The project proposes a total of 1,631 dwelling units at various densities. The project proposes to create 1,360 high density multi-family at 35 to 40 units per acre. Building heights proposed range from three to four stories. The City is in the process of negotiating with the project developer to include at least 10% affordable units (60% lower income and 40% moderate income) in the proposal. IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-41 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element The types of mixed use envisioned for the mixed-use overlay areas are consistent with the village center concept. In some cases, residential units would be added within existing shopping centers and districts. In other cases, existing de'delopments would be replaced with new mixed-use projects. Both multi-family rental apartments and condominiums/townhomes are envisioned. While mixed use will be permitted by right in the 448 acres identified with mixed use potential, 40% of the properties are assumed to be developed with residential uses. The maximum residential density for mixed-use development is up to 30 units per acre, with the potential to accommodate between 2,100 and 3,500 units depending on the areas to be included. To facilitate mixed-use development,, the City will consider providing flexible development standards such as increased height limit and shared parking opportunities. Upon completion of the General Plan, the City will revise the Zoning Ordinance to establish specific use, height, bulk, parking, landscaping, and other guidelines for these areas that would be appropriate for mixed-use development. 4. Second Units In addition to development on vacant land, the City recognizes the potential for additional new development of affordable housing in the form of second units. The City has incorporated development standards for second units into its Development Code. The Code allows for second units in all residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached dwelling unit if the following conditions are met: · The unit may be rented, but not sold; · An attached second unit's floor area is no more than 400 square feet, and does not exceed 30% of the floor area of the primary residential unit; · A detached second unit has a floor area between 400 and 1,200 square feet; · The application for the second unit is signed by the owner of the parcel and primary residential dwelling unit; · The design of the second unit is compatible with the primary dwelling unit and the surrounding neighborhood; and · There is one covered parking space for each two-bedroom (or smaller) second unit or two covered parking spaces for each three-bedroom (or larger) second unit. IV. Housing Resources.doc * July 2002 Page 4-42 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Residential Development Potential Compared with Temecula's Regional Housing Needs The WRCOG has adopted a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for its member cities. For Temecula, WRCOG has established the City's share of regional housing needs as 7,798 additional units for the period of January 1, 1998 to June 30, 2005, as of October 2000. Table 4-26 shows the breakdown of these 7,798 dwelling units into income categories. Housing Units Constructed: Housing units constructed and issued certificates of occupancy between January 1, 1998 and June 30, 2000 can also be counted toward fulfilling the RHNA for this Housing Element cycle. According to City records, a total of 1,408 new single-family dwelling units and 834 multi-family dwelling units have been approved, issued building permits, or constructed since January 1, 1998, as of July 1999. Of these newly approved or constructed housing units, 38 are part of the Mission Village Apartments affordable housing development, which is located on land acquired by the Redevelopment Agency. Half(19 traits) of these 38 units are affordable to Very Low Income households, and the remainder (19 units) are affordable to Low Income households. Two senior apartment projects, at densities of 30 units per acre, have been approved for a total of 385 units. These senior units are larger than the average senior unit and include additional amenities; the actual rent will be higher than typical senior housing affordable to Very Low Income seniors. These 385 units are anticipated to be affordable to Low Income senior households. Based on the housing cost and affordability analysis (Tables 4-13 and 4-14) contained in Section II of this Housing Element, the rema'ming 411 newly constructed multi-family units are affordable to Moderate Income households. Of the 1,408 single-family housing units, 189 units were developed at densities less than eight units/acre, and as such are affordable only to Upper Income households. Given that three-bedroom homes were the most typical home sales in 1999 and had a median price of $153,000, conservatively one quarter of the remaining 1,219 single- family homes is expected to be affordable to Moderate Income households. This assumption is reasonable given that several new subdivision developments in Temeeula are currently selling at prices starting at high $140,000 to low $170,000. These include The Villas (two- and three-bedroom homes) and the Bungalows (three- to five-bedroom homes). Accord'rog to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, between 1998 and 1999, 67 very low income households, 308 low income households, and 1,063 moderate income households purchased homes in Temecula. Lower and moderate income households constituted 33% of all homebuyers in the City during those two years. Among these 1,438 lower and moderate income households, 636 (44%) received government-backed loans from the FHA that offer reduced interest rates and downpayment requirements. In addition, the City's First:Time Homebuyer Program offers downpayment assistance to households with incomes not exceeding the area median income. The Mortgage Credit Certificate and Employee Relocation programs IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-43 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element also provide downpayment assistance to households with incomes not exceeding 120% of the area median income. Remaining RItNA: The remainder of the newly constructed single-family houses is assumed to be affordable to Upper Income households. Of the remaining 5,556 RHNA units, 2,994 will need to be affordable to Very Low, Low, and Moderate Income households. Table 4-26 presents the City's RHNA as determined by WRCOG, the affordability level of housing units constructed since January 1998, and the remaining RHNA for the City. Income Group Very Low Income Low Income Moderate Income Upper Income Total Table 4-26 Regional Housing Growth Need by Income Housing Units Total RHNA Constructed/Approved (1/1/1998 - 6/30/2005) I/1/1998~/30/1999) 1,403 19 1,014 404 1,716 716 3,665 1,103 7,798 2,242 Group RHNA Remainin§ . 1,384 610 1,000 2,562 5,556 Source: WRCOG, June1999; City of Temecula, July 1999. S!!c !m'cntory Summary of Residential Development Potential: The City's site inventory demonstrates the availability of adequate sites to address the projected housing growth needs. Table 4-27 sunmaarizes the City's residential development potential_. However, the difficulty of providing affordable housing is generally acknowledged due ro thc tight housing market in Southern California. The site inventory indicates a capacity 1,029 units on properties outside of a specific plan area and 1,273 units within specific plan areas with High Density and Very High Density zoning. Additional capacily is also available through target sites and mixed-use development: These zoning designations will facilitate the development of affordable housing, particularly with thc use of public assistance, such as redevelopment housing set-aside funds, low income housing tax credits, and Section 8 rental assistance. The Redevelopment Agency is actively pursuing affordable housing development with redevelopment housing scl-. aside funds as mandated by state law. One recent Redevelopment Agency project, Mission Village, was developed at a density of approximately 20 units to the acre and the units are affordable to Very Low and Low Income households. The City has set target densities for the various residential designations: Hillside Residential (0.1 unit/acre); Very Low Density Residential (0.3 units/acm); Low Density Residential (1.3 units/acre); and LOw Medium Density Residential (4.5 units/acre). Only projects that provide amenities or public benefits will be allowed to exceed thc target level. However, to facilitate affordable housing development, the City has not set target density levels for the Medium and High Density Residential categories. As indicated in Table 4-24, development in the City's High Density zone is permiued to occur at densities of 20 units/acre, which can be increased to 30 units/acre with a density bonus, potentiaUy creating housing affordable to LOw and Very Low h~come IV. Housing Resources.doc * July 2002 Page 4-44 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element households. For Very High Density development within specific plan areas, the anticipated density is 15.8 to 16.2 units per acre (Table 4-25). However, the anticipated density refers only to an overall average density across the specific plan when a range of housing types is provided within a residential category. It docs not prevent individual projects from achieving the maximum density permitted. Density bonuses for senior and affordable housing may also be permitted within approved specific plan areas as long as the maximum density bonus does not exceed 50% of the target density in such areas. Past multi-family developments in the City have realized a range of densities, averaging to about 16 units per acre with some projects exceeding 20 units per acre. According to a major residential developer in the Inland Empire, development of housing affordable to lower income households in most communities in California requires some form of subsidies, such as land writedowns, construction financing, fee waiver/reimbursement, and/or provision of off-site improvements. The issue is whether the subsidies required would be so high that render affordable housing development financial infeasible. Based on past projects, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency estimates an average subsidy of about $18,000 to $24,000 per unit to develop housing affordable for lower income households. This level of gap financing required in Temecula is consistent with, or less than, that needed in other communities based on a review of affordability gap analyses contained in several inclusionary in-lieu fee studies. Therefore, the $18,000 to $24,000 per unit subsidy to develop affordable housing for lower income households is considered financially feasible. As part of this Housing Element update, the City has included several programs/actions to facilitate affordable housing development. Program 4 (Land Assemblage and Affordable Housing Development) acquires land, which is then provided to affordable housing developers for the development of housing affordable to lower income households. Program 9 (Development Fee Reimbursement) offers reimbursement of development fees paid by the developers of affordable and senior housing. Program 11 (Redevelopment Set-Aside) identifies the development of multi-family affordable housing and acquisition of land for the development of low and moderate income housing as Priority I projects for the use of set-aside funds. Affordable Housing Projects in the Pipeline: Currently, the Agency is involved in the development of three affordable housing projects, including: · A single-family development with 20 to 25 units and affordable to households with income up to 120% of the County MFI · A 70-unit condominium project affordable to households with incomes between 80% and 100% of the County MFI · A 96-unit senior housing project affordable to seniors with incomes between 50% and 80% of the County MFI. IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-45 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-27 Summary of Residential Development Potential GP Maximum Maximum Income Opportunity Areas Designation Density . Acres Unit Potential Lower Income Outside Specific Plan Areas High 20 du/ac 48 1,029 Within Specific Plan Areas Very High 20 du/ac --- 1,273 Target Sites High 20 du/ac 5.33 89 Mixed-Use (Village of Old Town) MU 35 - 40 du/ac -- 82 Total 2,473 Moderate Income Outside Specific Plan Areas Medium 12 du/ac 171 2,004 Within Specific Plan Areas High Density 14 du/ac --- 175 Mixed-Use (Village of Old Town) MU 35-40 du/ac --- 54 Total 2,233 Upper Income Outside Specific Plan Areas Hillside 0.1 - 4.5 1,893 3,041 through Low du/ac Medium Within Specific Plan Area Low through 0.4 - 8.0 --- 3,234 Medium High du/ac Mixed-Use (Village of Old Town) MU various --- 1,495 Total 7,770 Note: Development potential in this table does not include the mixed use areas to be considered in the General Plan update. IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-46 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Financial Resources Redevelopment Set-Aside Fund State Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) provides the mechanism whereby cities and counties within the state can, through' adoption of an ordinance, establish a redevelopment agency. The Agency's primary purpose is to provide the legal and financial mechanism necessary to address blighting conditions in the community through the formation of a redevelopment project area(s). Of the various means permitted under CRL for financing redevelopment implementation, the most useful of these provisions is tax increment financing. This technique allows the assessed property valuation within the redevelopment project area to be frozen at its current assessed level when the redevelopment plan is adopted. As the property in the project area is improved or resold, the tax increment revenue generated from valuation increases above the frozen value is redistributed to the redevelopment agency to finance other redevelopment projects. CRL also requires the redevelopment agency to address housing issues for Low and Moderate Income residents in the following ways: expend 20% of the tax increment revenue to increase and improve the supply of Low and Moderate Income housing; · replace Low and Moderate Income housing which is destroyed as a result of a redevelopment project (replacement housing obligation); and ensure that a portion of all housing constructed or substantially rehabilitated in a redevelopment project area be affordable to Low and Moderate Income households (inclusionary obligation). Prior to Temecula's incorporation, the County of Riverside established a Redevelopment Project on July 12, 1988 with the adoption of Redevelopment Plan No. 1-1988. The Project ar¢a extends fi:om Interstatel5/State Route 79 Interchange north to the City limits. The Old Town is included within the Project area. After incorporation, the City of Temecula assumed responsibility for administering the Project area. Pursuant to State law, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has established a Redevelopment Housing Fund by setting aside 20% of the tax increment revenue. The Agency anticipates an annual deposit of about $1.4-1.6 million in tax increment over a five-year period, for a total deposit of approximately $7.7 million. Based on the required 20% set-aside, approximately $1.5 million will be available during the five- year period for housing activities. Since set-aside funds are a function of property tax revenues, the amount of future deposits will depend on factors such as market conditions and the timing of new taxable development. CRL sets forth a variety of options for localities to expend their housing rinds, including: IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-47 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element · Land disposition and write-downs; · Site improvements; · Loans; · Issuance of bonds; · Land and building acquisition by Agency; · Direct housing construction; · Housing rehabilitation; · Rent subsidies; · Predevelopment funds; and · Administrative costs for non-profit housing corporations. The specific uses of the set-aside funds are described in the Housing Plan section of this Housing Element. Section 8 The Section 8 rental assistance program extends rental subsidies to Very Low Income · families and elderly who spend more than 30% of their income on rent. The subsidy represents the difference between the excess of 30% of the monthly income and the actual rent. Most Section 8 assistance is issued to the recipients as vouchers, which permit tenants to locate their own housing and rent units beyond the federally determined fair market rent in an area, provided the tenants pay the extra rent increment. The Housing Authoi/ty of Riverside administers the Section 8 Certificate/Voucher Program for Temecula. As of April 1999, 22 households were leasing in Temecula with the assistance of Section 8 programs. Of these 22, four households were elderly, and seven were disabled. An additional 138 households living in Temecula were on the waiting list to receive Section 8 rental assistance, 35 of which were elderly and/or disabled. 3. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program The City receives its CDBG funding through the County of Riverside. Based on its population, the City is eligible to receive approximately $300,000 annually from the County. The City has, in the past, used approximately 85% of the CDBG funds for capital projects, such as the Senior Citizen Center Expansion project, and the remaining 15% of the funding is awarded to various public service organizations. No CDBG funds have been used for housing at this time. IV. Housing Resources.doc * July 2002 Page 4-48 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element C. Housing Developers The following are several housing providers interested in developing and/or preserving affordable housing in the City: Coachella Valley Housing Coalition 45-701 Monroe Street, Suite G Indio, CA 92201 (760) 347-3157 · Habitat for Humanity 41964 Main Street Temecuta, CA 92591 (909) 693-0460 · Jamboree Housing Corporation 2081 Business Center Drive, Suite 216 Irvine, CA 92612 (949) 263-8676 · Affirmed Housing 200 East Washington Avenue, Suite 208 Escondido, CA 92025 (619) 738-8401 Vista Equities 29800 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 750 Irvine, CA 92612 (949) 474-3145 The Olson Company 30200 Old Ranch Pkwy, #250 Seal Beach, CA 90740 (562) 596-4770 San Diego Community Housing Corporation 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 571-0444 SoCa Housing 8265 Aspen Street, Suite 100 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 48 I-0172 IV. Housing Resources.doc * July 2002 Page 4-49 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element D. Infrastructure and Facilities The majority of the land available for residential development is located adjacent to existing infrastructure facilities, or with'm a specific plan area where infi'astmcture will be provided as part of the development process. As a result, infrastructure facilities will be able to serve most of the future residential development. E. Energy Conservation .As residential energy costs rise, increasing utility cost reduce the affordability of housing. The City has many opportunities to directly affect energy use within its jurisdiction. Title 24 of the California Administrative Code sets forth mandatory energy standards for new development, and requires adoption of an "energy budget". The home building industry must comply with these standards while localities are responsible for enforcing the energy conservation regulations. IV. Housing Resources.doc · July 2002 Page 4-50 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element V. Accomplishments under Adopted Housing Element In order to develop an effective housing plan for the 2000-2005 period, the City must assess the effectiveness of its existing housing programs and determine the continued appropriateness of such programs in addressing housing adequacy, affordability, and availability issues. This section evaluates the accomplishments of each program against the objectives established in the 1993 Housing Element, expla'ms any discrepancy in program achievements, and recommends programmatic changes to the 2000-2005 Element. A. Provision of Adequate Housing Sites 1. Land Use Element/Zoning Ordinance Objective: Provide a range of residential development opporttmities through appropriate land use and zoning designations to fulfill the City's share of regional housing needs. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RI-INA) for the City was determined at 870 units (129 Very Low; 137 Lower; 171 Moderate; and 433 Above Moderate Income households) for the period of 1989 to 1997. Accomplishments: The City provided adequate sites to accommodate its share of regional growth through specific plan and zoning provisions. A total of 5,998 housing units have been constructed between January 1990 and December 1997, representing 690% of the City's allocated RHNA. Based on the affordability analysis contained in Section II and Section iV, Part 4, one- quarter of the new 5,962 single-family houses constructed are affordable to Moderate Income households, while one-half of the 23 apartments and seven mobile homes constructed during this period are affordable to Moderate Income, with the other half affordable to lower income households. Based on tiffs analysis, the City provided 1,509 units affordable to moderate income households (880% of the RHNA for moderate income households) and 18 units affordable to lower income units (or 13% of the RHNA for lower income households). 2. Sites for Homeless and Emergency and Transitional Shelters Objective: Provide adequate sites for emergency and transitional shelters by adopting a Zoning Ordinance that permits transitional and emergency housing in Medium and High Residential Deus!ty zones, and conditionally permits shelters in the remaining Residential zones and Commercial and Industrial zones. Accomplishments: In 1998, Temecula updated the Development Code in .which emergency shelters and transitional housing are permitted in the V. Accomplishments.doc * July 2002 Page 4-51 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element · Medium Density and High Density Residential districts. The City required two units in the Rancho West project to be reserved for transitional housing. These uses are also permitted in other residential districts with a conditional use permit. Emergency shelters are also permitted with a conditional use permit in the Neighborhood Commercial, Commtmity Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, and Light Industrial zoning districts. 3. Landbanking Objective: Acquire sites (or funds) for affordable/senior housing through the development of a Landbanking Program. Accomplishments: In 1996, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency purchased 3.42 acres of land on Pujol Street to be leased to Affirmed Housing for the Mission Village affordable housing project. A 0.19-acre parcel was also purchased by the Agency and will be granted to Habitat for Humanity for the construction of two single-family homes affordable to Very Low Income families. In addition, the Agency acquired two Medium Density Residential parcels totaling 0.67 acres. The Redevelopment Agency is working to acquire four additional parcels and two tax defaulted parcels for a total of 4.47 acres. B. Assist in Development of Affordable Housing I. Density Bonus Program Objective: Encourage development of housing for low-income households by incorporating a Density Bonus Program into the Zoning Ordinance. Include provisions to ensure the continued affordability of units. Accomplishments: The City updated the Development Code in 1998. As described in Section III and IV, the new Development Code contains density bonus provisions for affordable and senior housing developments in the High, Medium, and Low Medittm residential designations. Density bonuses may also be granted to specific plan areas, as long as the maximum density, including the bonus, does not exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area. Two senior housing developments have been approved at 30 units per acre, providing a total of 385 units. 2. Mortgage Revenue Bond Financing Objective: Increase the supply of rental and ownership units affordable to Low and Moderate Income households by working with Riverside County in securing tax exempt Mortgage Revenue Bond financing. Assistance will be provided to 20 first time homebuyers annually through the single-family V. Accomplishments.doc * July 2002 Page 4-52 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element program and the use of multi-family Mortgage Revenue Bond financing will be promoted. Accomplishments: Use of Mortgage Revenue Bond for residential construction in Riverside County has been limited in recent years. Instead, the City has relied heavily on redevelopment set-aside funds for affordable housing development. 3. Section 202 Elderly or Handicapped Housing Objective: Provide housing and related facilities for the elderly and handicapped by supporting all viable non-profit entities, seeking Section 202 funding'.' Accomplishments: Due to federal budgetary constraints, the application and allocation of Section 202 funding has become an increasingly competitive process. No non-profit organization pursued Section 202 allotment for the development of senior housing in Temecula. 4. Second Units Objective: Provide increased affordable housing oppommities to low-income households by adopting a Second Unit Ordinance as part of the Development Code. The Second Unit Ordinance shall permit second units on residential lots zoned for single- and multi-family residential use. Incentives shall be included for development of second units intended for occupancy by persons over the age of 62. Accomplishments: The City has incorporated development standards for second units into its Development Code. The Code allows for second units in all residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached dwelling unit if the conditions described in Section m are met. Since adoption of the second unit ordinance, 10 second units have been achieved. C. Government Constraints 1. Priority Processing for Affordable Housing Objective: Facilitate production of affordable housing through the development of a schedule for priority processing of affordable housing projects. A contact person shall be designated to coordinate processing of all of the necessary permits. V. Accomplishments.doc o July 2002 Page 4-53 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element ~lccomplishments: The City has not adopted a schedule for priority processing of affordable housing projects. The number of housing projects processed during the last ten years did not warrant any special processing procedure for affordable housing projects. 2. Modify Development Fees Objective: Provide incentives to developers of affordable/senior housing by reviewing existing development fee schedule and consider fee reductions, or the addition of fee waiver provisions for the production of low-income and senior citizen housing. .4ccomplishments: To provide assistance to developers of affordable/senior housing, the Redevelopment Agency may reimburse developers for the development fees paid. On a project-by-project basis, a developer of affordable/senior housing may enter into a development agreement with the Redevelopment Agency that stipulates that the developer will pay the City's development fees and the Agency will reimburse the developer. D. Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing 1. Preservation Program Objective: Conserve affordable housing in the City by encouraging Section 8 project property owners to renew their contracts. Identify non-profit organizations capable of purchasing these units. Consider the use of City- based incentives for assisted units that are not subject to HUD-sponsored incentives. Explore the possibility of providing tenant-based subsidies to assisted units that convert to market rate. Accomplishments: The Redevelopment Agency has attempted to work with the owner of the Temecula Villas (Section 8 contract expired in June 1999) to maintain the affordability of the units in exchange for financial incentives from the City. The owner is not interested in maintaining the units as affordable housing and plans on offering the units at market rents. The 2000- 2005 Housing Element includes programs to preserve and expand affordable housing opportunities in the City. 2. Redevelopment Set-aside Fund Objective: Provide a source of funding for housing programs by developing an expenditure plan for redevelopment set-aside monies. Programs that focus on the rehabilitation of units occupied by Low and Moderate Income households, preservation of assisted units, and construction of affordable housing will receive priority in the expenditure plan. V. Accomplishments.doc · July 2002 Page 4-54 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Accomplishments: Pursuant to State law, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has established a Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside Fund using 20% of the tax increment revenue. The Agency received a total deposit of approximately $15.8 million in set-aside funds for the period of Fiscal Year 1991/2 through Fiscal Year 1999/2000. These funds were utilized to implement the First Time Homebuyer and Residential Improvement Programs. 3. Code Enforcement Objective: Preserve the housing stock by developing a Housing Inspection Program for all multi-family complexes. Accomplishments: Temecula has not adopted a Housing Inspection Program targeting multi-family complexes. Implementation of such a program is infeasible at this time due to the high cost and staffing requirements. Furthermore, housing in the City is generally in good condition; a citywide inspection program is not warranted. However, the City continues to enforce the Development Code and the Uniform Building Code. 4. Tool Lending Objective: Maintain the integrity of the housing stock by establishing a Tool Lending Program and advertise the availability of home repair information and tool lending. Accomplishments: The City has not adopted a Tool Lending Program as the administration of such a program can be cumbersome and time-consuming. However, to assist households with housing rehabilitation needs, the City offers a range of loan and grant rehabilitation programs, as described below. 5. Low-Interest Residential Rehabilitation Loans Objective: Preserve existing housing stock by establishing a low-interest residential rehabilitation program. Provide program referrals through code enforcement activities. Accomplishments: Since 1996, the City has been offering the following low- interest or grant rehabilitation programs for residential units: Senior Home Repair Grant Program: This program was available to seniors 55 or older with a household income that does not exceed 120% or the area median income adjusted for household size. Eligible households receive grants of up to $3,000 for be used for needed repairs to their homes. As of June 1999, eight senior households have been awarded grants through this rehabilitation program. V. Accomplishments.doc * July 2002 Page 4-55 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Home Improvement Program: This program is available to owners of single-family detached homes, condominium units, townhouses, and manufactured homes on a permanent foundation that are located within Old Town, La Serena, Winchester Creek, or any condominium units. The household income of the homeowner must not exceed 80% of the area median income adjusted for family size. Grants are available for up to $2,500 to correct confirmed health and safety and/or building code violations. Loans up to $5,000 per household are available for exterior painting, roofing, fence repair/replacement, and other exterior improvements. As of June 1999, 57 projects funded by these two programs have been completed. Multi-Family Rehabilitation Loan Program: Thc City offers this loan program to owners of rental property within the City to assist with rehabilitation and correction of deferred maintenance. To qualify for the loan program, a number of units will be required to be set-aside for a period of 30-years for rental to Very Low and Low Income tenants. In addition, the property owner must enter into a Property Maintenance Agreement to ensure that thc property is properly maintained. As of June 1999, the City has provided funding under this program to three multi-family complexes, and 218 units have been set- aside for rental to Very Low and Low Income tenants. 6. Section 8 Housing Certificates/Vouchers Objective: Provide housing subsidies for Low Income households by supporting efforts to increase the amount of funding allocated to HUD programs. Provide referrals to apartment complex owners for information on the various Section 8 programs. Accomplishments: The Housing Authority of Riverside administers the Section 8 Certificate/Voucher Program for Temecula. As of April 1999, 22 households are leasing in Temecula with the assistance of Section 8 programs. Of these 22, four households are elderly, and seven are disabled. An additional 138 households living in Temecula are on the waiting list to receive Section 8 rental assistance, 35 of which are elderly and/or disabled. 7. Home Sharing Objective: Assist seniors and other with limited income in obtaining housing by supporting SHARE and home sharing activities of the Senior Citizens Service Center. The objective is 40 matches a year: 15 Very Low Income households; 15 Lower Income households; and 10 Moderate Income households. V. Accomplishments.doc · July 2002 Page 4-56 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Accomplishments: The City has not adopted its own Home sharing program, but continues to support the homesharing activities of the Senior Citizens Service Center. 8. Mobile Home Park Assistance Objective: Preserve low-cost housing options for City residents by providing technical assistance to mobile home park residents in pursuing Mobilehome Park Assistance Program (MPAP) funds. Accomplishments: Heritage Mobile Home Park is the only mobile home park in the City. Residents of this mobile home park did not pursue MPAP funds; no technical assistance was needed. 9. Mortgage Credit Certificate Objective: Assist at least 50 first-time homebuyers by providing tax credits, 10 of which are lower income households. Accomplishments: The City participates in the Mortgage Credit Certificates program administered by the County. As of July 1999, 72 households have been assisted under this program. In addition, the City has implemented a First Time Buyer Program to assist lower income households with the purchase of the.ir first home. This loan program provides assistance for a portion of the down payment and/or closing costs of up to 20% of the purchase price of a home. To qualify, the home buyer must not have owned a home during the previous three years, the buyer's household income must not exceed the area median income adjusted for household size, and the house must be located within the City. As of July 1999, 52 households have received funding through this program. The City has also adopted an Employee Relocation Program to assist employees of participating employers with the down payment for a house located within Temecula. To qualify for this program, the household income of the homebuyer cannot exceed 120% of the area median income adjusted for household size. Down payment assistance is provided in the form of a loan of up to 10% of the purchase price, up to $15,000, with payments deferred for five years. As this is a recent program, adopted in January 1999, no households have been assisted yet. 10. Low Income Home Energy Act Program Objective: Support the County of Riverside Department of Community Action (DCA) and Temecula Senior Citizen Services Center in providing utilities assistance and weatherization to 30 Very Low Income households and V. Accomplishments.doc · July 2002 Page 4-57 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element allocate CDBG funding to the DCA for cont'mued administration of the Low Income Home Energy Act Program (LI/-IEAP). Accomplishments: The City has not participated in the LIHEAP and did not allocate CDBG funding to the DCA for continued administration of the LIHEAP. E. Equal Housing Opportunity 1. Equal Housing Opportunity Objective: Support the activities of the Fair Housing Program to be in compliance with the National Fair Housing Law. Accomplishments: The City participates in the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) program as part of the Riverside Urban County program. CDBG regulations mandate the provision of programs and services to further fair housing choice. Fair housing services are provided by Fair ' Housing Program of Riverside County. 2. Housing Referral Directory Objective: Dispense information on local, state and federal housing programs by developing a directory of services and resources for Low and Moderate Income households and special needs groups. Provide information and referrals to persons on an as needed basis. Accomplishments: The City created a Housing Referral Directory. Generally, information provided to persons requesting information through the Directory includes: the name, location, unit sizes, and phone number of the projects providing the required housing. F. Housing Element Monitoring and Reporting 1. Annual Reporting Objective: Ensure that the Housing Element retains its viability and usefulness by developing a monitoring program and report annually to the City Council on implementation progress. Forward the monitoring report to HCD. Accomplishments: While a formal, annual report addressing the implementation of the Housing Element has not been developed, the Planning Department periodically updates the City Council on the progress of V. Accomplishments.doc · July 2002 Page 4-58 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element implementation of the General Plan, 'including the Housing Element. However, new state law now mandates the annual reporting to the State Department of Housing and Community Developmem (}lCD) and Office of Planning and Research (OPR). The City will comply with the annual reporting requirements. 2. Housing Needs Data Base Objective: Accurately assess housing needs in the community by requiring social service agencies/non-profit organizations receiving CDBG funding from the City to record information on the residences of clients served using a reporting form to be developed by the City. Accomplishments: Service agencies receiving CDBG funding from the City are required to report on their program accomplishments at least annually. Records from service agencies help the City assess the extent of housing and supportive service needs, particularly regarding the special needs population. The City also participated in the preparation of the 2000-2005 Consolidated Plan for the Riverside Urban County consortium. The Consolidated Plan includes an updated housing and community development needs assessment. V. Accomplishments.doc · July 2002 Page 4-59 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element VI. Housing Plan The five-year Plan is the centerpiece of the 2000-2005 Housing Element for Temecula. The Housing Plan sets forth the City's goals, policies, and program~ to address the identified housing needs. Housing programs included in this Plan define the ~pecific actions the City will take to achieve specific goals and policies. The City's overall strategy for addressing its housing needs has been defined according to the following areas: · Providing adequate housing sites; · Assisting in development of affordable housing; · Removing govemmental constraints; · Conserving and improving existing affordable housing; and · Promoting equal housing oppommity. A. Goals and Policies Provide Adequate Housing Sites Goal 1 Provide a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula. Discussion The City provides for a mix of new housing opportunities by designating a range of residential densities and promoting creative design and development of vacant land. By providing for the construction of a range of housing, the needs of all sectors of the community can be met. Policy 1.1 Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of housing types in terms of cost, density and type, and provides the opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by balancing jobs and housing types. Policy 1.3 Require a mixture of diverse housing types and densities in new developments around the village centers to enhance their people-orientation and diversity. Policy 1.4 Support the use of innovative site planning and architectural design in residential development. Policy 1.5 Encourage the use of clustered development to preserve and enhance important environmental resources and open space. Policy 1.6 Encourage the development of compatible mixed-use projects that promote and enhance the village concept, facilitate the efficient use of public facilities, and support alternative transit options. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-60 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Assist in Development of Affordable Housing Goal 2 Provide affordable housing for all economic segments of Temecula. Discussion Temecula works to provide a variety of affordable housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. By coordinating with other government agencies and non-profit organizations to access funding sources for affordable housing and partner in the creative provision of affordable housing, the City helps provide safe and affordable housing for all residents in the community. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, and provide opporttmities to meet the City's fair share of Low and Moderate Income housing. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private and non-profit efforts in the development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs groups. Policy 2.3 Encourage the use of non-traditional housing models, including single-room occupancy structures (SRO) and manufactured housing, to meet the needs of special groups for affordable housing, temporary shelter and/or transitional housing. Policy 2.4 Pursue all available forms of private, local, state and federal assistance to support development and implementation of the City's housing programs. Remove Governmental Constraints Goal 3 Remove governmental constraints in the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, where appropriate and legally possible. Discussion The City's goal is to remove or mitigate constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing to ensure that housing affordable to all members of the community is provided. Governmental requirements for the development and rehabilitation of housing often add to the cost of the provision of affordable housing and may result in fewer opportunities for housing affordable to lower income households. Reducing development fees and ensuring that City regulations provide for the s~fety and welfare of the population without imposing unreasonable costs will help in the provision of affordable housing. Policy 3.1 Provide reasonable processing procedures and fees for new construction or rehabilitation of housing. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-61 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Policy 3.2 Policy 3.3 Consider mitigating development fees for projects providing affgrdable and senior housing. Periodically review City development standards to ensure consistency with the General Plan and to facilitate high-quality affordable housing. Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing Goal 4 Conserve the existing affordable housing stock. Discussion Along with providing for new affordable housing opportunities, the City also has a goal to preserve existing affordable housing opportunities for residents. By providing incentives and programs to maintain existing units, both the affordability and the structural integrity of the units, the City ensures that affordable housing opportunities are preserved. Policy 4.1 Monitor the number of affordable units eligible for conversion to market-rote units and develop programs to minimize the loss of these units. Policy 4.2 Develop rehabilitation programs that are directed at preserving the integrity of the existing housing stock. Policy 4.3 Support the efforts of private and public entities in maintaining the affordability of units through implementation of energy conservation and weathefization programs. Promote Equal Housing Opportunities Goal 5 Provide equal housing opportunity for ali residents in Temecula. Discussion Policy 5.1 In order to make provisions for the housing needs of all segments of the community, the City must ensure that equal and fair housing opportunities are available to all residents. Encourage and support the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting the discrimination in lending practices and in the sale or rental of housing. Policy 5.2 Support efforts to ensure unrestricted access to housing for all segments of the community. Policy 5..3 Encourage housing design standards that promote the accessibility of housing for the elderly and disabled. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-62 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Policy 5.4 Encourage and consider supporting local private non-profit groups that address the homing needs of the homeless and other disadvantaged groups. B. Housing Programs The goals and policies contained in the Housing Element address Temecula's identified housing needs and are implemented through a series of housing programs. Housing programs include both programs currently in operation in the City and new programs that have been introduced to address the unmet housing needs. This section provides a description of each housing program, and future program goals. The Housing Program Summary (Table 4-27) located at the end of this section summarizes the future five-year goals of each housing program, along with identifying the program funding sources, responsible agency, and time frame for implementation. Provide Adequate Housing Sites A key element in satisfying the housing needs of all segments of the community is the provision of adequate sites for housing of all types, sizes and prices. This is an important function in both zoning and General Plan designations. 1. Land Use Element and Development Code The Land Use Element of the Temecula General Plan designates land within the City for a range of residential densities ranging from 0.1 to 20 units per acre. The following aspects of the Development Code facilitate the provision of adequate sites for affordable development: No density targets have been set for the Medium and High Density Residential categories so these districts can be developed at their maximum allowable density; · The Village Center Overlay and Planned Development Overlay allow for the modifications and flexibility in development standards; · · Mobile home parks are allowed in all of the residential zoning districts with a conditional use permit; Senior and affordable housing are allowed in a variety of residential and non-residential zoning districts and are eligible for density bonuses and development concessions; Congregate care facilities are allowed in a variety of residential and non- residential zoning districts and the facilities are not limited specifically to the density requirements of the specific zoning district; VI. Plan.doc · luly 2002 Page 4-63 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element · Second units are allowed in all residential zoning districts where a detached single-family unit exists; and Emergency shelters and transitional housing are allowed in the Medium and High Density Residential zoning districts, and conditionally allowed in the remainder of the residential districts. Emergency shelters are also conditionally allowed in several of the non-residential zoning districts. As stated in Section IV, the City has a RHNA of 7,798 new units for the period of 1998 through 2005. A total 'of 2,242 units have already been approved or constructed between 1998 and July 1999. The residential development capacity under the Temecula Land Use Plan provides sufficient land to meet the City's remaining need for new construction of the remaining 2,242 units for the 2000-2005 period. Five-Year Objectives: · The City will continue to implement and, as appropriate and necessary, augment the Land Use Element and Development Code. The City will provide for an adequate number of residential sites to accommodate the remaining regional share of 999 Very Low Income units, 789 Low Income units, 1,206 Moderate Income units, and 2,562 Above Moderate Income units. · The City will maintain an inventory Of sites suitable for residential development and provide that information to interested developers. The City will encourage the reservation of land that is currently designated for multiple-family development for the development of multiple-family housing by providing the multi-family sites inventory to multi-family housing developers to solicit development interest. The City will update the multi-family sites inventory at least once a year. As part of the General Plan update, the City has identified additional areas with mixed-use potential. The City will work to create a mixed-use overlay in the Land Use Policy May to be applied to approximately 448 acres of land along the 1-15 corridor. Residential mixed-use is permitted at_a density of 30 units per acre. To facilitate mixed-use development, the City will establish appropriate flexible development standards such as increased building height and shared parking opportunities in the Zoning Ordinance. Target date for adopting the Land Use Policy Map is anticipated in 2003. Within six months of adoption of the Land Use Policy Map including the mixed use overlay, the City will establish development standard appropriate for implementing mixed-use standards. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-64 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element The City will encourage higher density residential development within the mixed~use overlay areas by providing appropriate, flexible development standards through the Zoning Ordinance. Upon completion of the General Plan (2003), the City will revise the Zoning Ordinance to establish specific use, height, bulk, parking, landscaping, and other guidelines appropriate for mixed-use development. 2. Sites for Emergency and Transitional Housing The homeless population of Temecula consists of only a few transient homeless persons, though there is a larger rural homeless population located outside of the City limits in the unincorporated, agricultural areas. While there are a number of facilities and service agencies serving the homeless needs of Temecula, the only transitional housing with'm Temecula is the two units within the Rancho West project that have been reserved as transitional housing. The Temecula Development Code provides for the provision of emergency shelters and transitional housing within th~ City. The City facilitates the development of emergency shelters and transitional housing by permitting such facilities in the Medium Density and High Density Residential districts by fight. These uses are also permitted in other residential districts with a conditional use permit. Emergency shelters are also permitted with a conditional use permit in the Neighbbrhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, and Light Industrial zoning districts. Five-Year Objectives: · The City will continue to permit emergency shelters and transitional housing as identified in the Development Code. · The City will continue to require affordable housing projects receiving assistance from the City to rese~e units for transitional housing. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-65 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Assist in Development of Affordable Housing New construction is a major source of housing for prospective homeowners and renters. However, the cost of new construction is substantially greater than other program options. Incentive programs, such as density bonus, offer a cost-effective means of providing affordable housing. Other programs, such as the First Time Home Buyers Program, increase the affordability of new and existing housing. 3. Density Bonus Ordinance The City has adopted its own Density Bonus Ordinance that complies with the State requirements. The allowable density bonus for qualifying senior and affordable housing projects increases the total allowable density for High Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Low Medium Density Residential zones. For the approved specific plans, the maximum density, including thc density bonus, is not allowed to exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area. Affordable housing projects, including affordable senior projects may also be granted at least one development concession by the City as an incentive for the provision of affordable housing. The potential concessions include: · An increase in the maximum lot coverage; · A modification to the setback or required yard provisions; · An increase in the maximum allowable building height; · A reduction in the required on-site parking; A reduction in the amount of on-site landscaping, except that no reduction in on-site recreational amenities may be approved unless the affordable housing is in close proximity with easy access to a public park with recreational amenities; · A reduction in the minimum lot area; or · Approval of an affordable housing project in the Professional Office zone with the approval of a conditional use permit. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to implement the Density Bonus Ordinance. · The City will inform residential development applicants of opportunities for ~ density increases. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-66 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element 4. Land Assemblage and Affordable Housing Development The City can utilize CDBG and redevelopment monies to purchase land for the development of lower and Moderate Income housing. Through its Redevelopment Agency, the City has acquired, through the purchase or tax default, three parcels of residential land, not including the land acquired for the Mission Village project, to be used for the development of affordable housing. The Redevelopment Agency typically provides the land it acquires to affordable housing developers for the development of housing units affordable to Low and Very Low income households. l;he City currently has an additional four parcels, a total of 1.37 acres, under contract for purchase. Two tax-defaulted properties totaling 3.1 acres will also be available for affordable housing development Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to acquire land for use in the provision of affordable housing. · The City will facilitate the development of the nine parcels to produce 89 housing units affordable to lower income households. 5. Second Unit Ordinance The City has adopted a Second Unit Ordinance to facilitate the construction of affordable second units within developed areas of the City. The Second Unit Ordinance allows for second units in all residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached dwelling unit if certain conditions are met, as described in Section IV. Five-Year Objectives: · The City will continue to allow and promote the construction of affordable second units to result in the construction of five new second units by 2005. 6. Mortgage Credit Certificate Program The Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) program is administered countywide by the County of Riverside Economic and Development Agency (EDA), and is a way for the City to further leverage homeownership assistance. MCCs are certificates issued to income-qualified first-time homebuyers authorizing the household to take a credit against federal income taxes of up to 20% of the annual mortgage interest paid. This tax credit allows the buyer to qualify more easily for home loans as it increases the effective .income of the buyer. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-67 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Five-Year Objectives: · The City will continue to promote the regional Mortgage Credit Certificate program to assist an average of 10 households annually. 7. First Time Home Buyer Program The City's First Time Home Buyer Program (FTHB) provides loan assistance to first fume home buyers whose income does not exceed the area median income. The home being purchased must be located within City limits, be attached to a permanent foundation, have a minimum of two-bedrooms, and be occupied by the seller, or vacant. The maximum assistance available under this program is 20% of the purchase price plus closing costs, up to a total payout of $24,000. The home buyer also must maintain to house in good condition during the term of the assistance. Five-Year Objectives: · The City will continue to implement the First Time Home Buyer Program to assist 15 households annually. 8. Employee Relocation Program The Employee Relocation Program is designed to provide assistance to families moving to the City due to relocation of their employer. This program provides a second trust deed of up to 10% of the purchase price of the house, up to $15,000, to be used for the downpayment. During the flint five years of the 30-year loan, no payment on the loan is required. For the remaining 25 years, the loan is fully amortized for 300 months, at Prime Rate of simple interest. To be eligible, the applicant must be employed with a City approved company participating in this program and the household income must not exceed 120% of the area median income. The home must be located within the City limits, be attached to a permanent foundation, and be occupied by the seller, or vacant. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to implement its Employee Relocation Program to assist five households annually. VI. Plan.doc., July 2002 Page 4-68 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Remove Governmental Constraints under state law, the Temecula Housing Element must address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. The following programs are designed to lessen governmental constraints to housing development. 9. Development Fees Reimbursement Developers of affordable/senior housing may qualify to receive a reimbursement by the Redevelopment Agency for development fees paid by the developer. Typically, developers of affordable/senior housing pay the City the required development fees. If the development qualifies for reimbursement of development fees through the Redevelopment Agency, the developer enters into a contract with the Agency, which then reimburses the developer for the fees paid. Five- Year Objectives: The Redevelopment Agency will continue to enter into development agreements with qualifying senior/affordable housing projects on a case-by- case basis'to provide development fee reimbursement. Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing A community's existing affordable housing stock is a valuable resource that should be conserved, and if necessary, improved to meet habitability requirements. 10. Preserve At-Risk Housing Units Between July 1, 2000 and June 30, 2010, three assisted housing projects in Temecula are at-risk of converting to market rate housing. The 344-unit Woodcreek project was financed through the use of a multi-family revenue bond and the Low Income rent restrictions on the 71 affordable units are due to expire in March 2003. The 55-unit Rancho California project maintains a 20-year Section 8 contract that subsidizes rents for the 55 units. The Section 8 contract will expire in March 2004. Detailed analysis on the potential conversion of these projects is included in the Housing Needs section of the Housing Element. Finally, the 40-unit Oaktree project was financed through FmHA-New Construction Section 515 loans. As discussed in the Housing Needs section of this Element, affordability control on this project may potentially expire in 2004 with prepayment of the loan. However, due to the nature of the program it is extremely unlikely that the Oaktree project will be permitted to prepay and convert to market-rate rents. The City of Temecula will implement the following programs on'an on-going basis to conserve its affordable housing stock. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-69 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Monitor Units At-Risk: Monitor the status of Woodcreek, Rancho California, and Oaktree since the affordable restrictions are due to expire during the planning period. Work with Potential Purchasers: Establish contact with public and non- profit agencies interested in purchasing and/or managing units at-risk to inform them of the status of the Rancho California and Oaktree projects. Tenant Education: The California Legislature passed AB 1701 in 1998, requiring property owners give a nine-month notice of their intent to opt our of low income restrictions. The City will work with tenants of at-risk units and provide them with information regarding tenant rights and conversion procedures. The City will also provide tenants with information regarding Section 8 rent subsidies through the Riverside County Housing Authority, and other affordable housing opportunities. Assist Tenants of Existing Rent Restricted Units to Obtain Priority Status on Section 8 Waiting List: Work with the Riverside Housing Authority to place tenants displaced fi.om at-risk units on a priority list for Section 8 rental assistance. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will monitor the status of Woodcreek, Rancho California, and ' Oaktree. · The City will identify non-profit organizations as potential purchasers/managers of at-risk housing units. The City will explore funding sources available to preserve the affordability of Woodcreek, Rancho Califomia, and Oaktree or to provide replacement traits. The City will assist qualified tenants to apply for priority status on the Section 8 voucher/certificate program immediately should the owners of the at-risk project choose not to enter into additional restrictions. 11. Redevelopment Set-Aside Prior to Temecula's incorporation, the County of Riverside established a Redevelopment Project on July 12, 1988 with the adoption of Redevelopment Plan No. 1-1988. The Project area extends from Interstatel5/State Route 79 interchange north to the City limits. The Old Town is included within the Project area. After incorporation, the City assumed responsibility for administering the Project area. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-70 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Pursuant to State law, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency established a Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside Fund using 20% of the tax increment revenue. The Agency anticipates an annual deposit of about $1.4-1.6 million in tax increment over a five-year period, for a total deposit of approximately $7.7 million. Based on the required 20% set-aside, approximately $1.5 million will be set aside during the five-year period for use for housing. Since set-aside funds are a function of property tax revenues, the amount of future deposits will depend on factors such as market conditions and the timing of new taxable development. The housing programs identified for expenditure of Housing Set-Aside Funds include funding for the development and preservation of multi-family affordable housing, acquisition of land for the development of Low and Moderate Income housing, and assistance in the rehabilitation of existing housing units. All of these programs are considered Priority I projects for the use of set aside funds. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to utilize its Housing Set-Aside Fund to implement the identified housing programs, pursuant to State law. 12. Code Enforcement While the majority of the existing housing stock in Temecula is less than 30 years old, there is a need to enforce housing maintenance for some of the older housing units. The City implements a code enforcement program to correct housing and building code violations. The City has adopted and enforces the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Five- Year Objectives: The City will continue to enforce the UBC and offer information regarding the City's housing rehabilitation programs to low and moderate-income households cited for code violations. 13. Residential Improvement Program The City provides the following grant and low-imerest loan programs under its Residential Improvement Program to assist in rehabilitating existing residential units: Senior Home Repair Grant - This program is available to seniors 55 or older with household incomes not exceeding 120% of the area median income. The one time grant of up to $3,000 can be used for repairing owner-occupied homes on a permanent foundation located in Old Town, La Sercna, Winchester Creek, or condominiums throughout the City. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-71 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing, Element Single-Family Emergency Grant - This program provides up to $2,500 grants to correct confirmed health and safety and/or building code violations in owner-occupied homes on a permanent foundation located in Old Town, La Serena, Winchester Creek, or any condominium throughout the City. The household's income must not exceed 80% of the area median income. Single-Family Paint & Fence Repair Loan - This loan program is available to households whose income does not exceed 80% of the area median income. Eligible housing units include owner-occupied homes on a permanent foundation located in Old Town, La Serena, Winchester Creek, or any condominium throughout the City. The maximum loan is $5,000 to be used for exterior improvements to the house. The interest rate for the loan is prime interest rate, but the payments are deferred and forgiven after five years if the owner still owns and occupies the unit. If the house is sold within the five-year period, the loan will be due and payable. Multi-Family Rehabilitation Loan - This program is available to owners of rental property within the City of Temecula. The maximum loan amount is $3,000 per unit and it to be used to for rehabilitation and correction of deferred maintenance of the units. The term of the loan is 20 years, with repayment deferred for the first five years, after which the loan is fully amortized for the remaining 15 years at prime rate, simple interest. The loan becomes due if the property is sold or refinanced prior to the 20-year period. In exchange for the loan, an affordability covenant on the project will be recorded for a 30-year duration. These covenant requires that a portion of the units be reserved for rent to Very Low and Low Income tenants. The owner is also required to maintain the property and improvements in good condition. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will fund 30 rehabilitation grants and loans annually through its Residential Improvement Program. 14. Section 8 Rental Assistance Program The Section 8 rental assistance program extends rental subsidies to Very Low Income families and elderly that spend more than 30% of their income on rent. The Section 8 certificate subsidy represents the difference between the excess of 30% of the monthly income and the actual rent (up to the federally determined Fair Market Rent (FMR). Most Section 8 assistance is issues to the recipients as vouchers, which permit tenants to locate their own housing and rent units beyond the FMR, provided the tenants pay the extra rent increment. The City contracts with the Riverside County Housing Authority to administer the Section 8 Certificate/Voucher Program. V1..Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-72 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to contract with the County of Riverside to administer the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program and provide rental assistance to at least 22 Very Low Income Temecula households. · The City will support the County of Riverside's applications for additional Section 8 allocation. The City will promote the Section 8 program to second unit owners. 15. Mobilehome Assistance Program (MPAP) To preserve affordable housing opportunities found within mobilehome parks, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provides financial and technical assistance to Low Income mobilehome park residents through the Mobilehome Assistance Program 0ViPAP). The MPAP provides loans of up to 50% of the purchase price plus the conversion costs of the mobilehome park so that Low Income residents, or organizations formed by Low Income residents can own and/or operate the mobilehome park. Heritage Mobilehome Park is the only mobile home park in Temecula. The owners have indicated that they intend to operate the park indefinitely. In the event that the owners decide to close the park, the City will ~work with the tenants to acquire fimding.through the MPAP program. Five- Year Objectives: The City will provide technical assistance to Heritage Mobilehome Park residents in pursuing MPAP funds in the event that the owners propose to clos_e the mobilehome park. Promote Equal Housing Opportunities In order to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the housing program must include actions that promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, family size, martial status, ancestry, national origin, color, age or physical disability. 16. Equal Housing Opportunity The Riverside County Consortium, of which the City is a member, has adopted an Analysis of Impediments (Al) to Fair Housing Choice and has conducted fair housing planning to implement the recommendations identified in the Al. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-73 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element The Fair Housing Program of Riverside County maintains a comprehensive approach to affirmatively further and ensure equal access to housing for all persons. The three major components of this approach are: education, training/technical/ consultant assistance, and fair housing rights assistance. The Fair Housing Program of Riverside County is also an advocate for affordable housing, legislative reform, local compliance, and research projects relative to fair housing and human rights issues. The agency works with the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and HUD in the referral, enforcement, and resolution of housing discrimination cases. Five- Year Objectives: · Temecula will continue to participate in the Riverside County Consortium in implementing the fair housing plan. · The City will place fair housing brochures at City Counters, public libraries, Temecula Community Center and Temecula Community Recreation Center. The City will continue to post information regarding fair housing services on the City web site. Future fair housing workshops can also be advertised on the City web site. The City will continue to .provide referral services to the Fair Housing Program of Riverside County for residents inquiring about fair housing issues. 17. Housing Referral Directory The City provides housing referral services through its Housing Referral Directory. People contacting the City are provided information on housing projects offering housing specific to the person's needs. Five- Year Objectives: · The City will continue to offer housing referral services through its Housing Referral Directory. 18. Housing for Persons with Disabilities The City will analyze and determine whether there are constraints on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities, consistent with SB 520 enacted January 1, 2002. The analysis will include land use controls, permit procedures, and building codes. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-74 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Five- Year Objectives: If any constraints are foUnd'in these areas, the City will develop a plan by January 1, 2003 to remove the constraints or provide reasonable accommodation for hosing intended for persons with disabilities_~ Housing Element Monitoring and Reporting To ensure that the housing programs identified in this Housing Element are implemented and achieve their goals, an accurate monitoring and reporting system is required. 19. Annual Reporting/Housing Needs Database Service agencies receiving CDBG funding fxom the City are required to report on their program accomplishments at least annually. Records from service agencies help the City assess the extent of housing and supportive service needs, particularly regarding the special needs populations. The City is also required to submit annual reports to the state addressing its success in implementing the General Plan and Housing Element. These reports provide decision makers with useful information regarding how successful the'housing programs are with meeting the needs of the community. Five- Year Objectives: The City will continue to require that service agencies report on their accomplishments annually. This information will be used by the City to assess the commUnity's housing needs and how well these needs are being met by the existing programs. · The City will continue to submit annual reports to the state assessing the implementation of the General Plan and Housing Element. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-75 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-28 ~ Housing Program Summary HousingProgram I Program Objectives I 5-YearOb}ecfiveeadTimeFrame [ Funding Source [ ResponslbleA~ency Provision of Adequate Housing Sites 1. Land Use Element and Provide a range of · Continue to implement and, as Departmental Planning Development Code meidential development appropriate and necessary, augment Budget Department opportunities through the Land Use Element and appropriate land use Development Code. designations. · Provide f~ an adequate number of res~ential sites to accommodate the remaining regional fair share for all income levels. · Maintain an inventory of sites available for residential development and provide this information to interested developers. · Encourage the reservation of land that is currently designated for multiple-family development for the development of multiple-family housing by providing the multi-family sites inventory to multi-family housing developem 1o solicit development interest. Update the multi-family sites inventory at least once a year. · Work to create a mixed-use overlay in the Land Use Policy May to be applied to approximately 448 aeres of land along the 1-15 corridor. Residential mixed-use is permitled at a density of 30 units per acre. Establish appropriate flexible development standards such as increased building height and shared parking opportunities in the Zoning Ordinance. Target date for adopting the Land Use Policy Map is anticipated in 2003. Within six months of adoption of the Land Use Policy Map including the mixed use overlay, establish development standard appropriate for implementing mixed-use standards. · Encourage higher density residenliai development within the mixed-use overlay areas by providing appropriate, flexible development standards through the Zoning Ordinance. Upon completion of the General Plan (2003), revise the Zoning Ordinance to establish specific use, height, bulk, parking, landscaping, and other guidelines appropriate for mixed, use development. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-76 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-28 Housing Program Summary Responsible Housln9 Program Program Oblectives 5-Year Objective and Time Frame Funding Source Agency 2. Sites for Emergency Provide forsites forthe o Continuetoparmit emergency Departmental Planning and Traditional development and sheltem and transitional housing as Budget Department Housing opportunities for the identitied in the Development Code. provision of housing for · Ccetinue to require affordable the homeless, housing projects receiving assistance from the City to reserve units for transitional housing. Affordable Housing Deveh ~raent 3. Density Bo~us Encourage the prevision · Continue to implement the City's Departmental Planning Ordinance of senior/affordable Density Bonus Ordinance. Budget Department housing development by · Inform residential development continuing lo implement applicants of opportunities for density the Density Bonus increases. Ordinance. 4. Land Assemblage and Assist with the · Continue to acquire land for use in theRedevelopment Redevelopment Affordable Housing development of provision of affordable housing. Set-aside Funds Agency Development affordable housing by ,, Facilitate the development of nine and CDBG funds acquiring land for the parcels to produce 89 housing units development of Low and affordable to lower income Moderate Income households. housing. 5. Second Unit Ordinance Facilitate the · Continue to allow and promote the Departmental Planning development of construction of affordable second Budget Department affordable housing units to result in the construction of through the construction five new second units by 2005.' of second units, 6. Mortgage Credit Assist tirst time home · Continue to promote the regional Departmental . Planning Certiticate Program buyer by promoting the Mortgage Credit Certificate program Budget Department regional Mortgage Credit to assist an, average of 10 households Certificate Program. annually. 7, First Time Home Buyer Assist lower income first · Continue to implement the First Time Redevelopment Redevelopment Program time home buyers with Home Buyer Program to assist 15 Set-aside Agency the purchase of a home households annually. through the use of loan assistance. 8. Employee Relocation Provide loan assistance · Continue to implement the Employee Redevelopment Redevelopment Program lo qualified, lower Relocation Program to assist five Set-aside Agency income relocated households annually, employees for the 3urchase of a home. Rerooval of Governmental Constraints 9. Development Fees Reduce the cost of · Continue to enter into development Redevelopment Redevelopment Reimbursement affordable/senior agreements with qualifying Set-aside Agency housing development senior/affordable housing projects on through the a case-by-case basis to provide reimbursement of development fee reimbursement. developmenl fees. VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-77 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-28 Housing Program Summary ,oas,n=P m I P,og moba w I I I Responsible ~en~ Cons~e and I~rove ~n9 A~able Ho6sln9 10. Pr~e At-~sk En~e ~e · M~itor the sl~us of W~k, R~velo~ent R~evelopment Housing Units mn~nu~ affo~ability ~ ~n~o Card. ia, ~d OaEme. Set.side Funds, Agent, Pinning at~sk housing units to · I~ti~ non~mf~ ~ani~fions as CDBG Funds, and D~a~ment and p~e exis~ng ~tenfiat pu~as~managem of at- S~on 8 ~vemide Housing ~o~able housing ~sk housing units. Vou~em/ Au~od~. op~uniaes. · ~plom funding sou~ available to ~ifi~t~. pmse~e at~sk units or to provide ~lamment units, · Assist tenan~ to apply for pHo~ ~us on the S~ion 8 voucher/~fi~te pr~mm imm~ia~y should ~e ownem of ~e at~sk proj~ ~o~e not to enter into additional r~dions. 11. R~evelopment Set- Develop and pr~e~e · Continue to utilize the Ci~'s Housing Redevelopment R~evelopment Aside ~dable housing Set-aside Fund to implement the Set.side Funds Agency ~mugh ~e ex~nditum identifi~ housing pr~mms, pumuant of R~evelopment Set- to State I~. aside funds. t2. C~e Enfor~ent Maintain the existing · ~ntinue to enfor~ the UBC and ~pa~mental Planning housing st~ through offer info~ation regarding housing Budgets Department · e enfor~ment of ~e mha~litation pr~rams to I~ ~d Un~o~ Building C~e m~erate in.me households (UBC). for ~e violaaons. 13. R~dentiaJ Assist ~th the · Fund 30 rehabilita~on grants and loan Redevelopment R~evetopment Improvement rehabilitation ~ e~sting annually thr~gh the Ciys Set-aside and Agency Pr~mm single and mul~4ami~y Residential Improvement Pr~mm. CDBG Funds I~er in.me housing units through the use of I~n and grant pr~mms. 14. S~on 8 Rental Sup~the~un~of · Continueto ~ntra~withtheCounly HUDSe~ion 8 Planning Assistanm Program Rivemide's S~ion 8 d Rivemide to administer the Se~ion all~tions Depa~ment Rental Assistanm 8 Rental A~istan~ Pr~mm and Pr~ram. provide rental assistan~ to at le~t 22 Ve~ Low In.me Tem~la households. · Sup~ ~e ~unty of Riverside's application for additional S~ion 8 all~ation. · Promote the Se~ion 8 pr~ram to s~nd unit ~nem. 15. Mobilehome Avoid the loss d · Provide t~ni~l ~sistan~ to ~pa~mental Planning Assistan~ Pr~mm affo~able housing He,rage Mo~lehome Pa~ r~idents Budget ~pa~ment (MPAP) within mobilehome pa~s in pumuing MPAP ~nds in the event due to ~e closure of ~at lhe owners pm~s~ to close the existing pa~s by mobilehome paA. ~ providing t~ni~l ' assistan~ to I~er in.me mobilehome pa~ residents puming MPAP ~nds. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-78 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Table 4-28 Housing Program Summary Promote EquaI Houslng 0 ~por~unl~y 16. Equal Housing Promote equal ,, Continue to participate in the Departmental Planning Opportunity opportunities for housing Rivemide County Consortium in Budget Department by participating in the implementing the fair housing plan. Riverside County · Place fair housing brochures at City Consortium. counters, public libraries, Tern·cola Community Center, and Temecula community Recreation Center, · Post information regarding fair housing services on City web site, · Provide referral sen'ices to the Fair Housing Program. 17. Housing Referral Assist community ,, Continue to offer housing referral Departmental Planning Directory members in locating services through the City's Housing Budget and Department and housing which meets the Referral Directory. Redevelopment Redevelopment individual's needs. Set-aside Funds Agency 18. Housing for Persons Analyze and determine · Develop a plan by January 1, 2003 to Departmental Planning and with Disabilities whether there are remove the constraints or provide Budget Building constraints on the reasonable accommodation for Departments development, hosing intended for persons with maintenance, and disabilities. improvement of housing for persons with I disabilities, consistent I with SB 520 enacted ! January 1. 2002. Housing Element Monitorin9 and Reporting 19. Annual Reporting/ Monitor the housing · Continue to require that service Departmental Planning Housing Needs needs of the sommunity agencies report on their Budget and CDBG Department Database and the ability of currentaccomplishments annually. This Funds housing programs to information will be used by the City to meat these needs assess the community's housing through ongoing needs and how well these needs are repoding, being met by the existing programs. · Continue to submit annual repods to the state assessing the implementation of the General Plan and Housing Element. VI. Plan.doc * July 2002 Page 4-79 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element C. Summary of Quantified Objectives The following Table 4-29 summarizes the City's quantified five-year objectives with regard to housing production, conservation, rehabilitation, and provision of homeowners assistance. Table 4-29 Summary of Quantified Objectives Very Low Moderate Upper Type of Activities Income Low Income Income Income Total New Construction 1,403 1,014 1,716 3,665 7,798 Conservation At-Risk Housing 166 166 Section 8 22 22 Rehabilitation 24 36 90 150 Homeownership First-Time Homebuyer 5 40 80 125 Employee Relocation 5 20 25 Total 1,620 1,095 1,906 . 3,665 8,286 VI. Plan.doc · July 2002 Page 4-80 CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element APPENDIXA: HOUSING ELEMENT GLOSSARy Acre: a unit of land measure equal to 43,560 square feet. Acreage5 Net: The portion of a site exclusive of existing or planned public or private mad rights-of- Affordability Covenant: A property rifle agreement which phces resale or rental restrictions on a housing unit. Affordable Housing: Under State and federal statutes, housing which costs no more than 30 percent of gross household income. Housing costs include rent or rvortgage payments, utilities, taxes, insurance, homeowner assochtion fees, and other rehted costs. Annexation: The incorporation of land area into the jurisdiction of an existing city with a resulting change in the boundaries of that city. Assisted Housing: Housing that has been subsidized by federal, state, or local homing programs. At-Risk Housing: Muki-family rental housing that is at risk of losing its status as housing affordable for low and moderate income tenants due to the expiration of federal, state or local agreements. Califomia Department of Housing and Community Development - HCD: The State Department responsible for administering State-sponsored housing programs and for reviewing housing elements to determine compliance with State housing hw. Census: The official United States decennial enumeration of the population conducted by the federal govemment. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): A grant program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This grant allots money to cities and counties for housing rehabilitation and community development activities, including public facilities and economic development. Condominium: A building or group of buildings in which units are owned individually, but the structure, common areas and facilities are owned byall owners on a proportional, undivided basis. Density: The number of dwelling units per unit of land. Density usually is expressed "per acre," e.g., a development with 100 units located on 20 acres has density of 5.0 units per acre. Density Bonus: The allowance of additional residential units beyond the maximum for which the parcel is otherwise permitted usually in exchange for the provision or preservation of affordable housing units at the same site or at another location. Development Impact Fees: A fee or charge imposed on developers to pay for a jurisdiction's costs of providing services to new development. Appendix A · July 2002 Page 4-Ai CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Development Right: The right granted to a land owner or other authorized party to improve a property. Such right is usually expressed in terms of a use and intensity allowed under existing zoning regulation. For example, a development right may specify the maximum number of residential dwelling units permitted per acre of land. Dwelling, Multi-famil?. A building containing two or more dwelling units for the use of individual households; an apartment or condominium building is an example of this dwelling unit type. Dwelling, Single-family Attached: A one-family dwelling attached to one or more other one-family dwellings by a common vertical wall. Row houses and town homes are examples of this dwelling unit type. Dwelling, Single-family Detached: A dwelling, not attached to anyother dwelling, which is designed for and occupied bynot more than one family and surrounded byopen space or yards. Dwelling Unit: One or mom rooms, designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities provided within the unit for the exclusive use of.a household. Elderly Household: As defined by HUD, eldedy households are one- or two- member (family or non- family) households in which the head or spouse is age 62 or older. Element: A division or chapter of the General Plan. Emergency Shelter. An emergency shelter is a facilitythat provides shelter to homeless families and/or homeless individuals on a limited short-term basis. Fair Market Rent (FMR): Fair Market Rents (FMKs) are freely set rental rates defined by HUD as the median gross rents charged for available standard units in a county or Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). Fair Market Rents are used for the Section 8 Rental Program and many other HUD programs and are published annuallT by HUD. FL, st-Time Home Buyer. Defined by HUD as an in~vidual or family who has not owned a home during the three-year petiod preceding the HUD-assisted purchase of a home. Jurisdictions may adopt local definitions for first-time home buyer programs which differ from non-federally funded programs. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The gross floor area of all buildings on'a lot divided bythe lot area; usually expressed as a numerical value (e.g., a building having 10,000 square feet of gross floor area located on a lot of 5,000 square feet in area has a floor area ratio of 2.0). General Plan: The General Plan is a legal document, adopted by the legishtive body of a City or County, setting forth policies regarding long-term development. C~lifomla law requires the preparation of seven elements or chapters in the General Phn: Land Use, Housing, C/rculation, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. Additional elements are permitted, such as Economic Developmem, Urban Design and similar local concerns. Group Quarters: A facility which houses groups of umelated persons not living in households (U.S. Census del'tuition). Examples of group quarters include institutions, dormitories, shelters, mih'rary Appendix A * July 2002 Page 4-Ail CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element quarters, assisted living facilities and other quarters, including single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, where 10 or more unrelated individuals are housed. Growth Management: Techniques used by a government to regulate the rote, mount, location and type of development. HCD: The State Departmem of Housing and Community'Development. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA): The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires larger lending institutiom making home mortgage loans to publicly disclose the location and disposition of home purchase, refinance and improvement loans. Iustimtious subject to HMDA must also disclose the gender, race, and income of loan applicants. Homeless: Unsheltered homeless are families and in~viduals whose primary nighttime residence is a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (e.g., the street, sidewalks, cars, vacant and abandoned buildings). Sheltered homeless are families and persons whose primary nighttime residence is a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter (e.g., emergency, transitional, battered women, and homeless youth shelters; and commercial hotels or motels used to house the homeless). Household: The US Census Bureau defines a household as all persons living in a housing unit whether or not they are related. A single person living in an apartment as well as a family living in a home is considered a household. Household does not include individuals living in dormitories, pdsons, convalescent homes, or other group quarters. Household Income: The total income of all the persons living in a household. A household is usually described as very low income, low income, moderate income, and upper income based upon household size, and income, relative to the regional median income. Housing Problems: Defined by HUD as a household which: (1) occupies a unit with physical defects (lacks complete kitchen or bathroom); (2) meets the definition of overcrowded; or (3) spends more. than 30% of income on housing cost. Homing Subsidy: Homing subsidies refer to government assistance aimed at reducing housing sales or rent prices to more affordable levels. Two general types of housing subsidy exist. Where a housing subsidy is linked to a particular home or apartment, homing subsidy is "project" or "unit" based. In Section 8 rental assistance programs the subsidy is linked to the family and assistance provided to any number of families accepted by willing private landlords. This type of subsidy is said to be "tenant based." Homing Unit: A room or group of rooms used by one or more individuals living separately from others in the structure, with direct access to the outside or to a public hall and containing separate toilet and kitchen facilities. HUD: See U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Income Categor~ Four categories are used to classify a household according to income based on the median income for the.county. Under state housing statutes, these categories are defined as follows: Appendix A * July 2002 Page 4-Aiii CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element VeryI ow (0-50% of Countyme,ti~n); Low (50-80% of County median); Moderate (80-120% of County median); and Upper (over 120% of County median). Large Household: A bomehold with 5 or more members. Manufactured Homing: Homing that is comtmcted of manufactured components, assembled pardy at the site rather than totally at the site. Also referred to as modular homing. Market Rate Housing: Homing which is available on the open market without any subsidy. The price for homing is determined by the market forces of supply and demand and varies by location. Median Income: The annual income for each household size within a region which is defined annually by HUD: Half of the households in the region have incomes above the median and half have incomes below the median. Mobile Home: A structure, transportable in one or more sectiom, which is at least 8 feet in width and 32 feet in length, is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling unit when connected to the required utilities, either with or without a permanent foundation. Mortgage Revenue Bond (MRB): A state, county or city program providing financing for the delrelopment of housing through the sale of tax-exempt bonds. Overcrowding: As defined bythe U.S.C. emus, a household with greater than 1.01 persons per mom, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways, and porches. Severe overcrowding is defined as households with greater than 1.51 persons per moro_ Overpayment: The extent to which gross housing costs, including utility costs, exceed 30 percent of gross household income, based on data published by the U.S.. Census Bureau. Severe overpayment, or cost burden, exists if gross housing costs exceed 50 percent of gross income. parCel: The basic unit of land entitlement. A designated area of land established by pht, subdivision, or otherwise legally defined and permitted to be used, or built upon. Physical Defects: A housing unit hcking complete kitchen or bathroom facilities (U.S. Census definition). Jmisdictiom may expand the Census definition in defining units with physical defects. Povet~. The income cutoffs used bythe Census Bureau to determine the povertystams of families and unrelated individuals included a set of 48 thresholds. The poverty thresholds are revised annually to allow for changes in the cost of living as reflected in the Consumer Price Index. The average threshold for a family of four persons in 1989 was $12,674. Poverty thresholds were applied on a national basis and were not adjusted for regional, state, or local vatiations in the cost of living. Project-Based Rental Assistance: Rental assistance provided for a project, not for a specific tenant. A tenant receiving project-based rental assistance gives up the right to that assistance upon moving from the project. Appendix A * July 2002 Page 4-Aiv CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Public Homing: A project-based low-rent housing program operated by independent local public housing authorities. A low-income family applies to the local public housing authority in the area in which theywant to live. Redevelopment Agency: Callfomia Community Redevelopment Law provides authority to establish a Redevelopment Agency with the scope and financing mechanisms necessary to remedy blight and provide stimulus to eliminate deteriorated conditiom. The hw provides for the planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction, or rehabilitation, or any combination of these, and the provision of public and private improvements as may be appropriate or necessary in the interest of the general welfare by the Agency: Redevelopment hw requires an Agency to set aside 20 percent of all tax increment dollars generated from each redevelopment project area for the purpose of increasing and improving the community's supply of housing for low and moderate income households. Regional Homing Needs Assessment (RHNA): The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is based on State of Callfomia projections of population growth and Musing unit demand and assigns a share of the region's future housing need to each jurisdiction within the SCAG (Southem California Association of Governments) region. These homing need numbers serve as the basis for the update of the Housing Element in each California city and county. Rehabilitation: The upgrading of a building previously in a dilapidated or substandard condition for human habitation or use. Section 8 Rental Voucher/Certificate Program: A tenant-based rental assistance program that subsidizes a family's rent in a privately owned house or apartment. The program is administered bylocal public housing authorities. Assistance payments are based on30 percent of household annual income. Households with incomes of 50 percent or below the area median income are eligible to participate in the program. Service Needs: The particular services required byspecial populations, typically including needs such as transportation, personal care, housekeeping, counseling, meals, case management, personal emergency respome, and other services preventing premature institutionalization and assisting individuals to continue living independently. Small Household: Pursuant to HUD definition, a small household consists of two to four non-elderly persons. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG): The Southern California Association of Governments is a regional planning agency which encompasses six counties: Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Venmra. SCAG is responsible for preparation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Special Needs Groups: Those segments of the population which have a more difficult time finding decent affordable housing due to special circumstances. Under Callfomia Housing Element statutes, these special needs groups consist of the elderly, handicapped, hrge families, female-headed households, farmworkers and the homeless. A jurisdiction may also choose to consider additional special needs groups in the Housing Element, such as students, military households, other groups present in their community. Appendix A · July 2002 Page 4-Av CITY OF TEMECULA Housing Element Subdivision: The division of a lot, tract or parcel of land in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (C'allfomia Government Code Section 66410 et seq.). Substandard Housing: Housing which does not meet the minimum standards contained in the State Housing Code (ke. does not provide shelter, endangers the health, safety or well-being of occupants). Jurisdictions may adopt more stringent local definitions of substandard housing. Substandard, Suitable for Rehabilitation: Substandard units which are structurally sound and for which the cost of rehabilitation is considered economicallywarranted. Substandard, Needs Replacement: Substandard units which are structurally mound and for which the cost of rehabilitation is considered infeasible, such as instances where the majority of a unit has been damaged by rue. Supportive Housing: Housing with a supporting environment, such as group homes or Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing and other housing that includes a supportive service component such as those defined below. Supportive Services: Services provided to residents of supportive housing for the purpose of facilitating the independence of residents. Some examples are case management, medical or psychological counseling and supervision, child care, transportation, and job training. Tenant-Based Rental Assistance: A form of rental assistance in which the assisted tenant may move from a dwelling unit with a tight to continued assistance. The assistance is provided for the tenant, not for the project. Transitional Housing: Transitional housing is temporary (often six months to two years) housing for a homeless individual or family who is transifioning to permanent housing. Transitional housing often includes a supportive services component (e.g. job skills training, rehabilitation counseling, etc.) to allow individuals to gain necessarylife skills in support of independent living. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): The cab'met level department of the federal govemn~nt responsible for housing, housing assistance, and urban developrmnt at the national level. Housing programs administered through HUD include Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME and Section 8, among others. Zoning: A land use regulatory measure enacted by local government. Zoning district regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards vary from district to district, but must be uniform within the same district. Each city and dounty adopts a zoning ordinance specifying these regulations. Appendix A · July 200~ Page 4-Avi ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ERRATA CHANGES TO DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 8 HOUSING ELEMENT ERRATA SHEET Page 4-1, 5th Paragraph: Replace the entire fifth paragraph with the following: "Employment opportunities exist within the City of Temecula, allowing residents to work and live within the City. In 1990, the estimated jobs:housing ratio was about 1.15 jobs per household. Regional estimates predict that ratio will decrease to 1.06 jobs per household by 2005, as the construction of new housing outpaces employment growth." Page 4-5, Table 4.1. Add an additional footnote to the bottom of this table that states: "The 2005 population projections are based upon the City boundary at the time of the 1990 Census. The City is required to use the 1990 Census baseline. These regionally mandated baseline projections do not include the Vail Ranch annexation." R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 9 ATFACHMENT NO. 4 PC RESOLUTION 02-038 R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 10 PC RESOLUTION NO. 02-038 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE 2000-2005 HOUSING ELEMENT (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0186) WHEREAS, State Law requires that local jurisdictions periodically update their housing elements; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula adopted its first Housing Element on November 9, 1993; and WHEREAS, the State of California has completed the Regional Housing Need Assessment process for this housing element cycle; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment on September 23, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, an did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVE THE 2000-2005 HOUSING ELEMENT AND ACCOMPANYING NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORMS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION IN EXHIBITS A AND B, RESPECTIVELY. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by Commission this 18th day of September 2002. ATTEST: the City of Temecula Planning Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairpersdi3Y Debb~e Ubnoske, Secretary {SEAL} R:\GENPLAN~Iousing Element 2000\PC Reso.doc STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-038 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of September, 2002, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff None None None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\PC Reso.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 5 INITIAL STUDY R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 13 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Proiect Title 2000 - 2005 City of Temecula Housing Element Update Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number David Hogan, Principal P~anner (909) 694-6400 Project Location City of Temecula, in Southwest Riverside County. Project Sponsor's Name and Address City of Temecula General Plan Designation Not applicable Zoning Not applicable Description of Project The California State Legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as the State's major housing goal. Recognizing the important role of local planning programs in the pursuit of this goal, the Legislature has mandated that all cities and counties prepare a housing element as part of their comprehensive General Plan. Section 65302(c) of the Government Code sets forth the specific components to be contained in a community's Housing Element. State law requires Housing Elements to be updated at least every five years to reflect a community's changing housing needs. This update covers the 2000-2005 period, pursuant to the update cycle for jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region. The Temecula Housing Element was first adopted in 1993 and is currently being comprehensively updated to address existing and projected housing needs. The Temecula Housing Element is comprised of the following major components: · Ah analysis of the demographic, household, and housing characteristics and trends; · A review of potential market, government, and environmental constraints to meeting the City's identified housing needs; · An evaluation of the land, financial and administrative resources available to address housing needs; and, · Identifies the regionally determined Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the City. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Temecula is located in southwest Riverside County, surrounded by the communities of Murrieta, Fallbrook, Winchester, Rainbow, as well as unincorporated areas of Riverside County. Surrounding land uses include open space, agricultural, residential, commemial, and industrial uses. Other public agencies whose approval California Department of Housing and Community Development ~s required R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\initial Study 2002-draft. 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 Minera~ Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance v' 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 ~otentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are ~mposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Printed name Date For R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Potenfialry Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant 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 adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. The proposed updated Housing Element will not physically divide an established community or conflict with other local or regional plans. Both the current and proposed housing elements are consistent with the other Elements of the General Plan and applicable local plans. Implementing this program will enhance the City's ability to provide a balance of residential, commercial and industrial opportunities as described in the vision statement for the General Plan. The proposed Housing Element is an integral part of providing a balance of residential opportunities. As a result, no impacts to environment are anticipated. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: PotenfialJy Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportin~ 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 adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. As a result, the programs and actions contained in the proposed updated Housing Element will not induce population growth or new residents to the community beyond those already described in the adopted General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts to environment are anticipated. R:\GENPLAN\Houslng Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft,doc 3 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Potentially PotectJally Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact rncorporated 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 fa ure, including liquefaction? ,/ iv) Landslides? ¢' b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? v' 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 v' 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 wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of ," wastewater? Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. All future development within the City will be subject to site-specific geotechnical studies, as appropriate, and will comply with applicable building code regulations. Furthermore, the project sets forth programs and policies to facilitate housing rehabilitation and therefore has the potential to improve the seismic safety of older housing units in the City. As a result, no impacts are expected to occur. R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Sludy 2002-draft.doc 4 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Mitigation 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 whicl' would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in ," substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? 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 ~n 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 )olluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ,/' g. Place housing within a l O0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? ," ~. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ~njury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? ! j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Coqnments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. All future development within the City will address all applicable drainage, water supply, and water quality issues when specific development projects are proposed. Future development proposals will also be consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, no impacts are expected to occur. R:\(~ENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft,doc 5 5. AIR QUALITY. WOuld the project: Potentially Potentially Significant U nle,~s Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Su@po~in.~ Information Sources Impact Incorporated 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 v' 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? ,/ Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. All future development within the City will address air quality and air pollution issues when specific projects are proposed. Future development proposals will also be consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, no impacts are expected to occur. 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in 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? d. 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 features ,,, (e.g., sharp curves, dangerous intersections)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ,/ · f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, ,,' bicycle racks? R:\GENPLAFAHousing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft,doc 6 Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. Future development proposals will also be consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, the approval of the Housing Element will not impact transportation of traffic issues and no impacts are expected to occur. 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 W dlife 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 wild fe nursery 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 adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the . requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. The impacts to biologic issues will be addressed when specific.development occurs. Biology studies are required for all development projects with the potential to impact biologic resources. If resources are identified, mitigation measures are identified and implemented to address the site specific effects. In addition, most of the City is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. Habitat Conservation fees will be required to mitigate the effect of cumulative impacts to the species from R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 7 urbanization occurring throughout western Riverside County. As a result, the approval of the Housing Element will not impact biologic resources and no impacts are expected to occur. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potenfial~y Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Suppoding 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? Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. Future development proposals will also be consistent with the adopted General Plan. Therefore, the approval of the Housing Element will not impact mineral resources and no impacts are expected to occur. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentiatiy Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Suppoding 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. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials nto 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? R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potenfialiy Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No issues and Support n,~ nformafion Sources Impact incorporated Impact impact 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, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where ," residences are ntermixed with wildlandsa Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. Approval of the Housing Element will not create hazards or result in hazardous material issues. These issues will be addressed when site specific development proposals are considered. Future development proposals will be consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, no impacts are expected to occur. 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potenfially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO issues and Supporting Information Sources tmpact 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? R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 9 Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already' envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. Future development proposals will comply with, and will be consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, no impacts are expected to occur. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have a substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potenfially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No issues and Supporting Infonnafion Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Fire protection? ,/ b. Police protection? 7 c Schools? ,/ d. Parks? ,/ e Other public facilities? ,/ Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. As a result, the adoption of the housing opportunity program in the Housing Element will have no impacts to public services not otherwise addressed elsewhere in the General Plan. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially PotentialJy Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mifigafion Significant No Issues and Suppodin~l Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 7 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 c(~nstruction 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? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the projigct that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected ,/ demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? R:\GENPLAN~Housbg Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft,doc lO 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to, accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? ," g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ,/ Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. As a result, the adoption of the housing opportunity program in the Housing Element will have no impacts to public utilities or service systems not addressed elsewhere in the General Plan. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources rmpact 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 adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. These issues will be addressed when site specific development proposals are considered. As a result, no aesthetic impacts are expected to occur. R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 11 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potengally Potentially Significant Unress 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 un que geologic feature? ,/ d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ,/ Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. The impacts to cultural resources will be addressed when specific development occurs. When development occurs in an area with a high potential for cultural resources, special studies are required. If resources are identified, mitigation measures are identified and implemented to address any site specific effects. As a result, no impacts to public services are expected to occur. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Poten fial[y Pctentially 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 i the construction or expansion of recreational facilities · which might have an adverse physical effect on the ~' environment? Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. As a result, no impacts to recreational facilities are expected to occur. R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc 12 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Signiticant No Issues and Supportin~l Informa~fon Sources rmpact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environmen't, 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 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 d rectly or indirectly? Comments: The proposed adoption of the 2000-2005 Housing Element describes how the City will meet the requirements of State law (Section 65302 of the Government Code) to provide adequate opportunities for housing. The proposed Housing Element will update a previously certified Housing Element. Housing elements do not approve specific development projects that are not already envisioned or contained in the adopted City General Plan. As a result, the approval of an updated housing element will not impact the environment in excess of the impacts associated with implementing the General Plan. No impacts to public utilities or service systems are expected to occur. t7. 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 impacts associated with the implementation of the City General Plan were previously identified and discussed in the Draff and Final Environmental Impact Reports in 1993. The Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan also identified specific general plan level mitigation measures and adopted a statement of overriding consideration for agricultural resources, air quality, biologic resources, education, library, noise, transportation and circulation. R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Initial Study 2002-draft.doc t3 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 HCD COMMENT LE'I-FERS R:\GENPLAN\Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 14 January18,2001Le~er R:\GENPLAN~Housing Element 2000\Staff Report CC.doc 15 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Division of Homing Policy Development 1800 *l'p~l Sfreeg Sut~ 430 P.O.h 9~20~'t .hQ~.~eo~o, CA ~42S2-20~ (916) 32.~t76 F,~.~ (916) 327-2643 Jaauary 15, 2001 Ms. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director City of Temecula Commlmity Development Depamncnt P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Deer Ms. Ubnoskc: , RE: Review of the City of Temecula's Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting Temecula's draft homing element, received for our review on December 7, 2000. As you know, the Department of Homing and community Development (HCD) is required to review dra~ housing elements and report our findings to the locality pursuant to Government Code Section 65585Co), '" A telephone conversation on Janua~ 17, 200I with Ms. Veronica Tam, of Cotton, Bridges & Associates, and Mr. Dave Hogan, the City's 8enio~ Planner, assisted our review. This letter and accompanying Appendix summarize that conversation. While the current draft element includes a useful identification of'housing needs in Temecula, revisions will be necessary to comply with State homing element .law (Article 10.6 of the Government Code). Among the necessary changes, the element should be t~'ised to demonstrate that the City has sufficient land, zoned at appropriate densities, to accommodate the development of housing commensurate with Temeenla's .nh~ of the regional homing need for all income groups. We look forward to reviewing the revisions in the near future and to receiving the · nn,ial general plan implementat/on reports pummnt to Government Code Section 6~400. For your i~formation, we have enclosed a brief description of new and existing housing and community development programs administered by this DePa~hnent along with funding levels for the current fiscal year. We are pleased to report a historic increase in homing funds available through HCD. A number of the programs such as the lobs-Housing Balance Improvement Program, the CalHome Program and the Downtown Rebound Program are new and under current development. Please consult our homepage at www. hc~ for program information updates. We hope our comments are helpful to the City. We appreciate thc courtesy and assistance of Mr. Hogan and Ms. Tam during the course of our review. We would be willing to meet in Temecula or otherwise provide additional assistance to aid 'cbc City in r~vising its housing element. Please feel flee to contact Robert Mare, of our sta~ at (916) 323-3180. l~{s. Dcbbic Ubnoskc, Plamfing Director Page 2 In accordance with their ~luests pursuant to thc Public Records Act, we are forwarding a copy of this letter to thc individuals listed below. Sincerely', Cathy E. ~ Acting De~ ,'well try Director Enclosure CC' Veronica Tam, Cotton, Bridges 8: Associates Dave Hogan, City of T~mccula Catherine Ysrael, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, AG's Office Terry Roberts, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Suan Acosta, California Building Industry Association Marcia S~lkin~ Califom/a Association of Realtors Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation Rob Weiner, California Coalition for l~ural Housing Susan DeSantis, The Plmming Center Dam Schur, Western C~nter on Law and Poverty Michael G. Colantuono, Attorney at Law lonathan Lehrer-Graiwer, Attorney at Law An:~ Marie Whhaker, California State Poly- Tech University Karen Warner, Cotton, Bridges & AssoCiates David Booher, California Housing Council lose Rodriquez, California Rural Legal Assistance Mi~h Tran, Inland Counties Legal .%rvices APPENDIX. City of Temeeula The following C_ha.$es wo~Id bring Temecula'.~ housing'el~nent into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Govcmmen! Code. Accompanying each recommended change we cite thc supporting section of the Government Code. The particular program ~xamples or data sources listed am suggestions for your use. A. HousinRNeeds. Resources nnd COnstrnint~ The element should contain an analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and. a quantification of the locality's existing and projected needs for all income levels. Such ~cisting and projected need~ shall include the locality's share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584 (Section 65585(a)(1)). '~ae regional share need may be reduced by the number of new tmlts built since ~anuaty 1, 1998. Newly'built units are to be assigned to the appropriate income group, bar~ upon the unit's affordabilit~. The el~nent should demonsuat~ tho units subu-acted from the very low-, and low-income categories are affordable to the appropriate income group. For example, the current element lacks a b~is for assi?i~ng 50 percent of the 411 newly constructed multifamily units as affordable to lower-income households (pages ~38 and 4-39). 1'he element mu~t include a documentation of housing stock condition (Section The element includes int'ormation on the age of Temecula's housing stock; it should also' contain an estimate of the number of substandard units in Temecula in need of r.eha.b, ilitation and reolacement. The element should include an inventory of land suita'ble for residential development, including vacant site~ and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public service~ available to these ~ites (Section 6558.$(a)(3)). Expand the land inventory analysis to indicate and clarify:. Whether there is s~cient total water and wastewater treatment capacity from the City's water and sawer provider~ to accommodate the new construction n~d. Whether units have been or are likely to be develooed in Temecula at the upper end of the Mgh density and very high density general plan designations. The City could demonstrat~ the viability of the dwelling unit projection by describing the basis for the estimate (for example, past development applications, historic development pattcms in these districts, current City policies, ~tc.) to substantiatc the likelihood that development occurring on high density land outside specific plan areas and very high density land docs occur at the upper end of thc density ranges for these general plan designations. Whether typical developed deusities within the high and very high density des_ignations can accommodate lower-income households. l'he impact of the flood plain overlay district md/or the thee Alquist-Priolo earthquake, fault zon~ oh the development potential and cost of the vacant land identified (Tables 4-24 and 4-25). How the Village Center Overlay and the Planned Development Overlay allow for modification and flexibility in development standards so az to promote a greater range of housing oppornmities w/thin the City, including affordable hous/ng. 4. ,~nal),ze potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing for all income level~, including building codes and their enforcement. 2'he analysi~ shall al~o demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting its share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584 (Section 65585(a)(4)). The element should be revised to include a description of the type and degree of the City's code enforcement program. B. ~uantified Oblectives~ The housing element s.~all contain a statement of the community's goal*, quantified objectives and policies relative to the maintenance, improvement, and development of ho~_. ing, by income level (emphasis added} (Section · ,'-While the element contains general quantified objectives, the element should also specifically contain overall quantified objectives for housing development, rehabilitation, and conservation for .each income group: very low-, low-, moderate-, and above-moderate income. 2 C. Housin~ Pro,rams Identify adequate site* which will be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards and with public s~'vice~ and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage tit* development of a variety of types of housing for ali income level*, including rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, and emergency shelters and transitional homing. Ilrhere the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph ($) of subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for suj~cient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right, including density, and development ~tandards that could accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low- and low-income households (Section As noted in comment A,3 above, further analysis of the feasibility of sites described in the element is needed. The adequacy of sites cannot bo established prior'to a more detailed analysis. lane element indicates, "The Temecula Development Code provides for the provision'Of emergency shelters and transitional housing within the City." The element should describe how the City's standards ~nenurage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to, emergency shelters and/or transitional housing. The housing element shall contain programs, which "address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the. maintenance. improvement, and d~elopment ofhausing· (Section 655~3(c)(3)). As noted 'abovc (B-4), Temecula's element requires a more thorough analysis of potential governmental constraints posed by the City's code enforcement program. Depending upon .the results of that analysis, the City may need to add programs to rcmov~ or mitigate any identified constraints. Describe in detail the program action to promote housing opportunities for all persons (Section 65585(c)(5)). Wh/Ie the element includes a fair housing program, h lacks any description of an information dissemination component for educating r~sidcnts about their fa/r homing rights and of the process to make appropriate referrals for fair housing complaints. A fair housin§ information dissemination prol~m is necessary to ~wantee full utilization of the housin§ discrimination pro~ram. For example, thc Cit~ might wish to publicize a complaint referral a§cncy through the local media, schools, libraries, po~t offices, or through housing advocacy groups. D. Public Pnrticiuation Describe how the E~ty made a diligent effort to achieve the public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the element (Section The housing element should spccillcally describe efforts by Tcmecula to circulate the housing elemant anlong lower-income org~n{~ations and individuals and to involve such groups and persons in the dev¢16pmcnt of the element. 4 May 21, 2001 Letter DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND CO~ DEVELOPMEh'T Division of Housing Policy Development FAX (9~.) s27.2~'4,1 May21,200l Ms. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director City of Temecula Community Development Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 925890033 Dear Ms. lYonoske: RE: Review of the Revisions to Temecula's Draft Housing Element Update Thank you for submitting revisions to Temecula's draft housing element, received for our review on March 22, 2001. As you know, wc are required to review draft housing elements and report our findings to the locality pursuant to Government Code Sect/on 65S85~). Our review was facilitated by a telephone conversat/on with Ms. Veron/ca Tarn, the City's consultant, on May 18, 2001. Thc revisions to the clrat~ element addresses most of the statutory rcquircment~ cited in our review letter of lanuary 18, 2001. However, the City needs to clearly identify adequate sites to accommodate lower-income households as required by State housing element law (Article 10.6 of the Government Code). The Appendix to this letter descr/besin greater detail the changes needed to bring the element into compliance with Stale housing element law. We hope our comments ate helpful to the City. We welcome the opportunity to meet with the City in Temecula to provide any needed assistance to Ixing the element into compliance.' If you have any questions, please contact Robert Maus at (916) 323-3180. In accordance with requests pursuant to the Public Records Act, we are forwarding copies of this letter to the persons ~nd organizations listed below. Sincerely, Ms. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director Page 2 CC: Mark Stivers, Senate Committee on HoUSing & Community Development Catherine Ysrael, Superv/sing Deputy Attorney General, AG's Office Teny Koberts, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Kimberley Dellinger, California Building Industry Association Marcia Salkin, California Association of P. ealtors Marc Brox~, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation Rob Weiner, California Coalition for Rural Housing $ohn Douglas, AICP, The Plznnlng'Center Dara Schur, Western Center on Law and Poverty Michael G. Colantuono, Attorney at Law Data Schur, Western Center on Law and Poverty .Ionathan Lehrer-Graiwer, Attorney at Law Aaa Marie Whitaker, Californ/a State Poly- Tech University Karen Warner, Cotton Bridges & Associates David Bodher, Cahfomia Housing Council Jose P. oddquez, California Rural Legal Assistance Minh Tran, Inland Counties Legal Services C APPENDIX City of Temecula The following changes would bring Temeeula's hous/ng element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Gove~ment Code. Accompanying each recommendation we cite the applicable provision of the Government Code. The particular program examples or data sources listed are suggestions for your use. A. Housing Programs Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards and with'public services and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a'variety of types of housing for all income levels, and including multlfamily rental housing in order to meet the community's housing goals as identified in ~ubdivision (b). Y/here the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accomniodate the need for groups of all household income levels, the program shall provide for 'sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental, multifamily residential use by right, including density and development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low- and low-income households (Section 65583(c)(Z)). As ind/cated in Table ~-26, Temecula's x'emaining regional share need for lower-income households is 1,994. While the revisions provide more information, the element still does demonstrate that existing vacant sites, coupled with existing development standards, can accommodate the regional share need for lower-income households. The revised element states that very high density development within specific plan areas is anticipated to range between 15.8 and 16.2 du/ac; projects outside specific plan areas average about 16 un/ts per acre. The City should examine its density and development standards and ascertain whether such standards act to preclude development occurring at the upper end of the higher density range. The element could glso include policies or programs to encourage or facilitate development at the maximum of the higher density range or otherwise demonstrate how this zone can accommodate lower-income development. Argent conversation with a non-profit housing provider ia Riverside County suggests that existing land costs in Temecula range between $200,000 and $300,000 making development of units affordable to lower-income households unlikely at a density of 16 du/ac. The current draf~ element was not revised to .indicate how the Village Center Overlay and the Planned Development Overlay allow for modification and flexibility in development standards so as to promote a greater range of housing opportunities with/n the City, including affordable housing. The City may wish to revisit th/s issue and/ndicate how modified development standards within these areas could facilitate units affordable to lower-income households. B. Public Participation 1. Describe how the Cigy made a diligent effort to achieve the public participation of all economic segments of the communiO~ in the development of the element (Section 65583 (c)). The element provides a listing of organizations represen~in§ lower-income households and persons with special needs that were directly mailed a copy of the housing element. The element should also describe City efforts to encourage involvement of these groups in the development of the homing element. July 2, 2002 Letter R:~GENPLAN~Housing E~ement 2000~Staff Repor~ CC.doc DEP~kRTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNIT~ DEVELOPMENT Division of Housing Poliey Development Sacr~r~nto, CA 94252-2053 July 2, 2002 Ms. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director Community Development Department City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Dear Ms. Ubnoske: RE: Review of the Revisions to Temecula's Draft Housing Element Update Thank YOu for submitting revisions to Temecula's housing element update, received for our review on May 3, 2002. Additional fax revisions were received on June 18, 24 and 26, 2002. As you know, the Department of Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) are required to review draft housing elements and report our findings to the locality pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(b). Telephone conversations with Ms. Veronica Tam, your consultant, assisted our review. We are pleased to find the revised element, including the fax revisions submitted, addresses the statutory requirements in our May 21, 2002 letter. The element will be in compliance with State law when adopted and submitted to this Department for review (Article 10.6 of the Government Code). We appreciate the efforts of the City to develop land-use strategies and programs to address its share of the regional housing need and the community's unique needs. We commend the City's commimaent to facilitating affordable housing development through the provision of higher density, mixed-use strategies and flexible development standards. We are thankful of the hard work and cooperation of you, your staff and consultant during the course of our review and we look forward to receiving Temecula's adopted housing element for our review. If you have any additional questions, please contact Paul Mc Dougall, of our staff, at (916) 322-7995. In accordance with requests pursuant to the Public Records Act, we are forwarding copies of this letter to the persons and organizations listed below. Sincerely, Ms. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director Page 2 CCi Veronica Tam, Cotton Bridges and Associates Mark Stivers, Senate Committee on Housing & Commun/ty Development Catherine Ysrael, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, AG's Office Terry Roberts, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Kimberley Dellinger, California Building Industry Association Marcia Salkin, Califomia Association of Realtors Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation Rob Weiner, California Coalition for Rural Housing John Douglas, AICP, Civic Solutions Deanna Kitamura, Western Center on Law and Poverty S. Lynn Martinez; Western Center on Law mad POverty Alexander Abbe, Law Firm of Richards, Watson & Gershon Ruben Duran, Law Firm ofNeufield, Jaffe & Levin Ilene J. Jacobs, California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. Dara Schur, Protection & Advocacy, Inc. Jonathan Lehrer-Graiwer, Attorney at Law gna Made Whitaker, California State Poly- Tech University David Booher, California Housing Council Jose Rodriquez, California Rural Legal Assistance Mirth Tran, Inland Counties Legal Services Rose Mayes, Fair Housing Council of Riverside County Robert Bullock, Inland Counties Legal Services Joe Carreras, Southem California Association of Governments Won Chang, Attorney at Law, Davis and Company Jacob Lieb, Southern California Association of Governments James A. Ragsdale, JRA Planning Consultants ITEM 15 ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINAN~/E~, ~y~.. 2._~ CITY MANAGER -,~'~'.~" ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/Ci~/~ncil Debbie Ubnoskd~/Director of Planning October 8, 2002 Development Review Process PREPARED BY: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to adopt the following recommendations: 1. Identify, provide training and implement a method of project tracking; 2. Create an appointment process for application intake; 3. Create City CEQA Guidelines to allow for a greater number of exemptions; and 4. Revisit the Development Code's Approval Authority Matrix to possibly allow more projects to be considered at a Director's Hearing as opposed to the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: In May of 2002, staff was directed by the City Council to look at the City's Development Review Process and bring back to Council a Work Program to simplify the process, create partnerships and improve communication. Since receiving that direction, staff has met weekly and has taken the following steps: Analyzed the current development review process and created a flowchart of a streamlined process; Identified a method of project tracking that all departments will use; Met with the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, Economic Development Committee and Coordinating Committee on two occasions to discuss things the City does well, areas where improvement is needed and elicit suggestions for improvement; Prepared a Request for Proposal to update the City's Design Guidelines; Created a Customer Service Survey and sent the Survey to applicants who went through the development review process during the last year; and Analyzed the Planning Department applications to determine their viability and clarity. R:\DEBBIE~cc staff rpt.dev review prec.,ess.doc 1 These steps have been taken in an effort to create components of a Work Program that the City Council will approve. It is anticipated that this final Work Program will be the basis for a streamlined development review process that looks at creating partnerships between the City staff and applicants and improves communication, both with our external customers, as well as, our internal customers. For purposes of this process, staff looked at three separate categories of projects. These three categories are: projects that are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; projects that require a negative declaration and legislative projects (i.e. specific plans, general plan amendments, etc). Legislative projects such as specific plans have too many variables attached to them to be able to commit to any specific timeline (i.e. environmental impact report, public meetings, public controversy, other agency review, etc). The details of the Work Program are contained in the Planning Commission staff report, which is Attachment 1. Attachments to the Planning Commission staff report include notes from staff's meetings with the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, Economic Development Committee and Coordinating Committee, as well as, the Development Review Flow Chart and Customer Service Survey. Some of the highlights of the Work Program are as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Review time for exempt projects has been reduced from 15 weeks to 7 weeks (staff review only); Review time for projects requiring a negative declaration has been reduced from 19 weeks to 10 weeks (staff review only); Development of an appointment process for project intake thereby insuring a complete application at the time of submittal; Development of a project tracking system that will be used by all Departments to allow staff to monitor the progress of projects; Development of individual applications for each type of application that is filed; Development of a customer service survey to follow up on projects and ensure quality customer service; and Updating of the City's Design Guidelines. The process of creating a Work Program to streamline the Development Review Process has been a collaborative one. Staff has held meetings with the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, Economic Development Committee and Coordinating Committee and has received input from these groups that has helped to improve our review process. Upon the Council's approval of staff's suggestions, staff will develop a Formal Work Program that will outline Goals and Objectives, as well as, specific tasks and milestones. Staff would like to institute the appointment process, new applications, manual project tracking and customer service surveys beginning January of 2003. It is anticipated the Design Guidelines, staff training on the project tracking and City CEQA Guidelines will be completed by the end of calendar year 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Staff Report from the September 18, 2002 Hearing Attachment 2 - Customer Service Surveys R:\DEBBIE~cc staff rpt.dev review precess.dcc 2 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 18, 2002 Prepared By:. Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning. RECOMMENDATION: APPLICATIONINFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: The Community Development Department- Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: RECEIVE AND FILE City of Temecula City of Temecula Update the Development Review Process BACKGROUND In May of 2002, staff was directed by the City Council to look at the City's Development Review Process and bring back to the Council a Work Program to simplify the process, create partnerships and improve communication. Since receiving that direction, staff has met weekly. Staff, as a result of these weekly meetings, has taken the following steps: 1. Analyzed the current development review process and created a flowchart of a streamlined process; 2. Identified a method of project tracking that all departments ~ill use; 3. Met with the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, Economic Development Committee and Coordinating Committee to discuss things the City does well, areas where we need to improve, and elicit suggestions for improvement; Prepared a Request for Proposal to update the Ci~s Design Guidelines; Created a Customer Service Survey and sent the Customer Service Survey to applicants who Went through the development review process during the last ~ear; 6. Analyzed the Planning Department applications to determine their ~/ability and clarity. In addition, stall is suggesting the Commission and Council support the bllowing staff requests: 7. The creation of an appointment process for application intake; 8. The creation of City CEQA Guidelines to allow for a greater number of exemptions; R:\DEBBIE~pcrpt.dev reviewprccess.doc 1 Revisiting the Approval Authority Matrix to possibly allow more projects to be considered at a Director's Hearing as opposed to Planning Commission. These steps have been taken in an effort to create components of a Work Program that the City Council will ultimately approve. It is anticipated that this final Work Program will be the basis for a streamlined development review process that looks at creating partnerships between the City staff and applicants and improves communication, both with our external customers, as well as, our internal customers. For purposes of this process, staff looked at three separate categories of projects. These three categories are: projects that are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), projects that require a negative declaration a.nd legislative projects (i.e. specific plans, general plan amendments, etc.) The work program described in this staff report will address ways to streamline the projects that are categorically exempt and those that require a negative declaration. Legislative projects such as specific plans have too manyvariables attached to them to be able to commit to any specific timeline (i.e. environmental impact report, public meetings, public controversy, etc.) DISCUSSION Development Review Flow Chart The Development Review Flow Chart (Attachment 1) outlines the process for three major categories of projects: projects that are exempt from CEQA, projects that require a Negative Declaration (non- exempt) and legislative projects such as specific plans, zone changes, and general plan amendments. The biggest change to the process is the implementation of an appointment process to accept projects. Projects submitted under an appbintment can be deemed complete the day they are submitted, thereby saving 30 days that previously staff used to deem the project complete. If the application is not deemed complete, the applicant will have the immediate benefit of knowing the items that must be submitted to provide a complete application. This change, combined with instituting the CEQA process eadier, has reduced the amount of time that staff will spend on application review for exempt projects from an average of 15 weeks to 7 weeks. For projects requiring a negative declaration, staff has reduced the amount of staff review time from an average of 19 weeks to 10 weeks. It should be noted here that this is just the amount of time that staff has to review the project. The entire timeline for project review will be longer because the applicant will need time to make any changes, re-draft plans and then re-submit them to staff. Staff will commit, however, to ensuring that projects with a categorical exemption will be approved within four months and those with a negative declaration will be approved within six months provided the applicant meets mutually agreed upon submittal deadlines. Needless to say, if there are serious issues associated with any project, or any amount of public controversy, these timelines will most likely be longer. Another change to the process is the optional pre-Development Review Process and optional Development Review Process. This optional process will be used when staff determines that the project's comments are not significant enough to warrant a meeting with staff. For non- exempt projects, staff will be beginning the environmental rev!ew process 2 weeks earlier and this will also help streamline the process. Proiect .Trackinq The City Council also has indicated a desire to have staff create a project tracking system. Currently, such a system is in place, but is not used consistently by all the staff. In addition, the City has added new staff and not all of the staff have had training on the system. Part of the Work Program will be to create a standardized project tracking system, ensure that all staff are trained on it, and begin utilizing it. This process will most likely take some time to get up and running but it is R:~DESBIE~pcrpt~dev revlewprocess.doc 2 anticipated that it will be operational during the next calendar year. In the interim, staff will be tracking all projects manually. Staff suggests the use of milestones for each project similar to those used for "fast track" projects (reference Attachment 2). This will provide certainty to applicants in terms of a headng date. Staff is also suggesting that the Planning Director review all applications every four months to determine whether there appear to be any issues that might be slowing up projects. Lastly, staff suggests that the Commission and Council support the creation of a Commission/Council Sub-Committee that will meet every six months to review the status of all applications that have been submitted within that time period. Applications Staff from Planning, Public Works, Fire and Building and Safety all reviewed the application submittal requirements and removed requirements that could be submitted at a later point in the process. This will save applicants time at the beginning of the process and also defer some of the project costs until later in the process. Staff also took the existing "multi-purpose" application and created separate applications for every type of project (i.e. development plan, conditional use permit, zone change, etc). Every application will also have a cover sheet that explains the purpose of the application, the Code section that requires it and a brief description of the process. In addition, staff has made the "pre-application" process much less formal and will be revising this application to requir.e fewer submittals (i.e. no floor plans or elevations will be required). This will greatly Simplify the pre-application process. In addition, the City is proposing to give each applicant an "application completion letter" which will identify their project planner, contacts in other departments and a senior staff member to contact should complications adse. It is the intent of this letter to better explain the planning process and the City's customer service philosophy and hopefully reduce an applicant's hesitation to seek assistance if they encounter problems. Meetinqs with the Chamber of.Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, Economic Development Committee and Coordinatinq Committee During the months since May, staff has met on two separate occasions with the above-mentioned groups. The.purpose of the first meeting was to find out what the City is doing well in terms of our development review process, where the City needs to improve it's development review process, and to get suggestions for ways to improve the development review process. A summary of the meeting notes is included as Attachment 3. The purpose of the second meeting was to share with the Chamber, the Manufacturer's Council, the EDC and the Coordinating Committee what staff will be taking forward to the Planning Commission and City Council in terms of recommendations. At this meeting, staff did share with the people in attendance that much of what they raised as concerns is being addressed as we go through this process. Examples of where staff has addressed concerns are the following: Issue raised of expediency (instituting the appointment process and beginning CEQA review earlier will greatly streamline the process). Issue raised of unreasonable design requests (hidng a consultant to update the City's Design Guidelines will create a level playing field. Staff will be consulting with the Commission, Council and development community on these Guidelines). Issue raised that the submittal checklist is too extensive (staff has removed some of the requirements). issue raised that soils and hydrology reports older than one year need to be verified for accuracy (staff has changed this to reports older than tv~ years). R:~DEBBIE~pcrpt.dev reviewprocess.doc 3 5. Issue raised that CEQA process needs to be initiated earlier (staff is recommending doing this). City Desiqn Guidelines Request for Proposal One of the issues that was identified as staff met with the various groups mentioned in the paragraph above was the issue of staffsubjectivity with respect to project design. The City's Design' Guidelines, when created, were intended to allow for flexibility of design. It ~as become apparent, however, that there is the need for updating the City's Guidelines, and perhaps even requiring them to be part of the Development Code. Planning staff has prepared a Request for Proposal to update the City's Design Guidelines and will be releasing that shortly. The next step in the proceSs will be the interviewing of qualified firms to update the City's Design Guidelines. The development community will be strongly encouraged to have. input into these Design Guidelines as they are drafted. Customer Service Survey One of the Council's wishes was to have continuous feedback on the development review process. Towards that end, staff has developed a Customer Service Survey (Attachment 4). The survey has already been mailed to applicants who went through the development review process last year. It is staff's intent to have this survey sent out on a continuing basis to receive feedback on the process. All responses will be sent back to the City Manager's Office. It is Management's current philosophy to recognize good customer service and provide positive feedback and this philosophywill continue · to be an important one for the City. During the monthly Community Development Department staff meetings, staff that have exemplified outstanding customer service are recognized and rewarded with a Department trophy. This is just one example of how the City provides recognition for employees who provide excellent customer service. Creation of an Appointment Process As was mentioned earlier' in the report, upon Council's approval of the Work Program, one of the things staff hopes to institute is an appointment process for case intake. Appointments will be made by calling the Planning Department. Every attempt will be made to schedule an appointment within 2 to 3 days of the request. A planner and an engineer will meet with the applicant during the appointment to check the application for completeness. Applications will be deemed complete or incomplete dudng the appointment. An application that is deemed complete will then be scheduled for a Development Review Committee meeting within 3 weeks. If dudng the routing of an application, no significant comments arise, staff can choose to by-pass the pro-Development Review Committee meeting and the Development Review Committee meeting, thereby saving at least one more week in the process. City Wide California Environmental QualityAct Guidelines (CEQA) Currently, the City is using the State CEQA Guidelines. These Guidelines call out certain situations' where projects can be deemed eYempt from CEQA thereby saving an applicant time and money. The City will be creating our own CEQA Guidelines and that will enable us to look at other exemptions. Projects who aro then deemed exempt, as mentioned above, will not need to go through the environmental process. R:\DEBBIE~pcrpt.dev revlewprocess.doc 4 II-,') SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS in summary, per the City Council's direction, staff has spent the last few months reviewing our development review process and outlining a number of ways to streamline it. This process has been a collaborative process with the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturer's Council, EDC and Coordinating Committee..It is the intent of the Work Program to create a streamlined, collaborative process where the City and applicants work together to achieve the common goal of creating the best-built environment possible. Upon the Council's approval of staff's approach, staff will formalize all of the suggestions contained in this staff report into a formal Work Program that will outline Goals and Objectives, as well as, specific tasks and milestones. Staff would like to institute the appointment process, new applications, manual project tracking and customer service surveys beginning in January of 2003. It is anticipated that the Design Guidelines, staff training on the project tracking and the City CEQA Guidelines will be completed by the end of calendar year 2003. Attachments: Development Review Flow Chart - Blue Page 6 Project Timeline - Blue Page 7 Summary of Meeting Notes - Blue Page 8 Customer Service Survey - Blue Page 9 R:'J~EBBIE~crpt. dev revlewprocess.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FLOW CHART R:\DEBBIE~ocrPt.dev revtewprocess.doc 6 0 I I I I I I ATFACHMENT NO. 2 PROJECT TIMELINE R:',DEBBIE~pcrpt.dev review process,doc 7 City of Temecula 43200 Business Pa'-~'~ri~ ~ Temecula ~ California 92589-9033 (909) 694-6400 ~ FAX (909) 694-6477 May 13, 2002 May 28, 2002 May 31,2002 June 6, 2002 June 7, 2002 June 14, 2002 June 23, 2002 July 17; 2002 August 1,2002 Application was submitted Soils Report and Current Title Report due (Applicant) Departmental comments due (Staff) Environmental determination (Staff) Corrections and revised plans to be re-submitted to staff ~(Applicant) Departmental Conditions of Approval due to Planning (Staff) Submit Grading Plans to Public Works Department (Applicant) Submit Building Plans to Building and Safety (Applicant) Public Notice prepared (Staff) Planning Commission hearing End of Appeal deadline R :~:{ ush R',Fo rms',Fast Track Contract.doc 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 SUMMARY OF MEETING NOTES R:~DEBBIE~ocrpt.do~ review process.doc 8 Development Review Process (Meeting Notes) Things we are doin.q well · City does a good job of logging plan checks in and out. · Assigned inspector for major projects. · Helpful staff · Hotels, motels, mini-storage always exceed F.A.R. · Front counter / Gary Formoe- very helpful. · Likes in-house - Shell is example. Things to study · Expediency · Complete comments and preparedness- in-field · Plan Checks o Repetitive plan checks o Plan check objects o Second plan' check inconsistencies. · Continuity in staff · Fear of reprisal · Planning process Subjective, opinionated Micro-management of projects (architectural, etc.) O O · Fees 0 0 Staff to send information on fees Fees.are higher in Temecula than in Murrieta and other cities. · Slow process · Unreasonable designs · "Attitude;' on Development o Attitude is privilege to develop, in Temecula.. · "Threat" of kicking project to higher level · Landscape o Landscape comments exceed scope of review o Consider not requiring landscaping in rear of Industrial projects. · CEQA not initiated eadier. · Health department food service plan check is slow. · Planning Commission and Staff asks for too much (i.e. raise the bar) · Cannot meet with individual departments involved in process. · Floor Area Ratio for hotels, motels - subjective findings to grant unclear · % acre - Gross vs. net o G.P. Consistency · Growth management- suitable amenities. 7/16/02 R:\WlMBERVG\gary. Notes,Development Review Process-2.doc 1 7/16/02 Development Review Process (Meetin.q Notes) · Process - define and assist applicant.. · No. monitoring of inter-departmental tasks. · Why didn't staff identify earlier high rate of incomplete applications. · Tracking software being looked at. · In past food service plan check has been slow. · CEQA started too late in process. · Submittal checklist is too extensive · Too much staff interpretation of what Commission / Council want to see · Specific time frame for pre-app comments. · Wants ordinances restructured <10k to P.C. In Murrieta is 3 acres. · Is soils report > 1 year old is required to be updated. · Re-prove hydrology studies is not always necessary. · Stumbling blocks in Building & Safety. \ · Delivery, not the process, is the issue. · Staff micro-manages projects. · 98% of submittals are deemed incomplete - something is wrong. · Mike Elliott is making land use decisions beyond his scope of responsibility. · More concurrent processing of applications. · Gross versus net acreage issue needs to be re-addressed. · Projects under 10,000 square feet - change to allow staff to approve larger projects. Recommended Actions · Staff be prepared/timely. · Reduce submittal requirements. · Clarity, simplicity · No surprises · Positive attitude. · Keep client informed · Responsiveness to problems o Ombudsman team o Understand role · Meeting after (3X) failure to address staff corrections. o Improve communications. o Not wait so long to receive comments. · "In-house~ lead to solve issues · Let decisionmakers understand reality of obstacles by Planning Commission staff on developer decision to build in Temecula · Clarityin standards · Pre-application timelines o Responsiveness R:\WlMBERVG~gary. Notes. Development Review Process-2.dcc 2 · 7/16/02 Development Review Process (Meetin.q Notes) · Code revision >10,000to Planning Commission o Extremely rigid vs. staff approval · Application submittal requirements are unreasonable. o Geotech o Hydrology o Soils report (1 year) · Hire staff landscape architect · Code amendment to emphasize landscaping in front · Concurrent processing · Help applicants through process - eliminate uncertainties - lay it out · Computer tracking (online?) · Not wait 30 days to find out incomplete · Encourage pre-application meeting- before design. · Copy the client on all correspondence. · Define what an amenity is in Growth Management Plan. · Landscape % too high - in wrong places - could prefer more in front. · Need to avoid multiple checks / reduce number of checks required reduce restrictions. · Additional requirements, not on 1st check. , · Make sure that contacts are made - let the client know what the status of the project is. · Make sure client knows when plans are received. · Have continuity of inspectors. · Call back same day / acknowledge calls. Project manager position should be developed need to get back to customer on issues. Would like to assist. · Don't fine tune plans - catch lSttime. · Don't assume developer wants to do things just for lower Cost. · Applicants have to prove utility capacity · Routing of additional material prior to department sign-off On building permits - last minute surprises · Develop design standards, rather than guidelines. R:\WlMBERVG~ary. Notes. Development Review Process-2,doc 3 8/12/02 Development Review Process (Meetin.q Notes) Thin[Is we are doing well · Design quality. · Specific applications-easier. · FlowCharting process. · Application intake by appointment is good. Things to study · Pre-App, do not require as much detail on plans- check for major items. · Continuity o[staff- submittal review. · Reduce"bloated'~ process/conditions. · Getting bogged down on details. · Overly de'~ailed grading plan requirements. · Guidelines vs. standards o Overly rigid? o Stifle good design? o Lose corporate identity? · Excessive information,required on plans - if one plan changes, then other related plans must be revised (coordination and cost) (i.e. Rancho Church project). · Design guidelines update - consideF private-sector input. · Input on code amendments. Agree to send notice amendments to Coordinating Committee as desired. · Incomplete analysis. · Planners acting as architects. · Inconsistency with Planning Commission decisions. Design Guidelines. · Soils report (< two years) why for "developed lots"; why up front. · Hydrology studies? Why up front? Letter from soils report. · Out-of-town architects not familiar with local regulations. Recommended Actions · Explore landscape %, versus location criteria. · . Performance standards preferred over prescriptive regulations. Churches. · Discuss design early-on · Project tracking onlin~ o Streamline o Security o Training of staff · Shave more time off on CEQA review. · Acknowledge design that may not have public visibility- be reasonable. · Applications have"Development Team" established. R:\WlMBERVG\Notes. Development Review Process-Coordinating Committe.doc 1 8/12/02 Development Review Process (Meeting Notes) Submittal requirements based on certain project scena?ios (flow chad and submittal requirements). Train staff to readily identify plan deficiencies early-on, or pre-app. LeSs'cumbersome pre-app and will hold off on working plans o Keep it simple o Fewer consultants o Site plan o No grading Schedule/Tracking - keep applicant in loop; coordination to get through process. Create Site Plan Design on a conceptual basis prior to submittal or pre-app or formal application ("Pre, pre-app") - more detailed, better comments. Eliminate Gobbledy-Gook requirements/conditions. Defer requirement for color renderings until public hearing schedule. Allow more administrative approvals. Feedback. Concurrent environment processing. R:\WlMBERVGWotes. Development Review Process-Coordinating Committe,doc 2 A3-1'ACH MENT .NO. 4 CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY R:~D EBBIE~pcrpt.dev review process.doc 9 City.,of Temecula OFFICE OF CI.TY MANAGER 43200 BusinessPark Drive - PO Box 9033 - Temecula - C-nlifol'Bia - 92589-9033 (909) 506-5100'. FAX (909) 694-6499 CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please be as specific as possible with your comments. Please rate our service on a scale of I to 5,,with 1 being "needs improvement" an.d 5 being "excellent". Please mark "N/A" if not applicable. STAFF ASSISTANCE / GENERAL 1. Staff was courteous and professional. 2. Staff explained City requirements thoroughly. 3. Staff took under consideration alternative ideas. 4. Overall servica. 5. General Comments: PROCESSING 1. Staff performed tasks efficiently and timely. 2. Staff maintained contact throughout the process. 3. Staff correspondence was well written and clear. 4, Overall service. 5. Was the overall process cumbersome? Please explain: -- 6. Did staff keep you abreast of the processing of your application? 7. General Comments: R:~n~er Service Survey.doc GRADING / CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW 1. Plans were retumed within scheduled time frame. 2. The plan comments were clear and understandable. 3. Questions or clarifications were adequately addressed. 4. General Comments: INSPECTION SERVICES 1. Inspection requests were acted upon as scheduled. 2. Inspectors arrived within expected time frame. 3. Required corrections were made clear and concise. 4. Inspectors were courteous'and acknowledged any concerns. 5. Overall service. 6. General Comments: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OPTIONAL: NAME: , ADDRESS: pHONE NUMBER: PROJECT ADDRESS: [] Please check box if you would like someone from the City Manager's office to call you. Thank you for your. feedback! · R:~rn~lntylGCustonlet Service survey.do~ 2 CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please be as specific as aossible with your comments. Please rate our service on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being "needs improvement" and 5 being "excellent". Please mark "N/A" if not applicable. STAFFASSISTANCE/GENERAL 1. Staff was courteous and professional. 2. Staff explained City requirements thoroughly. Staff took under consideration alternative ideas. 4. Overall service. 5. · General Comments: PROCESSING 1. Staff performed tasks efficiently and timely. 2. Staff maintained contact throughout the process' 4. Overall service.3' Staff correspondence was well written and clear. 5. Was the o~er. all procjess~c~,bersom(~? Please explain;f ~ia ataff k~p you abraast of th~ proo~aain~ of your application? 7. General Comments: P:~PLAN NI NGVnclntyk~C ustome; Sewice Survey.doc 1 GRADING / CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW 1. Plans were returned within scheduled time frame. 2. The plan comments were clear and understandable. 3. Questions or clarifications were adequately addressed. 4. General Comments: INSPECTION SERVICES 1. Inspection requests were acted upon as scheduled. 2. Inspectors arrived within expected time frame. 3. Required corrections were made clear and concise, 4. Inspectors were courteous and acknowledged any concerns. 5. Overall service. 6. General Comments: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: PROJECTADDRESS: ~/,,~.-~- [] Please check box if you would like someone from the City Manager's office to call you, Thank you for your feedback! P:~PLANNING~clntyk~Customer Service Survey.doc 2 City of Temecula (909) 506-5100: FAX (909) 694-6499 CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please be as specific as possible with your comments. Please rate our service on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being "needs improvement" and 5 being "excellent". Please mark "N/A" if not applicable. STAFFASSISTANCE/GENERAL 1. Staff was courteous and professional. 2. Staff explained City requirements thoroughly. Staff took under consideration alternative ideas. 4. Overall service. 5. · General Comments: PROCESSING 1. Staff performed tasks efficiently and timely. 2. Staff maintained contact throughout the process. 3. Staff correspondence was well written and clear. 4. Overall service. 5. Was the overall process cumbersome? Please explain: - 6. Did staff keep you abreast of the processing of your application? 7. General Comments: P:~LANNING~rnclnty~Customer Sen, ice Survey,doc 1 GRADING / CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW 1, Plans were returned within scheduled time frame, 2, The plan comments were clear and understandable, 3, Questions or clarifications were adequately addressed, 4. General Comments: INSPECTION SERVICES 1, Inspection requests were acted upon as scheduled, 2. Inspectors arrived within expected time frame, 3, Required corrections were made clear and concise, 4. Inspectors were courteous and acknowledged any concerns, 5. Overall service. 6. General Comments: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OPTIONAL: NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: PROJECTADDRESS: [] Please check box if you would like someone from the City:Manager's office to call you. Thank you for your feedback! P:~LAN NIN G~ncintyk~Cust(xner Service Survey, do~ 2 City of Temecula OFFI ,C,E OF CiTY MANAGER ~ 43~)0 Bn.rJn*~S Park Drive - PO Box 903~ - Temeeula - California - 92589.9033 (909) 506-5100: FAX (909) 694~6499 CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey, Please be as specific as possible with your oomments. Please rate our service on a scale of I to 5.,with 1 being 'needs improvemenf' aqd 5 being ~exaellent". Please m.a~k "N/A" if not applieable. STAFF ASSISTANCE/GENERAL 1. Staff was courteous and professional. 2. Staff explained City requirements thoroughly. 3. Staff took under consideration alternative ideas. 4. Overall service. 5, General Comments: PROCESSING 1. Staff performed tasks efficiently and timely. _~ 2. Staff maintained oontact throughout the prooess. 3, Staff correspondence was well wriffen and clear. 4. Overall service. ~' 5. was the overall pro,ess oumbersome? Please explain: 6. Did staff keep you abreast of the processing of your application? 7. General Comments: Survey. doe ~0 B~d A~AI S£$~$0EB06 ~0:£] ~00E/90/B0 GRADING / (~OI~ISTRUCTION PLAN REVIE'VV 1. Plans were returned within scheduled time frame. 2. The plan comments were clear and understandable. 3. Questions or clarifications were adequately addressed. 4, General Comments: INSPECTION, ,,SERVICES 1. Inspe0tion requests were acted upon as scheduled. 2. Inspectom arrived within expected time frame. 3. Required corrections were made clear and concise. 4. Inspectors were courteous and acknowledged any concerns. 5. Overall service. 6. General Comments: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OPTIONAL: NAME: ADDRESS: PHONENUMBER: PROJECTADDRESS: [] Please check box if you would like someone from the City Manager's office to ~all you. Thank you for your feedback! R:Vllcintyk~Custcxl~r Selvioe Survey.doe ITEM 17 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ,~'---.. CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Grant Yates, Assistant to the City Manager October 8, 2002 Authorization of Additional Staff Time (At the Request of Councilmember Pratt) RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide direction for additional staff time to conduct further research on monorail systems. BACKGROUND: This item is placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Pratt. Staff has already spent the allowable time dedicated to researching the feasibility of monorail systems. Current City policy requires that once five hours of staff research time is exhausted, the City Council must authorize additional time. ITEM 18 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN_~;E CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Anthony Elmo-Director of Building and Safety October 8, 2002 Resolution Supporting California Building Officials RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION No. 02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFFICIALS RECOMMENDATION TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION FOR THE ADOPTION OF A COMBINATION OF BUILDING RELATED CODES DISCUSSION: The building code adoption process affects every citizen in every municipality of California on a daily basis. Sensible and efficient building code enforcement is vital to the public safety of all Californians. Concerns have been raised over actions of the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) over the past several years that have the potential of gravely endangering the people of our state. As a result of actions by the CBSC, California, the most seismically active state in the nation, has been relegated to the status of having to use outdated code provisions from the 1997 edition of the Building Code instead of the most current and up- to-date editions available, the 2000 edition of the International Building Code. Because of the excessively political nature of the state code adoption process administered by the CBSC, conflict between two (2) code development groups for code supremacy in California and the unacceptable and unnecessary delays in the adoption process by the CBSC, California will be utilizing provisions from the 1997 building code edition well into 2004. It is believed that these delays are being caused due to the long overdue publication of a new building code by one of the competing code development groups. The only motivation and goal of the California Building Officials (CALBO) is to ensure that the most appropriate set of building codes are adopted in California in a timely manner. The combination of available codes proposed by the California Building Officials (CALBO), consisting of the International Building and Residential Codes from the International Code Council (ICC), the Uniform Plumbing and Mechanical Codes of the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), and the Electrical Code of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), contain the most current standards, and have a proven track record. This combination of codes provides each of the competing code development groups a stake in the package of codes that must be considered for adoption. This matter can no longer be ignored by local officials because of the potential for harm to be visited upon our residents in the event of a building code related catastrophe occurring in our community. CALBO has recently brought this matter to the attention of the Governor and in meetings with his Secretary of State and Consumer Services. CALBO has also brought this matter to the attention of the membership of the League of California Cities as well as the California Building Industry Association. It is through the support of our City Councils and superiors that will ensure California stays in the forefront of building code enforcement in the United States. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE ATFACHMENTS: Letter to the Governor, Secretary of State and League of California Cities RESOLUTION NO. 02-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CALIFORNIA BUILDNG OFFICALS RECOMMENDATION TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMSSlON FOR THE ADOPTION OF A COMBINATION OF BUILDING RELATED CODES WHEREAS, the California Building Officials have been in existence for over forty years representing local government in the code adoption process and to keep local government informed about the ever-changing state of building codes in California; and WHEREAS, the mission of the California Building Officials is to work for the adoption of sensible, efficient, and up to date building codes to protect the public safety of all Californians; and WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Commission has caused California to fall drastically behind in building code enforcement by adopting out of date building codes for enforcement at the local level; and WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Commission has caused unnecessary delays in the past and current code adoption cycle of up to twenty- two (22) months, the current code adoption cycle being six (6) months behind schedule, and WHEREAS, the continuation of unnecessary delays in the current code adoption cycle and the continued utilization of out of date editions of building codes editions will subject the residents of California to harm in the event of a building code related catastrophe occurring in our communities, and WHEREAS, the California Building Standards Commission and the Governor should assure that the most up to date and reasonable building codes is a priority for California by directing the California Building Standards Commission-gO'- 7-0 forward in a timely manner and direct the adoption of the International Building Code, International Residential Code, Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code and the National Electrical Code in accordance with the recommendation of the California Building Officials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1: The City Council does support the recommendation of the California Building Officials to the California Building Standards Commission to proceed without further delay with the 2004 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle and that the Commission direct state agencies to proceed with the review for adoption of a combination of codes comprised of the International Building Code, International Residential Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code and National Electrical Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 2002. Ron Robe,s, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk ITEM 19 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~) CITY MANAGER ,..,~_~ '~' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Anthony J. Elmo, Director of Building and Safety October 8, 2002 Introduction of an Ordinance Amending the Uniform Building Code RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORN;A ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUlLDINGS~ THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE R:agendareporis/amending buiidingcode100802 1 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETrING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODES, 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BACKGROUND: The adoption of the most current editions of the model building codes is one of the most important building safety issues that will be presented to you for your consideration and adoption. The Building Codes enforced by local jurisdictions in the State of California are reviewed, amended, and adopted by the Building Standards Commission on a three (3) year code adoption cycle. Upon adoption and publication of these codes, each local jurisdiction has a period of 180 days to further modify these codes with more stringent local amendments based upon specific local geological, topographical, and, or climatic conditions. The ordinance before you tonight is being presented as staffs' recommendation for the adoption of the model codes. The State mandated adoption date is November 1,2002. The ordinance proposes very few local amendments. Staff has been involved in a Statewide effort to obtain uniformity among regional or county jurisdictions in the code provisions they enforce. Specifically, staff is proposing to modify the code provisions affecting the required plumbing fixture counts in the Old Town Specific Plan area. Due to the fact that space is of a premium in this area, past history has shown that a majority of buildings in the Old Town Specific Plan area are not capable of complying with current code provision without entering into costly additions to buildings. Unlike other areas of the city, public restroom facilities have been provided at various locations throughout Old Town with others planned. The code amendment proposed will raise the occupant loading before additional restrooms and fixtures are required. Other amendments in this legislation are mostly administrative in nature. Regulations that dictate the minimum fire resistance of roofing material used in the city and the requirement for licensed contractors to perform certain work in commercial buildings currently exist and will be carried forward. Staff is also recommending the requirement for installation of emergency gas shut-off valves based upon the geological fact of the known fault zones in Temecula. FISCAL IMPACTS: None A'I-fACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 02- Resolution No. 02- R:agendareports/amending buiidingcode100802 2 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER '15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUBCODE The City Council of the City of Temecula does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Chapter 15.04 Construction Codes of Title 15 (Building and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.04.010 Codes Adopted. Except as hereinafter provided in this Chapter, the following codes are adopted by reference as the Building Codes of the City of Temecula: A. California Building Code, 2001 Edition (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); B. California Mechanical Code, 2001 Edition (Part 4 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); C. California Plumbing Code, 2001 Edition (Part 5 of Title ---24 of thECalifornia-Code-of Regulations); D. California Electrical Code, 2001 Edition (Part 3 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); E. Administrative Code, 2001 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials; International Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, 2000 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials; G. California Housing Code, 2001 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials; and International Swimming Pool Spa and Hot Tub Code, 2000 Edition, published by the International Code Council A copy of each of the above codes shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and shall be made available for public inspection while such codes are in force. 15.04.020 California Building Code. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Building Code, 2001 Edition, adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 103 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and violation penalties are subject to Section 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of the Municipal Code. Bo Section 106.2 is hereby amended by modifying subsection five (5) to read as follows: 5. Retaining walls which are not over two (2) feet in height, and garden walls not over four (4) feet in height, measured from the top of footing to top of wall unless supporting a surcharge or impounding flammable Class I, Class 11 or III-A liquids Section 106.3.1 is hereby amended by adding thereto Subsection (8) to read as follows: 8. All contractors and their subcontractors must have current and valid city business licenses Section 106.4.4 is amended to read as follows Permit Expiration - Every permit issued by the building official under the provisions of this code 2 shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit does not progress in a manner that results in an approval of an inspection that clearly moves the project forward. Any permit that has not progressed meeting this requirement within a period of 180 days shall be considered suspended or abandoned, and shall expire by limitation. Before such work can be recommenced, a new permit shall be first obtained to do so, and the fee therefore shall be one-half the amount required for a new permit for such work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original plans and specifications for such work, no changes have occurred to any applicable .codes, and provided further that such suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year. In order to renew action on a permit after expiration, the permittee shall pay a new full permit fee. When changes to any applicable codes have been adopted, the permit may only be reinstated after a review has been made to certify that any new code requirements have been incorporated into the plans. Section 107.2 Permit Fees. Is hereby amended to read as follows: Fees for permits and services rendered pursuant to these building and construction regulations shall be paid to the building official as set forth in schedules established by resolution of the city council. The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of these codes shall be made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the fees shall be the total value of all construction Work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish, work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditions\lng, elevators, fire extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment (Ord 95-14 § 1 (part)). Section 107.3 Plan review fees is hereby amended to read as follows: When submittal documents are required by Section 302.2 of the Uniform Administrative Code as adopted in Section 15.04.060 of this Municipal Code, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting the submittal documents for plan review. Said plan review fee shall be seventy- five percent of the building permit fee as established by resolution of the city council pursuant to Section 15.02.010. The plan review fees specified in this section are separate fees from the permit fees specified in Section 15.02.010 and are in addition to the permit fee. When submittal documents are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan review or .when the project involves deferred submittal items as defined in Section 302.4.2. of the Uniform Administrative Code, an additional plan review fee shall be charged at the rate established by resolution of the city council. Ord 95-14 § 1 (part)) G~ Section 107.4 Expiration of plan review, is hereby amended to read as follows: Applications for which no permit is issued within one hundred eighty days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review maY thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time for action by application of the applicant for a period not exceeding one hundred eighty days on written request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. An application shall not be extended more than once. An application shall not be extended if this code or any other pertinent laws or ordinances have been amended subsequent to the date of application. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) 4 Section 107.6 Fee refunds is hereby amended to read as follows: The building official may authorize refunding of a fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than eighty percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under the permit issued in accordance with this code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than eighty percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any examination time has been expended. The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permitee not later than on hundred eighty days after the date of fee payment (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 107.7 Violations - Penalties is hereby added: It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to brect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this code. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 107.8 Civil penalty is hereby added to read as follows: Any person, firm or corporation who shall proceed with or commence work for which a permit is required by these building and construction regulations without first having obtained such permit shall,, if subsequently permitted to obtain a permit therefore, pay double the fee fixed for such work. The original permit fee shall be for issuance of the permit and the balance shall be a civil penalty. This provision shall not apply to emergency work when it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the building official that such work was urgently necessary and that it was not practical to obtain a permit before commencement of the work. In all such cases a permit must be secured as soon as it is practicable to do so, and if there is an unreasonable delay in securing the required permit, the civil penalty as provided in this section shall be charged. In no event shall such civil penalty exceed the permit fee plus five hundred dollars. The civil penalty provided in this section shall be in addition to any other fines and remedies prescribed elsewhere in this code. The payment of such fee and fine shall not relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of these building and construction regulations in the execution of the work. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 108.1 follows: is hereby amended to read as General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of construction shall have continuous inspection, as specified in Section 1701.5 Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection. A survey of the lot shall be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in 6 accordance with the approved plans. The survey shall denote any variations from the approved plan in tenths of a foot for locations and elevations. Section 109.1 exception is amended to read as follows: Exception: Group R, Division 3 and Group U Occupancies. Occupancy shall not be permitted prior to obtaining final inspection approval. Table No. 1-A Building Permit Fees is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 217 Progress - is the action or performance of work necessary to move forward, .or to advance a project towards completion Section 304.1 is amended by adding the following exception: Exception 1. In the Old Town Specific Plan area, for the purpose of determining required sanitation facilities, B occupancies shall be those with an occupant load of fifty (50) or less. 0 Section 502 is hereby amended by'adding thereto the following: Numbers or addresses for commercial and industrial buildings shall be maintained a minimum of twelve (12) inches in height facing the street or front of the building. Numbers or addresses in the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) of the Old Town Specific Plan, is permitted to be a minimum of eight (8) inches. All suites must have a minimum of (6) inch high letters on both front and rear doors. Residential usages must have as a minimum four (4) inch high letters. All letters must be placed upon a contrasting background. P. Section 1202.2.6 is hereby amended by adding: When mechanical ventilation is required in a Group S, Division 3 repair garage, the ventilation shall comply with the design provision in Section 1202.2.4. Q. Section 1503 is hereby amended to read as follows: The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code shall be as specified in Table No. 15-A and as classified in Section 1§04, except that no roof covering shall be less than a Class B roofing assemblyl .Exception: 1. The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code within the Historical District Overlay, generally known as the Old Town Temecula Historical Preservation District, shall not be less than a Class C roofing assembly. 2. The roof covering or roof assembly of all re-roofing shall conform to the applicable provisions of this Section as amended herein, except that the roof covering for the re-roofing of ten percent (10%) or less of the area of any roof may consist of material comparable to the remainder of the roof. R. Section 1900.4.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: The minimum thickness of concrete floor slabs supported directly on the ground shall not be less than three and one-half (3 ~) inches. All group R occupancies shall have a minimum six (6) mil moisture barrier with minimum two (2) inch sand cover. Exception 1. A moisture barrier shall not be required under slabs on grade of open or enclosed patios as defined in Section 217. S. Section 1900.4.4.1 is hereby further amended by adding thereto a new paragraph to read as follows: Slab Dowels. In all occupancies, slab connection from existing slabs to new construction shall be placed at a minimum twenty-four (24) inches on center with reinforcing steel of one half inch minimum diameter, eighteen (18) inches in length. Embedment to existing shall be a minimum of six (6) inches. For slab cuts 24" or greater shall also conform with these provisions. T. _Appendix Chapter 4. Section 421.1 para,qraph 1 Requirements is hereby amended to read as follows: 421.1 Outdoor Swimming Pool. An outdoor swimming pool shall be provided with a barrier that shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to plastering or filling with water or filling with water. The barrier shall comply with the following: The top of the* barrier shall be at least 60 inches above grade measured on the side of the b'~rrier that faces away from the swimming pool. The maximum vertical clearance at the bottom of the barrier may be increased to 4 inches (102 mm) when grade is a solid surface such as a concrete deck, or when the barrier is mounted on top of the above-ground pool structure. When barriers have horizontal members spaced less than 45 inches (1143 mm) apart, the horizontal members shall be placed on the pool side of the barrier. Any decorative design work on the side away from the swimming pool, such as protrusions, indentations away from the swimming pool, such as protrusions, indentations or cutouts which render the barrier easily climbable, is prohibited. The following appendices are deleted in their entirety from the 2001 California Building Code; Appendix 3, 9.10,11,13,,16,19,21,23,29, and 33. 15.04.030 California Mechanical Code. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Mechanical Code, 2001 Edition adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 111 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code. 9 Section 115 is hereby deleted in its entirety and superseded by Sections 15.02.010 through 15.02.050 of this Municipal Code, expressly incorporated herein by reference. All references in the Uniform Mechanical Code to fees, fee schedules, or fee tables shall mean the fee schedule as established by Resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 15.02.010 herein. D. Section 504 is hereby amended by adding the following: Section 504.1 makeup and exhaust ducts. Bathroom and laundry room exhaust ducts may be of gypsum wallboard subject to the limitation of Section 1002(a). Aluminum flex ducts are not permitted to be installed horizontally in rooms that produce steam: An angle greater than forty-five degrees from the vertical is considered a horizontal run. 15.04.50 California Electrical Code. The amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Electrical Code, 2001 edition, adopted by this Chapter. following California A. Section 90-4 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code. For commercial projects an electrical contractor shall be responsible for obtaining permits for electrical work performed. B. Section 90-8 is hereby amended by adding the following: Accessory uses or other building, signs, etc., separately located on the same lot or premises, shall have, connecting conductors run underground. (Agricultural area excepted.) ]0 Where spare circuit protective devices are provided or space for future circuit protective devices are provided on the bus in any flush or semi-flush mounted panel, then raceways of sufficient capacity to permit utilization of such space or spaces shall be provided to an approved accessible location. Circuits for electric vehicle charging stations shall meet all the requirements of CEC Article 625. Residential garages shall have a minimum three quarter (3~4) inch flex conduit ran from meter box to the garage fire wall and terminated in a metal box at forty-two (42) inches above finished floor for future electric vehicle charging station.. All residential electrical applications shall provide two (2) future expansion conduits from the meter box, stubbed to an accessible location. Section 110-5 is hereby amended by adding the following: Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, no aluminum conductors smaller than #6 A.W.G. shall be used. D. CEC Table 300-5 is amended to read as follows: CEC Table 300-5 location of wiring method or circuit "Under a Commercial Building" is amended to read "Si__~x (6) inches beneath the concrete slab" E. Section 336-4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 336-4 Uses Permitted. Non-metallic sheathed cable shall not be used for exposed wiring, except as provided in Section 336-4(b), and shall only be used in one and two family dwellings or multi-family dwellings (apartment houses). 15.04.40 California Plumbing Code. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Plumbing Code, 2001 Edition, adopted by this chapter A. Section 102.3.2 is amended by adding the following ]! Violations and violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code. B. Section 103.4 is deleted in its entirety and superseded by Sections 15.02.010 through 15.02.050 of this Municipal Code, expressly incorporated herein by reference. All references in the California Plumbing Code to fees, fee schedules, or fee tables shall mean the fee schedule as established by resolution of the city council in accordance with Section 15.02.010 heroin. C. Section 211 is amended to read as follows: (a) Indirect Waste Pipe. An indiroct waste pipe is a pipe that does not connect directly with the drainage system but conveys liquid wastes by discharging through an approved air gap into a plumbing fixture, interceptor or receptacle which is directly connected to the drainage system. D. Section 413.1 is amended by addition the following: In Groups B,F,H,M and S Occupancies, buildings or portions thereof where persons are employed shall be provided with at least one water closet for each sex when the number of employees exceeds four. Separate facilities shall be provided for each sex when the number of employees exceeds four. Such toilet facilities shall be located either in such building or conveniently in a building adjacent theroto on the same property. Such water closet room in connection with food establishments whero food is prepared, stored or served shall have a non-absorbent interior finish as specified in Section 807.1 of the California Building Code, shall have hand-washing facilities therein or adjacent theroto, and shall be separated from food preparation or storage rooms as specified in section 302.6 of the California Building Code. ]2 E. Section 719-5 is amended to read as follows: Cleanouts installed under concrete or asphalt paving shall be made accessible by yard boxes, or extended flush with paving with a "brass cap" or other approved material for installation where subject to vehicular traffic. F. Section 1202 is amended by adding the following: 1202.2.2 1202.8.1. 1202.8.2 Downstream of Gas Utility - that portion of a gas piping which is away from the gas utility meter and is on the user or customer side of the meter serving a building or structure. Residential Building - any single family dwelling, duplex, apartment building, condominium, town house, lodging house, congregate residence, hotel, or motel. Seismic Gas Shutoff Valve - a system consisting of a seismic sensing means and actuating means designed to automatically actuate a companion gas shut off means · installed in a gas piping system in order to shut off th~ gas downstream of the location of the gas shutoff means in the event of a severe seismic disturbance. The system may consist of separable components or may incorporate all functions in a single body. The terms "Seismically Activated Gas Shutoff Valves" and "Earthquake Sensitive Gas Shutoff Valves" are synonymous. Section 1204.3.2. is amended by adding the following: Testing of gas piping greater than two and one quarter (2 ¼) inches in outside diameter shall require a twenty- four (24) hour graph test witnessed by the jurisdiction. Such test shall be at sixty (60) p.s.i. Section 1211.4 is amended by adding the following exceptions: Exception: 2. The installation of propane gas line for island fixtures is allowed beneath the slab as approved by the Building Official. Section 1211 is amended by adding the following: 1211.22 The installation of Seismic Gas Shutoff Valves shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Be installed by a contractor licensed in the appropriate classification by the State of California. Exception: Seismic gas shutoff valves may be installed by a gas utility provided a permit is obtained and the valves are installed and approved in accordance with this section. 2. Be mounted rigidly to the exterior of the- building or structure containing the fuel gas piping. Exception: This requirement need not apply if the Building Department determines that the seismic 9as shutoff valve has been tested and listed for an alternate method of installation. 3. Be listed by an approved testing laboratory and certified by the Office of the State Architect. 4. Be approved by the Building and Safety Department. Have a thirty-year warranty, which warrants that the valve is free from defects, and will continue to properly operate for thirty years from the date of installation. Where seismic gas shutoff valves are installed as required by this section, they shall be maintained for the life of the building or structure or be replaced with a valve complying with the requirements of this section. The following appendices are deleted in their entirety from the 2001 California Plumbing Code: 14 Appendix E, mobile home parks and recreational vehicle parks; Appendix H, commercial kitchen grease interceptors; Appendix J, reclaimed water systems for nonresidential buildings. RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SE'I-rING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE 2001 EDITION OF THE. CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODES, 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE WHEREAS, certain building standards and other related uniform codes are adopted by the State of California in the California Building Standards Code which becomes applicable in the City unless amended by the City pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958; and, WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 provides make reasonably necessary changes or modifications based on certain adopting the most current edition of the model codes; and, for the City Council to local conditions before WHEREAS, the Building Official of the City of Temecula recommended that the modifications to the California Building Code, Code, California Plumbing Code, and the California Electrical Code are be adopted by the City of Temecula; and, has determined and California Mechanical reasonably required to WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 requires the City Council to make express findings of the necessity for modifications to the building standards in the most current editions of the model codes as adopted by the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, FIND, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula finds that the following amendments and modifications to the Temecula Municipal Code and the California Building Code, 2001 edition, the California Mechanical Code, 2001 edition, the California Plumbing Code, 2001 edition, and the California Electrical Code, 2001 edition, Administrative Code, 2001 edition, International Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, 2000 edition, California Housing Code, 2001 edition, International Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, 2000 edition, contained in Ordinance 02-__ are reasonably necessary due to consideration of specific local climatic, geological or topographical conditions as follows: Resos\resos 2002\02- 1 SECTION 15.04.020 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Building Code, 2001 Edition, adopted by this Chapter. Section 106.2 is hereby amended by modifying subsection five (5) to read as follows: Retaining walls which are not over two (2) feet in height, and garden walls not over four (4) feet in height, measured from the top of footing to top of wall unless supporting a surcharge or impounding flammable Class I, Class II or IIl-A liquids. This amendment is reason-"bly necessary because of the following local conditions: Geoloqical Conditions: The City of Temecula is located in an area near high seismic activity. Because of the degree of the City's urbanization and close proximity to major fault lines, the risk of structural damage and loss of life due to ground shaking is considerable. During a major earthquake, emergency resources would be extremely taxed, and the ability to respond to such emergencies would be complicated. Local standards in excess of statewide minimums will assist in reducing risks associated with earthquakes and the consequent disruption of traffic flow. B. Section 304.1 is amended by adding the following exception: Exception 1. In the Old Town Specific Plan area, for the purpose of determining required sanitation facilities, B occupancies shall be those with an occupant load of fifty (50) or less. Section 304.1 This amendment is administrative in nature necessitated by the space restrictions in Old Town to accommodate modifications of accessible restroom fixtures. This amendment is in line with the B occupancy criteria of 50 or less occupant as provided in the California Building Code. C. Section 1202.2.6 is hereby amended by adding: When mechanical ventilation is required in a Group S, Division 3 repair garage, the ventilation shall comply with the design provision in Section 1202.2.4 Section 1202.2.6. This amendment is reasonably necessary because of the following local conditions Climatic Conditions: Generally Riverside County and the City of Temecula has an arid climate. Annual temperatures can range from 30 degrees to 105 degrees resulting in the use of closeable openings for all occupancy types necessitating in the use of mechanical ventilation. Resos\resos 2002\02- 2 D. Section 1503 is hereby amended to read as follows: The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code shall be as specified in Table No. 15-A and as classified in Section 1504, except that no roof covering shall be less than a Class B roofing assembly. Exception: 1. The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code within the Historical District Overlay, generally known as the Old Town Temecula Historical Preservation District, shall not be less than a Class C roofing assembly. 2. The roof covering or roof assembly of all re-roofing shall conform to the applicable provisions of this Section as amended herein, except that the roof covering for the re-roofing of ten percent (10%) or less of the area of any roof may consist of material comparable to the remainder of the roof. Section 1503 Roof-Covering Requirements... This amendment is reasonably necessary because of the following local conditions: Climatic Conditions: Generally Riverside County and the City of Temecula has an arid climate. Annual rainfall varies from 3 inches in Blythe to over 33 inches in Pine Cove. Hot, dry Santa Ana winds are common to areas within Riverside County. These climatic conditions cause extreme drying of vegetation and common building materials and predispose the area to large destructive fires. Higher building standards are necessary to protect against the increased risk of fire. E. Section 1900.4.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: The minimum thickness of concrete floor slabs supported directly on the ground shall not be less than three and one-half (3~) inches. All group R occupancies shall have a minimum six (6) mil moisture barrier with minimum two (2) inch sand cover. Exception 1. A moisture barrier shall not be required under slabs on grade of open or enclosed patios as defined in Section 217. Section 1900.4.4.1 is hereby further amended by adding thereto a new paragraph to read as follows: Slab Dowels. In all occupancies, slab connection from existing slabs to new construction shall be placed at a minimum twenty-four (24) inches on center with reinforcing steel of one half-inch minimum diameter, eighteen (18) inches in length. Embedment to existing shall be a minimum of six (6) inches. For slab cuts 24" or greater shall also conform with these provisions. Section 1924. Minimum Slab Thickness...; and Section 1924.1 Slab Dowels... Resos\resos 2002\02- 3 These amendments are reasonably necessary because of the following local conditions: Topoqraphical Conditions: The City is comprised of varying soil conditions and a fluctuating water table that is fed by artesian springs. This water table will elevate substantially following heavy rain. The addition of a moisture barrier will mitigate excess moisture absorption into concrete placed on grade. Geoloqical Conditions: The City of Temecula is located Seismic Zone No. 4 and contains two (2) faults running north and south within it's boundaries. The addition of slab dowels as an additional means of attachment of added structures to existing is intended to help mitigate the effects of seismic activity on these connections. Appendix Chapter 4. Section 421.1 para,qraph I Requirements is hereby amended to read as follows: 421.1 Outdoor Swimming Pool. An outdoor swimming pool shall be provided with a barrier that shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to plastering or filling with water. The barrier shall comply with the following: The top of the barrier shall be at least 60 inches above grade measured on the side of the barrier that faces away form the swimming pool. The maximum vertical clearance at the bottom of the barrier may be increased to 4 inches (102 mm) when grade is a solid surface such as a concrete deck, or when the barrier is mounted on top of the above-ground pool structure. When barriers have horizontal members spaced less than 45 inches (1143 mm) apart, the horizontal members shall be place on the poolside of the barrier. Any decorative design work on the side away from the swimming pool, such as protrusions, indentations or cutouts away from the swimming pool, which render the barrier easily climbable, is prohibited. Appendix Chapter 4. Section 421.1 paragraph I is considered to be administrative in nature and necessary in order to allow for a 54 inch release mechanism height from grade specified. II. SECTION 15.04.030 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Mechanical Cede, 2001 Edition adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 504 is hereby amended by adding the following: Section 504.1 makeup and exhaust ducts. Bathroom and laundry room exhaust ducts may be of gypsum wallboard subject.to the limitation of Section 1002 (a). Aluminum flex ducts are not permitted to be installed horizontally in rooms that produce steam. An angle greater that forty-five degrees from the vertical is considered a horizontal run. Resos\resos 2002\02- 4 Section 504.1 Makeup and exhaust ducts... This amendment is reasonably necessary because of the following local conditions: Climatic Conditions: Due to the proximity to the ocean and the influx of moist air experienced in the City, water deposited in the corrugated depressions of the aluminum flex ducting will not properly evaporate, thus creating a potential for stagnation, mildew, and possible excessive build up. III SECTION 15.04.40 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Plumbing Code, 2001 Edition adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 413.1 is amended by adding the following: In Groups B.F.H.M. and S Occupancies, buildings or portions thereof where persons are employed shall be provided with at least one water closet for each sex when the number of employees exceeds four. Separate facilities shall be provided for each sex when the number of employees exceeds four. Such toilet facilities shall be located either in such building or conveniently in a building adjacent thereto on the same property. Such water closet room in connection with food establishments where food is prepared, stored or served shall have a non-absorbent interior finish as specified in Section 807.1 of the California Building Code, shall have hand-washing facilities therein or adjacent thereto, and shall be separated from food preparation or storage rooms as specified in section 302.6 of the California Building Code. Section 413.1 This amendment is administrative in nature. The deletion of this section is made in lieu of utilizing Chapter 29 and Appendix Chapter 29 of the California Building Code as the standard for establishing required number of plumbing fixtures. B. Section 719.5 is amended to read as follows: Cleanouts installed under concrete or asphalt paving shall be made accessible by yard boxes, or extended flush with paving with a "brass cap" or other approved material for installation where subject to vehicular traffic. Section719.5This amendment is administrative in nature intended to clarify an approved material for clean out installations. This is in answer to our history of inquiries on this subject. C. Section 1202 is amended by adding the following: 1202.2,2 Downstream of Gas Utility - that portion of a gas piping which is away from the gas utility meter and is on the user or customer side of the meter serving a building or structure. Resos\resos 2002\02- 5 1202.8.1 1202.8.2 Do Residential Building - any single family dwelling, duplex, apartment building, condominium, town house, lodging house, congregate residence, hotel or motel. Seismic Gas Shutoff Valve - a system consisting of a seismic sensing means and actuating, means designed to automatically actuate means designed to automatically actuate a companion gas shut off means installed in a gas piping system in order to shut off the gas downstream of the location of the gas shutoff means in the event of a severe seismic disturbance. The system may consist of separable components or may incorporate all functions in a single body. The terms "Seismically Activated Gas Shutoff Valves" and "Earthquake Sensitive Gas Shutoff Valves" are synonymous. Section 1204.3.2 is amended by adding the following: Testing of gas piping greater than two and one quader (2~,4) inches in outside diameter and all medium pressure gas piping, shall require a twenty-four (24) hour graph test witnessed by the jurisdiction. Such test shall be at sixty (60) p.s.i. Section 1204.3.2 Final Piping Inspection This amendment is reasonably necessary because of the following conditions: Climatic Conditions: Generally Riverside County and the City of Temecula has an arid climate. Hot, dry Santa Ana winds are common to areas within Riverside County. These conditions contribute significantly to the fluctuation of air pressure in gas plumbing lines. In lines larger that two (2) inches these fluctuations are subtler because of the volume, hence detecting a small leak becomes more difficult in the code prescribed time frame of ten minutes. Section 1211 is amended by adding the following: 1211.22 The installation of Seismic Gas Shutoff Valves shall comply with the following requirements: a. Be installed by a contractor licensed in the appropriate classification by the State of California. Exception: Seismic gas shutoff valves may be installed by a gas utility provided a permit is obtained and the valves are installed and approved in accordance with this section. b. Be mounted rigidly to the exterior of the building or structure containing the fuel gas piping. Resos\resos 2002\02- 6 Exception: This requirement need not apply if the Building Department determines that the seismic gas shutoff valve has been tested and listed for an alternate method of installation. c. Be listed by an approved testing laboratory and certified by the Office of the State Architect. d. Be approved by the Building and Safety Department. Have a thirty-year warranty, which warrants that the valve is free from defects, and will continue to properly operate for thirty years from the date of installation. Where seismic gas shutoff valves are installed as required by this section, they shall be maintained for the life of the building or structure or be replaced with a valve complying with the requirements of this section. Geolo.qical Conditions: The City of Temecula is located in Seismic Zone No. 4 and contains two (2) faults running north and south within its boundaries. IV SECTION 15.04.50 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Electrical Code, 2001 edition, adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 90-8 is hereby amended by adding the following: Accessory uses or other building, signs, etc., separately located on the same lot or premises shall have, connecting conductors run underground. (Agricultural area excepted.) Where spare circuit protective devices are provided or space for future circuit protective devices are provided on the bus in any flush or semi-flush mounted panel, then raceways of sufficient capacity to permit utilization of such space or spaces shall be provided to an approved accessible location. Circuits for electric vehicle charging stations shall meet all the requirements of CEC Article 625. Residential garages shall have a minimum three quarter (3/4) inch flex conduit ran from meter box to the garage fire wall and terminated in a metal box at forty-two (42) inches above finished floor for future electric vehicle charging station. All residential electrical applications shall provide two (2) future expansion conduits from the meter box, stubbed to an accessible location. Section 90-8. This amendment is administrative in nature intended to bring the requirement of this section in line with the provisions of the Temecula Development Code. Resos\resos 2002\02- 7 B. Section 110.5 is hereby amended by adding the following: Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, no aluminum conductors smaller than #6 A.W.G. shall be used. Section 110-5. This amendment is intended to establish a minimum size for the use of aluminum conductors primarily convenience receptacle and circuit breaker installations in residential and light commercial construction. The receptacles available are not designed for regular maintenance primarily due to the areas they are typically used in. C. CEC Table 300-5 is amended to read as follows: CEC Table 300-5 location of wiring method or circuit "Under a Commercial Building" is amended to read "Six (6) inches beneath the concrete slab". CEC Table 300-5. This amendment is administrative in nature intended to address the installation of conduits in underslab areas. D. Section 336-4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 336-4 Uses Permitted. Non-metallic sheathed cable shall not be used for exposed wiring, except as provided in Section 336-4(b), and shall only be used in one and two family dwellings or multi-family dwellings (apartment houses). Article 336 Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable. Section 336-3 Uses Permitted... This amendment is reasonably necessary because of the following local conditions: Topographical Conditions: The City is located on a north/south transportation corridor and is developing both a medical manufacturing and micro component business base. These occupancies typically contain hazardous uses of varying degree. Non-metallic sheathed cable is not prohibited from use in the city, but only in commercial and industrial type applications where the type of construction and constant tenant improvement needs cause a concern for the potential damage that may be caused to this cable's soft insulation and protection sheathing. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby further finds that the administrative amendments and modifications to the Temecula Municipal Code and the California Building Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, and California Electrical Code contained in Ordinance No. 02- regarding violations and penalties (Building Code Section 103, Mechanical Code Section 111, Plumbing Code Section 102.3.2, and Electrical Code Section 90-04), fees (Building Code Section 107 and Table l-A, Mechanical Code Section 115, and Plumbing Code Section 103.4), definitions (Plumbing Code Section 211 ) and other provisions (e.g., Building Code Section 106.3.1 ), are reasonable necessary to allow for the application of such Codes by procedures suited to the size and nature of the City's staff an(] administrative agencies by means suited to the City's Resos\resos 2002\02- 8 experience with local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions and to provide sufficient staff support for the time-consuming inspections and analysis required by the City's fire and seismic hazards. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of October, 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, California, 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 October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Resos\resos 2002\02- 9 AMENDED STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. 19 APPROVAL CITYATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANCE ClTY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT . City Manager/City Council Anthony J. Elmo, Director of Building and Safety,./~ October 8, 2002 Introduction ~)f an Ordinance Amending the California Building Codes RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Introduce and read by titie only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCENO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE. .2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE · 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENTOF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE R:agendareports/amending buildingcode100802 I 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ;1'O ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE 2000 EDITION oF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE, AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA, AND HOT TUB CODE, ALONG WITH AMENDMENTS TO EACH CODE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR HEARING COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CODES FOR OCTOBER 22, 2002 .) BACKGROUND: The adoption of the most current editions.of the model building codes is one of the most important building safety issues that will be presented to you for. your consideration and adoption. The Building Codes enfomed by local jurisdictions in the State of California are reviewed, amended, and adopted by the Building Standards Commission on a three (3) year code adoption Cycle. Upon adoption and publication of these codes, each local jurisdiction has a period of 180 days to further modify these codes with more stringent local amendments based upon specific local geological, · topographical, and, or climatic conditions. The ordinance before you tonight is being presented as staffs' recommendation for the adoption of the model codes. The State mandated adoption date is November 1, 2002. The ordinance proposes very few local amendments'. Staff has been involved in a Statewide effort to obtain uniformity among regional or county jurisdictions in the code provisions they enforce. Specifically, staff~ is proposing to modify the code provisions affecting the required plumbing fixture counts in the Old Town Specific Plan area. Due to the fact that space is of a premium in this area, past history has shown that a majodty of buildings in the Old Town Specific Plan area are not capable of complying with current code provision without entering into costly additions to buildings. Unlike other areas of the city, public restroom facilities have been provided at vadous locations throughout Old Town with others planned. The code amendment proposed will raise the occupant loading before additional restrooms and fixtures are required. Other amendments in this legislation are mostly administrative in nature. Regulations that dictate the minimum fire resistance of roofing matedal used in the city and the requirement for licensed contractors to perform certain work in commercial buildings currently exist and will be carried forward. Staff is also recommending the requirement for installation of emergency gas shut-off valves based upon the geological fact of the known fault zones in Temecula. FISCAL IMPACTS: ATTACHMENTS: None Ordinance No. 02- Resolution No. 02- R:agendarepor[s/amending buildingcode100802 2 ORDINANCE NO. 02-__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER t5.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 200t EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF 'THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION -OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE · CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB~,ODE The City Council of the City of Temecula does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Chapter 15.04 Construction Codes of Title 15 (Building and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.04.010 Codes Adopted. Except as hereinafter provided in this Chapter, the following codes are adopted by reference as the Building Codes of the City of Temecula: A. California Building Code, 2001 Edition (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); B. Califomia Mechanical Code. 2001 Edition (Pad 4 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); C. California Plumbing Code, 2001 Edition (Part 5 of Title 2-4~l~the-Californla~Code of Recj~latlons); D. California Electrical 'Code, 2001 Edition (Part 3 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations); E. Administrative Code, 2001 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials; International Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, 2000 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials; G. California Housing Code, 2001 Edition, published by the International Conference of Bud ng Officials; and Ho International Swimming Pool Spa and Hot Tub Code, 2000 Edition, published by the International Code Council A copy of each of the above codes shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and shall be made available for public inspection while such codes are ih force. 'i5.04.020 California Building Code. The following amendments additions and deletions are made to the California Building Code, 2001 Edition, adopted by this Chapter. A. Section 103 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and violation penalties are subject to Section 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of the Municipal Code. Bo Section 106.2 is hereby amended by modifying subsection five (5) to read as follows: 5. Retaining walls which are not over two (2) feet in height, and garden walls not over four (4) feet in height, measured from the top of footing to top of wall unless Supporting a surcharge or impounding.flammable Class I, Class 11 or III-A liquids Section 106.3.1 is hereby amended by adding thereto Subsection (8) to read as follows: 8. All contractors and their subcontractors must have current and valid city business licenses Section 106.4.4 is amended to read as follows Permit Expiration - Every permit issued by the building official under the provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit does not progress in a manner that results in an approval of an inspection that clearly moves the project forward. Any permit that has not progressed meeting this requirement within a period of 180 days shall be considered suspended or abandoned, and shall expire by limitation. Before such work can be recommenced, a new permit shall be first obtained to · do so, and the fee therefore shall be one-half the amount required for a new permit fo[ such work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original plans and specifications for such work, no changes have occurred to any applicable .codes, and provided further that such suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year. In order to renew action on a permit after expiration, the permittee shall pay a new full permit fee. When changes to any applicable codes have been adopted, the permit may only be reinstated after a review has been made to certify that any new code · requirements have been incorporated into the plans. Section 107.2 Permit Fees. Is hereby amended to read as follows: Fees for permits and services rendered pursuant to these building and construction regulations shall be' paid to the building official as set forth in schedules established by resolution 'of the city council. The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of these codes shall be made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the fees shall be the total value of all construction Work for which the. permit is issued, as well as all finish, work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditions\lng, elevators, fire extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment (Ord 95-14 § 1 (part)). Section 107.3 Plan review fees is hereby amended to read as follows: 3 G~ When submittal documents are required by Section 302.2 of the Uniform Administrative Code as adopted in Section 15.04.060 of this Municipal Code, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting the submittal documents for plan review. Said plan review fee shall be seventy- five percent of the building.permit fee as established by resolution of the city council pursuant to Section 15.02.010. The plan review fees specified in this section are separate fees from the permit fees specified in Section 15.02.010 and are in addition to the permit fee. When submittal documents are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan review or-when the project involves deferred submittal items as defined in Section 302.4.2. of the Uniform Administrative Code, an additional plan review fee shall be charged at the rate established by resolution of the city council. Ord 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 107.4 Expiration o{ plan review, is hereby amended to read as follows: . Applications for which no permit is issued within one hundred eighty days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to . the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time for action by application of the applicant for a pedod not exceeding one hundred eighty days on written request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. An application shall not be extended more than once. An application shall not be extended if this code or any other pertinent laws or ordinances have been amended subsequent to the date of application. In order to renew action on an ppi cat on after expIration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) 4 Section 107.6 Fee refunds is hereby amended to read as follows: The building official may authorize refunding of a fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than eighty percent of the permit fee paid when. no work has been done under the permit issued in accordance with this code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than eighty percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn o~ canceled before any examination time has been expended. The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permitee not later than on hundred eighty days after the date of fee payment (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 107.7 Violations - Penalties is hereby added: It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to ~rect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this code. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 107.8 Civil penalty is hereby added to read as follows: Any person, firm (~r.corporation who shall proceed with or commence work for which a permit is required by these building and construction regulations without first having obtained, such permit shall,. If subsequently permitted to obtain a permit therefore, pay double the fee fixed for such work. The original permit fee shall be for issuance of the permit and the balance shall be a civil penalty. This provision shall not apply to emergency work when it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the building official that such work was urgently necessary and that it was not practical to obtain a permit before commencement of the work. In all such cases a permit must be secured as soon as it is practicable to do so, and if there is an unreasonable delay in secudng the required permit, the civil penalty as provided in this section shall be charged. In no event shall such civil penalty exceed the permit fee plus five hundred dollars. The civil penalty provided in this section shall be in addition to any other fines and remedies prescribed elsewhere in this code. The payment of such fee and fine shall not relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of these building and construction regulation~ in the execution of the work. (Ord. 95-14 § 1 (part)) Section 108.1 follows: is hereby amended to read as General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of construction shall have continuous inspection, as specified in Section 1701.5 Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to all°w inspection. A survey of the lot shall be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in accordance with the approved plans. The survey shall denote any variations from the approved plan in tenths of a foot for locations and elevations. Section 109.1 exception is amended to read as follows: Exception: Group R, Division 3 and Group U Occupancies. Occupancy shall not be permitted prior to obtaining final inspection approval. .O Table No. 1-A Building Permit Fees is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 217 - Progress - is the action or performance of work necessary to move forwa~:d,.or. to advance a project towards completion Section 304.'1 is amended by adding the following exception: Exception 1. In the Old Town Specific Plan area, for the · purpose of determining required sanitation facilities, B occupancies shall be those with an occupant load of fifty (50) or less. Section 502 is hereby amended by' adding thereto the following: Numbers or addresses for commercial and industrial buildings shall be maintained a minimum of twelve (12) inches in height facing the street or front of the building. · Numbers.or addresses in the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) of the Old Town Specific Plan, is permitted to be a minimum of eight (8) inches. All suites must have a minimum of (6) inch high letters on both front and rear doors. Residential usages must have as a minimum four (4) inch 'high letters. All letters must be placed upon a contrasting background. P. Section 1202.2.6 is hereby amended by adding: When mechanical ventilation is required in a Group S, Division 3 repair garage, the ventilation shall comply with the design provision in Section 1202.2.4. Q. Section 1503 is hereby amended to read as follows: The roof covering or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code shall be as specified in Table No. 15-A and as classified in Section 1504, except that no roof covering shall be less than a Class B roofing assembly: Exception: 1. The roof covedng or roofing assembly on any structure regulated by this Code within the Historical District Overlay, generally knoWn as the Old Town Temecula Historical Preservation District, shall not be less than a Class C roofing assembly. 2. The roof covering or roof assembly of all re-roofing shall conform to the applicable provisions of this Section as amended herein, except that the roof covering for the re-roofing often percent (10%) or less of the area of any roof may consist of material comparable to the remainder of the roof. R. Section 1900.4.4 is hereby amended to read as foliows: The minimum thickness of concrete floor slabs supported directly on the ground shall not be less than three and one-half (3 ~) inches. All group R occupancies shall have a minimum six (6) mil moisture barrier with' minimum two (2) inch sand cover. Exception 1. A moisture barrier shall not be required under slabs on grade of open or enclosed patios as defined .in Section 217. S. Section 1900.4.4.1 is hereby fudher amended by adding thereto a new paragraph to read as follows: Slab Dowels. In all occupancies, slab connection from existing slabs to new construction shall be placed at a minimum twenty-four (24) inches on center with reinforcing steel of one half inch minimum diameter, eighteen (18) inches in length. Embedment to existing shall be a minimum of six (6) inches. For slab cuts 24" or greater shall also conform with these provisions. T. Appendix Chapter 4. Section 421.1 paragraph 1 Requirements is hereby amended to read as follows: 421.1 Outdoor Swimming Pool. An outdoor swimming pool shall be provided with a barder that shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to plastering or filling with water or filling with water. The barrier shall comply, with the following: The top of the' barder shall be at least. 60 inches above grade measured on the side of the b'-~rrier that faces away from the swimming pool. The maximum vertical clearance at the bottom of the barder may'be increased to 4 inches (102 mm) when grade is a solid surface such as a concrete deck, or when the barrier is mounted on top of the above-ground pool structure. When barriers have horizontal members spaced less than 45 inches (1143 mm) apart, the horizontal members shall be placed on the pool side of the barrier. Any decorative design work on the side away from the swimming pool, such as *protrusions, indentations away from the swimming pool, such as protrusions, indentations or cutouts which render the barrier easily climbable, is prohibited. .U. The following appendices are deleted in their entirety from the 2001 California Building Code; Appendix 3, 9.10,11,13,16,19,21,23,29, and 33. 15.04.030 California Mechanical Code. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Mechanical Code, 2001 Edition. adopted by this Chapter. A..,Section 111 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code. Section 115 is hereby deleted in its entirety and superseded by Sections 15.02.010 through 15.02.050 of this Municipal Code, expressly incorporated herein by reference. All references in the Uniform Mechanical Code to fees, fee schedules, or fee tables shall mean the fee schedule as established by Resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 15.02.010 herein. D. Section 504 is hereby amended by adding the following: Section 504.1 makeup and exhaust ducts. Bathroom and laundry room exhaust ducts may be of gypsum, wallboard subject to the limitation of Section 1002(a). Aluminum .flex ducts are not permitted to be installed horizontally' in rooms that produce steam: An angle greater than forty-five degrees from the vertical is considered a horizontal run. 15.04.50 California Electrical Code. The amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Electrical Code, 2001 edition, adopted by this Chapter. follOWing California A. Section 90-4 is hereby amended by adding the following: Violations and-violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code, For commercial projects an electrical contractor shall be responsible for obtaining permits for electrical .work performed. B. Section 90-8 is hereby amended by' adding the following: Accessory uses or other building, signs, etc., separately located on the same lot or premises, shall have, connecting conductors run underground. (Agricultural area excepted.) l0 Where spare circuit protective devices are provided or space for future circuit protective devices are provided on the bus in any flush or semi-flush mounted panel, then raceways of sufficient capacity to permit utilization of such space or spaces shall be provided to an approved accessible location. Circuits for electric' vehicle charging stations shall meet all the requirements of CEC Article 625. Residential garages shall have a minimum three quarter (3/4) inch flex conduit ran from meter box to the garage fire wall and terminated ina metal box at forty-two (42) inches above finished floor for future electdc vehicle charging station.. All residential electrical applications shall provide two (2) future expansion conduits from the meter box, stubbed to an accessible location. Section 110-5 is hereby amended by adding the following: Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, no aluminum conductors smaller than #6 A.W.G. shall be used. D. CEC Table 300-5 is amended to read as follows: CEC Table 300-5 location of wiring method or circuit "Under a Commercial Building" is amended to read ".Six (6) inches beneath the concrete slab" E, Section 336-4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 336-4 Uses Permitted. Nommetallic sheathed cable shall not be used for exposed wiring, except as provided in Section 336-4(b), and shall only be used in one and two family dwellings or multi-family dwellings (apartment houses). 15.04.40 CalifOrnia Plumbing Code. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Plumbing Code, 2001 Edition, adopted by this chapter A. Section 102.3.2 is amended by adding the following ]! Violations and violation penalties are subject to Sections 15.02.060 and Chapter 1.20 of this Municipal Code. B. Section 103.4 is deleted in its entirety and superseded by Sections 15.02.010 through 15.02.050 of this Municipal Code, expressly incorporated herein by reference. All references in the California Plumbing Code to fees, fee schedules, or fee tables shall mean the fee schedule as established by resolution of the city council in accordance with Section 15.02.010 herein. C. Section 211 is amended to read as follows: (a) Indirect Waste Pipe. An indirect waste pipe is a pipe that does not connect directly with the drainage system but conveys liquid wastes by discharging through an approved air gap into a plumbing fixture, interceptor or receptacle which is directly connected to the drainage system. D. Section 413..1 is amended by addition the following: In Groups B,F,H,M and S Occupancies, buildings or portions thereof where persons are employed shall be provided with at least one water closet for each · sex when the number of employees exceeds four. Separate facilities shall be provided for each sex when the number of employees exceeds four. .Such toilet facilities shall be located either in such building or conveniently in a building adjacent thereto on the same properly. Such water closet room in connection with food estab!ishments where food is prepared, stored or sen/ed shall have a non-absorbent interior finish as specified in Section 807.1 of the California Building Code, shall have hand-washing facilities therein or adjacent thereto, and shall be separated from food preparation or storage rooms as specified in section 302.6 of the California Building Code. E. Section 719-5 is amended to read as follows: Cleanouts installed under concrete or asphalt paving shall be made accessible by yard boxes, or extended flush with paving with a "brass cap" or other approved material for installation where subject to vehicular traffic. Fo 1202.8.t. 1202.8.2 Section 1202 is amended by adding the. following: 1202.2.2 Downstream of Gas Utility - that .podion of a gas piping which is away from the gas utility meter and is on the user or customer side of the meter serving a building or structure. Residential Building - any single family dwelling, duplex, apartment building, condominium, town house, lodging house, congregate residence, hotel, or motel. Seismic Gas Shutoff Valve - a system consisting of a seismic sensing means and actuating means designed to autbmatically actuate a companion gas shut off means · installed in, a gas piping system in order to shut off the gas downstream of the location of the gas shutoff means in the event of a severe seismic disturbance. The system may consist of separable components or may .incorporate all functions in a single body. The terms "Seismically Activated Gas Shutoff ValVes" and "Earthquake Sensitive Gas Shutoff Valves" are synonymous. Section 1204.3.2. is amended by adding the following: Testing of gas piping greater than two and one quarter (2 ~) inches in outside diameter shall require a twenty- four (24) hour graph test witnessed by the jurisdiction. Such test shall be at sixty (60) p.s.i. Section 1211.4 is amended by adding the following exceptions: ]3 Exception: 2. The installation of propane gas line for island fixtures is allowed beneath the slab as approved by the Building Official. Section 1211 is amended by adding the following: 1211.22 The installation of Seismic Gas Shutoff Valves shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Be installed by a contractor licensed in the appropriate classification by the State of California. Exception: Seismic gas shutoff valves may be installed by a gas utility provided a permit is obtained and the valves are installed and approved in accordance with this section. 2. Be mounted rigidly to the exterior of the-building or structure containing the fuel gas piping. Exception: This requirement need not apply if the Building Department determines that the seismic gas shutoff valve has been tested' and listed for an alternate method of installation. 3. Be listed by an approved testing laboratory and cedified by the Office of the State Architect. 4. Be approved by the Building and Safety Department. Have a thirty-year warranty, which warrants that the valve is free from defects, and will continue to properly operate for thirty years from the date of installation. Where seismic gas shutoff valves are installed as required by this section, they. shall be maintained for the life of the building or structure or be replaced with a valve complying with the requirements of this section. The following appendices are deleted in their entirety from the 2001 California Plumbing Code: ]4 Appendix E, mobile home parks and recreational vehicle parks; Appendix H, commercial kitchen grease interceptors; Appendix J, reclaimed water systems for nonresidential buildings. 15 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION O,F THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI'J'Y OF TEMECULA DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE 200'1 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE · CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, THE 200'1 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, THE '1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE, AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA, AND HOT TUB CODE, ALONG WITH AMENDMENTS TO EACH CODE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR HEARING COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CODES FOR OCTOBER 22, 2002 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF TEMECULA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section '1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby announce its intention to consider adoption of an Ordinance entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE; THE 1999 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; THE 2000 EDITION OF THE .INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS 'BUILDINGS; THE 2001 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA HOUSING CODE; AND THE 2000 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING POOL, SPA, AND HOT TUB CODE" (the Ordinance). On October 8, 2002, the City Council gave first reading to and introduced said Ordinance. The Council will also consider adoption of a Resolution which sets forth the local conditions upon which a determination will be made by the City. Council that modifications to Chapter 15.04 adopting the uniform codes are reasonable and necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the community ithe "Resolution"). Section 2. The City Council hereby sets a public hearing for October 22, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Temecula at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear the comments of the public on said ordinance and the uniform codes to be adopted thereby and on the adoption of said Ordinance and Resolution. Notice of the Public Headng shall be published in newspaper of general circulation in the City pursuant to Government Code 6066. Section 3. Copies of the codes proposed to be adopted by reference and described in Section 1 of this Resolution as well as copies of the proposed codes, Ordinance and Resolution described in Section 1 of this Resolution are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available during the office hours of the City Clerk for public inspection. R:/Resbs 2002/02-__ I Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of October, 2002. A'I-I'EST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, 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 this 8th day of October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNClLMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk R'JResos 2002/02-__ 2 ITEM 20 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CiTY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim McBride, Fire Marshal October 8, 2002 An Urgency Ordinance Amending the California Fire Code. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION, ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE Adopt an Urgency Ordinance entitled: URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. 3. Introduce and read by flue only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. DISCUSSION: The adoption of the most current edition Of the California Fire Code is one of the most important public health, safety and welfare issues that will be presented to you for your consideration and adoption. The fire codes enforced by local jurisdictions in the State of California are reviewed, amended and adopted by the Building Standards Commission on a three (3) year code adoption cycle. Upon the adoption and publication of the State Codes, each local jurisdiction has a period of 180 days to further modify these Codes with more stringent local amendments based upon local geographical, topographical and or climatic conditions. The ordinance before you tonight is being presented as an urgency ordinance. The state mandated adoption date is Nov. 1, 2002. Therefore, due to the length of time involved with staff's extensive study of the new code editions, and to enable staff to adopt the California Fire Code with local amendments before this date, the urgency action is necessary. The ordinance before you tonight proposes very few local amendments. Many of the provisions in this ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the current Municipal Code. Staff is proposing to modify the code provisions that are mostly administrative in nature and are substantiated on the requirements of fire apparatus for turning radius, weight and operational Considerations. Provisions that dictate the requirement of fire extinguishing systems based on building construction type, size of the building, and required fire flow currently exist and will be carried forward. These provisions are consistent with regulations as currently required by Riverside County Fire Department. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 02- Urgency Ordinance No. 02- Ordinance No. 02- RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION, ARE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE. WHEREAS, certain building standards and other related uniform codes are adopted by the State of California in the California Building Standards Code which becomes applicable in the City unless amended by the City pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958; and, WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 provides for the City Council to make reasonably necessary changes or modifications based on certain local conditions before adopting the most current edition of the model codes; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Chief of the City of Temecula has determined and recommended that the modifications to the California Fire Code CCR, Title 24 Part 9, 2001 edition are reasonably required to be adopted by the City of Temecula; and, WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 requires the City Council to make express findings of the necessity for modifications to the building standards in the most current editions of the model codes as adopted by the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, FIND, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section t. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby expressly finds that the amendments and modifications to the Temecula Municipal Code and the California Fire Code, CCR Title 24 Part 9, 2001 edition, contained in Ordinance No. 02- regarding identification of fire protection equipment and premises (Subsections C and D of Sections 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), fire apparatus access reads (Subsections E, F, G, H, I, J and K of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), fire protection systems and equipment (Subsections L, M, N, O, P, and Q of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), fire- extinguishing systems (Subsection R, S and T of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), fire alarms (Subsection U of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), fire- flow requirements (Subsection W of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code) and fire hydrant locations (Subsection X of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code) are reasonably necessary due to consideration of specific local climatic, geological or topographical conditions as follows: Climatic Conditions: Generally Riverside County and the City of Temecula has an arid climate. Annual rainfall varies from 3 inches in Blythe to over 33 inches in Pine Cove. Hot, dry Santa Ana winds are common to areas within Riverside County. These winds constitute a contributing factor which causes small fires originating in high density development presently being constructed in the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula which spread quickly and create the need for an increased level of fire protection. This added protection, including, but not limited to on-site protection, will supplement normal Fire Department response available in new development, and provide immediate fire protection for life and safety of multiple- occupancy occupants during fire occurrence. TopoRraphical Conditions: Traffic and circulation congested in urban areas often place Fire Department response time to emergencies at risk. This condition makes the need for enhanced on-site protection for property occupants necessary. GeoloRical Conditions: The City of Temecula is located in an area near high seismic activity. Because of the degree of the City's urbanization and close proximity to major fault lines, the risk of structural damage and loss of life due to ground shaking is considerable. Dudng a major earthquake, emergency resources would be extremely taxed, and the ability to respond to such emergencies would be complicated. Local standards in excess of statewide minimums will assist in reducing dsks associated with earthquakes and the consequent disruption of traffic flow. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby further finds that the administrative amendments and modifications to the Temecula Municipal Code and the Califomia Fire Code, CCR Title 24 Part 9, 2001 edition, contained in Ordinance No. 02- regarding definitions (Subsections A and B of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code) and cost recovery (Subsection V of Section 15.16.020 of the Temecula Municipal Code), are reasonably necessary to allow for the application of the Fire Code by procedures suited to the size and nature of the City's staff and administrative agencies by means suited to the City's experience with local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions and to provide sufficient staff support for the time-consuming inspections and analysis required by the City's fire and geological hazards. Section 3. The City Clerk shall cert~ the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of October, 2002. Steven J. Ford, 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, California, 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 22nd day of October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER t5.'16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 200'1 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 15.16 of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE I CODES ADOPTED 15.16.010. Code Adopted. Except as hereinafter provided in this Chapter, the California Fire Code, 1998 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is adopted by reference as the Fire Code of the City of Temecula, including: A. California Fire Code (CFC) Volume 1, CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition with appendices I-A, I-C, II-A, II-B, II-E, II-F, II-G, I1-1, II-J, Ill-A, Ill-B, IV-B and V-A. B. Uniform Fire Code Standards Volume 2, 2000 edition as amended by the California Fire Code (CFC), CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition. ARTICLE II AMENDMENTS '15.t 6.020. Amendments. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as adopted by this Chapter: A. Section 204 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Corporate counsel shall mean the City Attorney of the City of Temecula. B. Section 214 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Municipality For the purposes of this code, jurisdiction shall be known asthe City of Temecula a municipality. C. Section 901.4.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: Fire Protection Equipment and Fire Hydrants Fire protection equipment and fire hydrants shall be clearly identified in an 1 approved manner to prevent obstruction by parking and other obstructions. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots). See also Section 1001.7. Section 901.4.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Premises Identification Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and_industrial buildings shall have a minimum of twelve (12) inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. EXCEPTION: Building address numbers within the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) of the Old Town Specific Plan, are permitted to be a minimum of eight (8) inches in size. Section 902.2.2.1 hereby is amended to read as follows: Dimensions Fire apparatus roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet and six (6) inches. EXCEPTION: 1. Vertical clearances may be reduced, provided such reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clearance when approved. 2. Fire apparatus roads serving single family residences in accordance with Section 902,2.1 may have and an unobstructed width of not less than twenty (20) feet. Vertical clearances or widths shall be increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access. Section 902.2.2.2 is hereby amended to read as follows: Surface 2 Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of the apparatus and shall be with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVVVwith a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 8704, prior to building construction all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access reads. When temporary fire apparatus access roads are provided for use until permanent fire access roads are installed; the fire apparatus roads shall be an all weather surface for an 80,000 lbs GVW. Section 902.2.2.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: TuminR Radius Fire apparatus access roads for commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a turning radius of a minimum forty-five (45) feet-outside radius. EXCEPTION: For single family residential, fire apparatus access roads the turning radius shall be a minimum of a thirty-eight (38) feet outside radius. Section 902.2.2.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Dead ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access reads in excess of 150 feet (45 720mm) in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. The maximum length of a dead end road or cul-de-sac shall not exceed 1320 feet. Section 902.2.2.5 is hereby amended to read as follows: BddRes When a bridge is required to be used as a part of a fire apparatus access road, it shall be constructed and maintained with nationally recognized standards. See Article 90, Standard a.1.1 The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Bridges shall be capable to carry an imposed load of not less than 80,000 lbs. GVW. Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bddges when required by the chief. Section 902.2.2.6 is hereby amended to read as follows: Grade The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (16) percent. Subsection (a) of Section 902.2.4.1. is hereby amended to read as follows: The required width of fire department access roadways shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under Section 902.2.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Entrances to roads, trails or other access ways which have been closed with gates and barriers in accordance with Section 902.2.4.2 shall not be obstructed by parked vehicles. "No Parking, Fire Lane" signs or red painted curbs or other appropriate notice prohibiting obstructions shall be required and maintained. Any obstruction or impedance to said fire lane may be cited, as an infraction, or removed at the owners' expense, forthwith, by any public agency. Section 1001.3 is amended to read as follows: Plans Complete plans and specifications for fire alarm systems; fire-extinguishing systems, including automatic sprinklers and wet or dry standpipes; halon systems and other special types of fira-extinguishing systems; basement pipe inlets; and other fire-protection systems and appurtenances thereto shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to system installation. Plan and specifications for fire alarm systems shall include, but not limited to, a floor plan; location of all alarm-initiating and alarm-signaling devices; alarm control and trouble-signaling equipment; annunciation; power connection; battery calculations; conductor type and sizes; voltage drop calculations; and manufacturers, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials, [for SFM] and state fire marshal listing number of all equipment, devices and materials requiring listing. Plans and specifications for automatic fire sprinklers or suppression systems in addition to requirements of adopted standards plans shall include, but not limited to: a site plan; a building floor plan; piping plan (on a separate sheet); reflective ceiling plan (on a separate sheet); building cross sections; calculations; hanger details; earthquake sway brace details and calculations; manufacturer specifications, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials. Hydraulic calculations shall be provided for each system riser serving a building and for each floor when system risers are serving multiple floors. Submittals of manufacturers technical data sheets for all materials to be installed shall be provide with the plan. System design shall be limited to 90 pement of the available water supply in calculated systems. Three (3) sets of as-built drawings shall be submitted to the fire department for approval within five (5) working days of the final acceptance testing. Section 1001.5.4 is amended to read as follows: Systems in hiqh-rise buildin,qs. The owner of a high-rise building shall be responsible for assuring that the fire and life-safety systems required by the Building Code are maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. (See CBC Section 403.) Section 1001.5.5 is amended to read as follows: Smoke-control systems. Mechanical smoke-control systems, such as those in high-rise buildings, buildings containing atria, covered mall buildings and mechanical ventilation systems utilized in smokeproof enclosures and for smoke-removal systems utilized in high-piled combustible storage occupancies, shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. Section 1001.7.1 is amended to read as follows: General Posts, fences, vehicles, growth, trash, storage and other materials or things shall not be placed or kept near fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections or fire-protection systems control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately discernible. 5 The fire department shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining access to fire-protection equipment or hydrant and shall comply with Section 1001.7.2. Automatic fire sprinkler system risers shall not be obstructed in any manner, if a system riser is to be concealed by means of a wall, soffit, column, or other building construction, it shall be provided with eighteen (18) inch clearance to each side and to the front of the system riser, access shall be provided by means of a door with the minimum dimensions two (2) feet six (6) inches wide by six (6) feet eight (8) inches tall from the exterior of the building directly to the riser as approved by the Chief, Section 1001.7.2 is amended to read as follows: Clear space around hydrants. A 3-foot (914.4mm) clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections, post indicator valves, OS&Y valves and other fire department appurtenances. Section 1001.9 is amended to read as follows: Special Hazards. For occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus, or emergency operations is unduly difficult, the chief is authorized to require additional safeguards consisting of additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved or to assist in emergency operations. Such devices or appliances can consist of automatic fire alarm systems, approved fire department communication systems, automatic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or portable fire extinguishers, suitable fire blankets, breathing apparatus, manual or automatic covers, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenated or dry chemical or other special fire- extinguishing systems. Where such systems are provided, they shall be designed and installed in accordance with applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards and/or fire department requirements. See Article 90 and Section 101.3. Section 1003.1.1 is amended to read as follows: General. Fire-extinguishing systems shall be installed in accordance with the Building Code and Section 1003. 6 Fire hose threads used in conjunction with fire-extinguishing systems shall be national standard hose thread or as approved. The location of fire department hose connections shall be approved and be located within fifty (50) feet of a fire hydrant. Risers serving more than one floor shall have floor control valves as approved by the Chief. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire protection shall be in accordance with Article 81. Section 1003.2.1 is amended to read as follows: General An automatic fire-extinguishing system shall be installed in the occupancies and locations as set forth in Section 1003.2. For provisions on special hazards and hazardous materials, see Section 1001.9 and Articles 79, 80 and 81. 1. All Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCI:{ part.2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every structure hereafter constructed, except residential structures of two dwelling units or less, which exceeds the Fire area square footage as listed in Table No. A-III-A-1 of the Uniform Fire Code requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute, shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 2. Existing Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part.2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every existing structure to which additions are made, where either the addition itseE or the building and the addition in total exceeds the Fire area square footage listed in the Uniform Fire Code Table No. A-III-A-1 requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 3. Change of Use or Occupancy Every existing structure to which a change of use or occupancy occurs shall install sprinklers when required by State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part 2 or the California Fire Code, Title 24_CCR part 9. T. Section 1003.3.1 is amended to read as follows: 7 Where Required All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically monitored regardless of the number of sprinkler heads including interior and exterior valves regardless of location or floor. Valve monitoring and water-flow alarm and trouble signals shall be distinctly different and shall be automatically transmitted to an approved central station, remote station or proprietary monitoring station as defined by UFC. Standard 10-2 or, when approved by the chief, shall sound an audible signal at a constantly attended location. An approved sign shall be provide at or near the audible device stating the following: "SPRINKLER FIRE ALARM - WHEN ALARM SOUNDS CALL 9-1-1 ~ Duct detectors in individual tenant spaces of multi tenant buildings shall be powered from the main building alarm power supply. Fire Alarm Control Panels shall be located in the same room as, and sharing the same access as the fire sprinkler riser, as approved by the Chief. A minimum of one (1) manual pull station shall be provided at each automatic fire sprinkler system riser location. EXCEPTION: Underground key or hub valves in roadway boxes provided by the municipality or public utility need not be monitored. 2. One and two family dwellings provided with an approved residential sprinkler system need not be monitored. Section 1007.3.3.4 is amended to read as follows: Connections to other systems. A fire alarm system shall not be used for any other purpose other than fire warning unless approved [for SFM] by the authority having jurisdiction. Burglary, security systems, robbery and similar uses shall not be permitted to be a part of, or be connected to fire alarm systems. All additional fire suppression and fire detection systems shall be intemonnected to the fire alarm system. Appendix Chapter II-A, Section 24 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Cost Recovery Section 24.1. Any person who negligently, or in violation of the law, sets a fire, allows a fire to be set, or allows a fire kindled or attended by him to escape his control or 8 bum any structure, improvement, forest, range or grassland, is liable for the expense of fighting the fire, and such expense shall be a charge against that person, and that charge shall constitute a debt of such person which is collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public, or private agency or the County Fire Department incurring such expenses in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.1.1. Any person who negligently, or in violation of any statute regulation or ordinance dumps, or causes to be dumped, or releases or causes to be released, any hazardous or extremely hazardous material or hazardous waste onto the ground or into the environment is liable for the expense of mitigating and/or removing the hazard created by said actions or omissions, and such expense shall be a charge against such person or persons. Said charges shall constitute a debt of such person or persons which shall be collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public or private agency or by the County Fire Department and/or the County Health Department incurring the expense of mitigation and/or removal in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under arising contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2. The expense of securing any emergency, which is a result of a violation of this ordinance, is a charge against the person whose violation of this ordinance caused the emergency. Damages caused by and expenses incurred by the Fire Department for securing such emergency shall constitute a debt of such manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2.1. The expense of securing any hazardous or extremely hazardous materials or waste incident which is a result of negligence or a violation of any statute, regulation or ordinance is a charge against the person or persons whose actions or omissions caused the incident. The expenses incurred by the Fire Department and/or Health Department for securing such incident shall constitute a debt of such person or persons and shall be collectible by the County Fire Chief or Health Officer in the same manner as in the case of an obligation arising under contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.3. Structure, improvement shall mean, for the purposes of this Section only, any building, garage, tent, out-building, barn, corral, fence, or bridge whether or not in actual use at the time of the fire. Section 24.4 Requests for copies of public and legal documents, photographs, etc., relating to department activities is available as authorized by law through the Fire Department's Custodian of Records. All document requests shall be in writing, accompanied by a check made payable to the Riverside County Fire Department, in the amount(s) set forth in Riverside County Ordinance 787. Appendix Chapter Ill-A, Section 5 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Fire-flow requirements for residential tracts, commercial, retail, industrial, heavy industrial and multi-family residential developments. 5.3 One and Two family residential tracts with structures less than 3,600 square feet shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 1,500 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 2 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix III-B. 5.4 Commercial, retail and Multi-family developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 4,000 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in the accordance with Appendix III-B. 5.5 Industrial and heavy industrial developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 6,000 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix IlI-B. X. Appendix Chapter Ill-B, Section 2 is hereby amended to read as follows: LOCATION Fire hydrants shall be provided at street intersections and along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets. Fire hydrants used or installed for the frontage requirements as stated by Table A III-B-1 shall be on the building side of fire department access roads and adjacent public streets. EXCEPTION: When required hydrants utilized or is installed to the frontage requirements which serves single family dwellings on residential streets, such fire hydrant may be on either side of the street. Section 2. All inconsistencies between the Fire Code, as adopted bythis Ordinance, and the 2001 edition of the California Fire Code, as set forth in Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, are changes, modifications, amendments, additions or deletions thereto authorized by California Health and Safety Code sections 17958.5 and 17958.7. 10 Section 3. To the extent the provisions of this Ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments. Section 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit hereto is for any reason held to be invalid, such validity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit thereto. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 5. State law requires that localities adopt the California Building Standards Code and modifications thereto, by November 1, 2002. it is essential that the City have in effect on the date codes that comport with state law and contain those modifications necessitated by unique topographic, geologic and climatic conditions. In the absence of immediate effectiveness, the provisions of the Fire Code unique to the City's special circumstances will not be in place and this will have a detrimental effect on the public, health safety and welfare. The modifications to the Codes contain vital provisions regarding administrative procedures, fire-extinguishing systems, and other similar matters necessitated by the City's proximity to active earthquake fault zones, the City's exposure to Santa Ana winds, and the City's limited rainfall in the summer and fall months. For these reasons, the public health, safety and welfare require that this ordinance take effect on November 1, 2002 as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. Section 7. This ordinance shall become operative on November 1, 2002. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October, 2002. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] 11 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 Ordinance No. 02- , was duly adopted and passed as an urgency measure at a regular meeting of the City Council on November 22, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 12 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 15.16 of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: ARTICLEICODESADOPTED 15.16.010. Code Adopted. Except as hereinafter provided in this Chapter, the California Fire Code, 1998 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is adopted by reference as the Fire Code of the City of Temecula, including: California Fire Code (CFC) Volume 1, CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition with appendices I-A, I-C, II-A, II-B, II-E, II-F, II-G, I1-1, II-J, Ill-A, Ill-B, IV-B and V-A. Uniform Fire Code Standards Volume 2, 2000 edition as amended by the California Fire Code (CFC), CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition. ARTICLE II AMENDMENTS 15.16.020. Amendments. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as adopted by this Chapter: A. Section 204 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Corporate counsel shall mean the City Attorney of the City of Temecula. B. Section 214 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Municipality For the purposes of this code, jurisdiction shall be known as the City of Temecula a municipality. C. Section 901.4.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: Fire Protection Equipment and Fire Hydrants Fire protection equipment and fire hydrants shall be clearly identified in an 1 approved manner to prevent obstruction by parking and other obstructions. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots). See also Section 1001.7. Section 901.4.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Premises Identification Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and_industrial buildings shall have a minimum of twelve (12) inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. EXCEPTION: Building address numbers within the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) of the Old Town Specific Plan, are permitted to be a minimum of eight (8) inches in size. Section 902.2.2.1 hereby is amended to read as follows: Dimensions Fire apparatus roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet and six (6) inches. EXCEPTION: 1. Vertical clearances may be reduced, provided such reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clearance when approved. 2. Fire apparatus roads serving single family residences in accordance with Section 902.2.1 may have and an unobstructed width of not less than twenty (20) feet. Vertical clearances or widths shall be increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access. Section 902.2.2.2 is hereby amended to read as follows: Surface 2 Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of the apparatus and shall be with a surface so as to provide ail-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVWwith a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 8704, prior to building construction all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. When temporary fire apparatus access roads are provided for use until permanent fire access roads are installed; the fire apparatus roads shall be an all weather surface for an 80,000 lbs GVW. Section 902.2.2.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: TurninR Radius Fire apparatus access roads for commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a turning radius of a minimum forty-five (45) feet-outside radius. EXCEPTION: For single family residential, fire apparatus access roads the tuming radius shall be a minimum of a thirty-eight (38) feet outside radius. Section 902.2.2.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Dead ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet (45 720mm) in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. The maximum length of a dead end road or cul-de-sac shall not exceed 1320 feet. Section 902.2.2.5 is hereby amended to read as follows: Brid,qes When a bridge is required to be used as a part of a fire apparatus access road, it shall be constructed and maintained with nationally recognized standards. See Article 90, Standard a.1.1 The bridge shall be designed fora live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Bridges shall be capable to carry an imposed load of not less than 80,000 lbs. GVW. Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bddges when required by the chief. KJ Section 902.2.2.6 is hereby amended to read as follows: Grade The gradientfora fire apparatus access roads shallnotexceed fifteen (15) percent. Subsection (a) of Section 902.2.4.1. is hereby amended to read as follows: The required width of fire department access roadways shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under Section 902.2.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Entrances to roads, trails or other access ways which have been closed with gates and barriers in accordance with Section 902.2.4.2 shall not be obstructed by parked vehicles. "No Parking, Fire Lane" signs or red painted curbs or other appropriate notice prohibiting obstructions shall be required and maintained. Any obstruction or impedance to said fire lane may be cited, as an infraction, or removed at the owners' expense, forthwith, by any public agency. Section 1001.3 is amended to read as follows: Plans Complete plans and specifications for fire alarm systems; fire-extinguishing systems, including automatic sprinklers and wet or dry standpipes; halon systems and other special types of fire-extinguishing systems; basement pipe inlets; and other fire-protection systems and appurtenances thereto shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to system installation. Plan and specifications for fire alarm systems shall include, but not limited to, a floor plan; location of all alarm-initiating and alarm-signaling devices; alarm control and trouble-signaling equipment; annunciation; power connection; battery calculations; conductor type and sizes; voltage drop calculations; and manufacturers, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials, [for SFM] and state fire marshal listing number of all equipment, devices and materials requiring listing. Plans and specifications for automatic fire sprinklers or suppression systems in addition to requirements of adopted standards plans shall include, but not 4 limited to: a site plan; a building floor plan; piping plan (on a separate sheet); reflective ceiling plan (on a separate sheet); building cross sections; calculations; hanger details; earthquake sway brace details and calculations; manufacturer specifications, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials. Hydraulic calculations shall be provided for each system riser serving a building and for each floor when system dsers are serving multiple floors. Submittals of manufacturers technical data sheets for all materials to be installed shall be provide with the plan. System design shall be limited to 90 pement of the available water supply in calculated systems. Three (3) sets of as-built drawings shall be submitted to the fire department for approval within five (5) working days of the final acceptance testing. Section 1001.5.4 is amended to read as follows: Systems in hi.qh-rise buildin.qs. The owner of a high-rise building shall be responsible for assuring that the fire and life-safety systems required by the Building Code are maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. (See CBC Section 403.) Section 1001.5.5 is amended to read as follows: Smoke-control systems. Mechanical smoke-control systems, such as those in high-rise buildings, buildings containing atria, covered mall buildings and mechanical ventilation systems utilized in smokeproof enclosures and for smoke-removal systems utilized in high-piled combustible storage occupancies, shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. Section 1001.7.1 is amended to read as follows: General Posts, fences, vehicles, growth, trash, storage and other materials or things shall not be placed or kept near fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections or tire-protection systems control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately discernible. 5 P= The fire department shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining access to fire-protection equipment or hydrant and shall comply with Section 1001.7.2. Automatic fire sprinkler system risers shall not be obstructed in any manner, if a system riser is to be concealed by means of a wall, soffit, column, or other building construction, it shall be provided with eighteen (18) inch clearance to each side and to the front of the system riser, access shall be provided by means of a door with the minimum dimensions two (2) feet six (6) inches wide by six (6) feet eight (8) inches tall from the exterior of the building directly to the riser as approved by the Chief. Section 1001.7.2 is amended to read as follows: Clear space around hydrants. A 3-foot (914.4mm) clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections, post indicator valves, OS&Y valves and other fire department appurtenances. Section 1001.9 is amended to read as follows: Special Hazards. For occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus, or emergency operations is unduly difficult, the chief is authorized to require additional safeguards consisting of additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved or to assist in emergency operations. Such devices or appliances can consist of automatic fire alarm systems, approved fire department communication systems, automatic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or portable fire extinguishers, suitable fire blankets, breathing apparatus, manual or automatic covers, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenated or dry chemical or other special fire- extinguishing systems. Where such systems are provided, they shall be designed and installed in accordance with applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards and/or fire department requirements. See Article 90 and Section 101.3. Section 1003.1.1 is amended to read as follows: General. Fire-extinguishing systems shall be installed in accordance with the Building Code and Section 1003. 6 Fire hose threads used in conjunction with fire-extinguishing systems shall be national standard hose thread or as approved. The location of fire department hose connections shall be approved and be located within fifty (50) feet of a fire hydrant. Risers serving more than one floor shall have floor control valves as approved by the Chief. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire protection shall be in accordance with Article 81. Section 1003.2.1 is amended to read as follows: General An automatic fire-extinguishing system shall be installed in the occupancies and locations as set forth in Section 1003.2. For provisions on special hazards and hazardous materials, see Section 1001.9 and Articles 79, 80 and 81. 1. All Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part_2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every structure hereafter constructed, except residential structures of two dwelling units or less, which exceeds the Fire area square footage as listed in Table No. A-III-A-1 of the Uniform Fire Code requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute, shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 2. Existing Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part.2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every existing structure to which additions are made, where either the addition itself or the building and the addition in total exceeds the Fire area square footage listed in the Uniform Fire Code Table No. A-III-A-1 requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 3. Change of Use or Occupancy Every existing structure to which a change of use or occupancy occurs shall install sprinklers when required by State Code or Statutes, Califomia Building Code, Title 24 CCR part 2 or the California Fire Code, Title 24_CCR part 9. T. Section 1003.3.1 is amended to read as follows: 7 Where Required Alt valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically monitored regardless of the number of sprinkler heads including interior and exterior valves regardless of location or floor. Valve monitoring and water-flow alarm and trouble signals shall be distinctly different and shall be automatically transmitted to an approved central station, remote station or proprietary monitoring station as defined by UFC. Standard 10-2 or, when approved by the chief, shall sound an audible signal at a constantly attended location. An approved sign shall be provide at or near the audible device stating the following: "SPRINKLER FIRE ALARM -WHEN ALARM SOUNDS CALL 9-1-1" Duct detectors in individual tenant spaces of multi tenant buildings shall be powered from the main building alarm power supply. Fire Alarm Control Panels shall be located in the same room as, and sharing the same access as the fire sprinkler riser, as approved by the Chief, A minimum of one (1) manual pull station shall be provided at each automatic fire sprinkler system riser location. EXCEPTION: Underground key or hub valves in roadway boxes provided by the municipality or public utility need not be monitored. 2. One and two family dwellings provided with an approved residential sprinkler system need not be monitored. Section 1007.3.3.4 is amended to read as follows: Connections to other systems. A fire alarm system shall not be used for any other purpose other than fire warning unless approved [for SI:M] by the authority having jurisdiction. Burglary, security systems, robbery and similar uses shall not be permitted to be a part of, or be connected to fire alarm systems. All additional fire suppression and fire detection systems shall be interconnected to the fire alarm system. Appendix Chapter II-A, Section 24 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Cost Recovery Section 24.1. Any person who negligently, or in violation of the law, sets a fire, allows a fire to be set, or allows a fire kindled or attended by him to escape his control or 8 bum any structure, improvement, forest, range or grassland, is liable for the expense of fighting the fire, and such expense shall be a charge against that person, and that charge shall constitute a debt of such person which is collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public, or private agency or the County Fire Department incurring such expenses in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.1.1. Any person who negligently, or in violation of any statute regulation or ordinance dumps, or causes to be dumped, or releases or causes to be released, any hazardous or extremely hazardous material or hazardous waste onto the ground or into the environment is liable for the expense of mitigating and/or removing the hazard created by said actions or omissions, and such expense shall be a charge against such person or persons. Said charges shall constitute a debt of such person or persons which shall be collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public or private agency or by the County Fire Department and/or the County Health Department incurring the expense of mitigation and/or removal in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under arising contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2. The expense of securing any emergency, which is a result of a violation of this ordinance, is a charge against the person whose violation of this ordinance caused the emergency. Damages caused by and expenses incurred by the Fire Department for securing such emergency shall constitute a debt of such manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2.1. The expense of securing any hazardous or extremely hazardous materials or waste incident which is a result of negligence or a violation of any statute, regulation or ordinance is a charge against the person or persons whose actions or omissions caused the incident. The expenses incurred by the Fire Department and/or Health Department for securing such incident shall constitute a debt of such person or persons and shall be collectible by the County Fire Chief or Health Officer in the same manner as in the case of an obligation arising under contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.3. Structure, improvement shall mean, for the purposes of this Section only, any building, garage, tent, out-building, barn, corral, fence, or bridge whether or not in actual use at the time of the fire. Section 24.4 9 Requests for copies of public and legal documents, photographs, etc., relating to department activities is available as authorized by law through the Fire Department's Custodian of Records. All document requests shall be in writing, accompanied by a check made payable to the Riverside County Fire Department, in the amount(s) set forth in Riverside County Ordinance 787. Appendix Chapter Ill-A, Section 5 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Fire-flow requirements for residential tracts, commercial, retail, industrial, heavy industrial and multi-family residential developments. 5.3 One and Two family residential tracts with structures less than 3,600 square feet shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 1,500 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 2 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix III-B. 5.4 Commercial, retail and Multi-family developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 4,000 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in the accordance with Appendix III-B. 5.5 Industrial and heavy industrial developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 6,000 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix III-B. X. Appendix Chapter Ill-B, Section 2 is hereby amended to read as follows: LOCATION Fire hydrants shall be provided at street intersections and along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets. Fire hydrants used or installed for the frontage requirements as stated by Table A III-B-1 shall be on the building side of fire department access roads and adjacent public streets. EXCEPTION: When required hydrants utilized or is installed to the frontage requirements which serves single family dwellings on residential streets, such fire hydrant may be on either side of the street. Section 2. All inconsistencies between the Fire Code, as adopted bythis Ordinance, and the 2001 edition of the California Fire Code, as set forth in Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, are changes, modifications, amendments, additions or deletions thereto authorized by California Health and Safety Code sections 17958.5 and 17958.7. 10 Section 3. To the extent the provisions of this Ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments. Section 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit hereto is for any reason held to be invalid, such validity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit thereto. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section $. State law requires that localities adopt the California Building Standards Code and modifications thereto, by November 1, 2002. It is essential that the City have in effect on the date codes that comport with state law and contain those modifications necessitated by unique topographic, geologic and climatic conditions. In the absence of immediate effectiveness, the provisions of the Fire Code unique to the City's special circumstances will not be in place and this will have a detrimental effect on the public, health safety and welfare. The modifications to the Codes contain vital provisions regarding administrative procedures, fire-extinguishing systems, and other similar matters necessitated by the City's proximity to active earthquake fault zones, the City's exposure to Santa Ana winds, and the City's limited rainfall in the summer and fall months. For these reasons, the public health, safety and welfare require that this ordinance take effect on November 1, 2002 as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. Section 7. This ordinance shall become operative on November 1, 2002. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October, 2002. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] 11 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 Ordinance No. 02- , was duly adopted and passed as an urgency measure at a regular meeting of the City Council on November 22, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: 5 COUNClLMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 12 AMENDED STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. 20 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim McBride, Fire Marshal October 8, 2002 An Ordinance Amending the California Fire Code. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council 1. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER '15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 200'1 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF the CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15.'16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME '1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 200'1 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION, ALONG WITH AMENDMENTS TO EACH CODE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR HEARING COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CODES FOR OCTOBER 22, 2002 DISCUSSION: The adoption of the most current edition of the California Fire Code is one of the most important public health, safety and welfare issues that will be presented to you for your consideration and adoption. The fire codes enforced by local jurisdictions in the State of California are reviewed, amended and adopted by the Building Standards Commission on a three (3) year code adoption cycle. Upon the adoption and publication of the State Codes, each local jurisdiction has a period of 180 days to further modify these Codes with more stringent local amendments based upon local geographical, topographical and or climatic conditions. The State mandated adoption date is Nov. 1, 2002. Therefore, due to the length of time involved with staff's extensive study of the new code editions, and to enable staff to adopt the California Fire Code with local amendments before this date, the action is necessary. The ordinance before you tonight proposes very few local amendments. Many of the provisions in this ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the current Municipal Code. Staff is proposing to modify the code provisions that are mostly administrative in nature and are substantiated on the requirements of fire apparatus for turning radius, weight and operational Considerations. Provisions that dictate the requirement of fire extinguishing systems based on building construction type, size of the building, and required fire flow currently exist and will be carried forward. These provisions are consistent with regulations as currently required by Riverside County Fire Department. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: Ordinance No. 02- Resolution No, 02- ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 15.16 of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE I CODES ADOPTED 15.16.010. Code Adopted. Except as hereinafter provided in this Chapter, the Califomia Fire Code, 1998 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is adopted by reference as the Fire Code of the City of Temecula, including: California Fire Code (CFC) Volume 1, CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition with appendices I-A, I-C, II-A, II-B, II-E, II-F, II-G, I1-1, II-J, Ill-A, Ill-B, IV-B and V-A. Uniform Fire Code Standards Volume 2, 2000 edition as amended by the California Fire Code (CFC), CCR Title 24 part 9, 2001 edition. ARTICLE II AMENDMENTS 15.16.020. Amendments. The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as adopted by this Chapter: A. Section 204 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Corporate counsel shall mean the City Attomey of the City of Temecula. B. Section 214 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Municipality For the purposes of this code, jurisdiction shall be known as the City of Temecula a municipality. C. Section 901.4.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: Fire Protection Equipment and Fire Hydrants Fire protection equipment and fire hydrants shall be clearly identified in an approved manner to prevent obstruction by parking and other obstructions. R:ordst99-13 Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots). 1 R:ord$~99--13 See also Section 1001.7. Section 901.4.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Premises Identification Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or mad fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and_industrial buildings shall have a minimum of twelve (12) inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. EXCEPTION: Building address numbers within the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) of the Old Town Specific Plan, are permitted to be a minimum of eight (8) inches in size. Section 902.2.2.1 hereby is amended to read as follows: Dimensions Fire apparatus roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet and six (6) inches. EXCEPTION: 1. Vertical clearances may be reduced, provided such reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clearance when approved. 2. Fire apparatus roads serving single family residences in accordance with Section 902.2.1 may have and an unobstructed width of not less than twenty (20) feet. Vertical clearances or widths shall be increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access. Section 902.2.2.2 is hereby amended to read as follows: Surface Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of the apparatus and shall be with a surface so as to provide all-weather ddving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 8704, pdor to building construction all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. When temporary fire apparatus access roads are provided for use until permanent fire access roads are installed; the fire apparatus roads shall be an all weather surface for an 80,000 lbs GVW. Section 902.2.2.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: Tuminq Radius Fire apparatus access roads for commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a turning radius of a minimum forty-five (45) feet-outside radius. EXCEPTION: For single-family residential, fire apparatus access roads the turning radius shall be a minimum of a thirty-eight (38) feet outside radius. Section 902.2.2.4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Dead ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet (45 720mm) in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. The maximum length of a dead end road or cul-de-sac shall not exceed 1320 feet. Section 902.2.2.5 is hereby amended to read as follows: Bddges When a bridge is required to be used as a part of a fire apparatus access road, it shall be constructed and maintained with nationally recognized standards. See Article 90, Standard a.1.1 the bddge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Bridges shall be capable to carry an imposed load of not less than 80,000 lbs. GVW. Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bddge$ when required by the chief. Section 902.2.2.6 is hereby amended to read as follows: Grade The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent, Subsection (a) of Section 902.2.4.1. Is hereby amended to read as follows: ~ _/' R:ords~99-13 3 The required width of fire department access roadways shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under Section 902.2.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Entrances to roads, trails or other access ways which have been closed with gates and barriers in accordance with Section 902.2.4.2 shall not be obstructed by parked vehicles. "No Parking, Fire Lane" signs or red painted curbs or other appropriate notice prohibiting obstructions shall be required and maintained. Any obstruction or impedance to said fire lane may be cited, as an infraction, or removed at the owners' expense, forthwith, by any public agency. Section 1001.3 is amended to read as follows: Plans Complete plans and specifications for fire alarm systems; fire-extinguishing systems, including automatic sprinklers and wet or dry standpipes; halon systems and other special types of fire-extinguishing systems; basement pipe inlets; and other fire-protection systems and appurtenances thereto shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to system installation. Plan and specifications for fire alarm systems shall include, but not limited to, a floor plan; location of all alarm-initiating and alarm-signaling devices; alarm control and trouble-signaling equipment; annunciation; power connection; battery calculations; conductor type and sizes; voltage drop calculations; and manufacturers, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials, [for SFM] and state fire marshal listing number of all equipment, devices and materials requiring listing. Plans and specifications for automatic fire sprinklers or suppression systems in addition to requirements of adopted standards plans shall include, but not limited to: a site plan; a building floor plan; piping plan (on a separate sheet); reflective ceiling plan (on a separate sheet); building cross sections; calculations; hanger details; earthquake sway brace details and calculations; manufacturer specifications, model numbers and listing information for all equipment, devices and materials. Hydraulic calculations shall be provided for each system riser serving a building and for each floor when system ~isers are serving multiple floors. Submittals of manufacturers technical data sheets for all materials to be installed shall be provide with the plan. System design shall be limited to 90 percent of the available water supply in calculated systems. Three (3) sets of as-built drawings shall be submitted to the fire department for approval within five (5) working days of the final acceptance testing. R:ofds'~99-13 4 "' ~ R:o~ls~99-J3 Section 1001.5.4 is amended to read as follows: Systems in h .qh-dse buildin.qs. The owner of a high-rise building shall be responsible for assuring that the fire and life-safety systems required by the Building Code are maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. (See CBC Section 403.) Section 1001.5.5 is amended to read as follows: Smoke-control systems. Mechanical smoke-control systems, such as those in high-rise buildings, buildings containing atria, covered mall buildings and mechanical ventilation systems utilized in smoke proof enclosures and for smoke-removal systems utilized in high-piled combustible storage occupancies, shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times. Unless otherwise required by the chief, quarterly tests of Such systems shall be conducted by approved persons. A written record and current approved plans shall be maintained and shall be made available to the inspection authority. Section 1001.7.1 is amended to read as follows: General Posts, fences, vehicles, growth, trash, storage and other materials or things shall not be placed or kept near fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections or fire-protection systems control valves in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately discernible. The fire department shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining access to fire-protection equipment or hydrant and shall comply with Section 1001.7.2. Automatic fire sprinkler system risers shall not be obstructed in any manner, if a system riser is to be concealed by means of a wall, sofr~, column, or other building construction, it shall be provided with eighteen (18) inch clearance to each side and to the front of the system riser, access shall be provided by means of a door with the minimum dimensions two (2) feet six (6) inches wide by six (6) feet eight (8) inches tall from the exterior of the building direotly to the riser as approved by the Chief. Section 1001.7.2 is amended to read as follows: Clear space around hydrants. A 3-foot (914.4mm) clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections, post 5 R:ofds~99-'J3 indicator valves, OS&Y valves and other fire department appurtenances. Section 1001.9 is amended to read as follows: Special Hazards. For occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus, or emergency operations is unduly difficult, the chief is authorized to require additional safeguards consisting of additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved or to assist in emergency operations. Such devices or appliances can consist of automatic fire alarm systems, approved fire department communication systems, automatic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or portable fire extinguishers, suitable fire blankets, breathing apparatus, manual or automatic covers, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenated or d~y chemical or other special fire- extinguishing systems. Where such systems are provided, they shall be designed and installed in accordance with applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards and/or fire department requirements. See Article 90 and Section 101.3. Section 1003.1.1 is amended to read as follows: General. Fire-extinguishing systems shall be installed in accordance with the Building Code and Section 1003. Fire hose threads used in conjunction with firc extinguishing systems shall be national standard hose thread or as approved. The location of fire department hose connections shall be approved and be located within fifty (50) feet of a fire hydrant. Risers serving more than one floor shall have floor control valves as approved by the Chief. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire protection shall be in accordance with Article 81. Section 1003.2.1 is amended to read as follows: Genera! An automatic fire-extinguishing system shall be installed in the occupancies and locations as set forth in Section 1003.2. For provisions on special hazards and hazardous materials, see Section 1001.9 and Articles 79, 80 and 81. 6 1. All Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part.2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every structure hereafter constructed, except residential structures of two dwelling units or less, which exceeds the Fire area square footage as listed in Table No. A-III-A-1 of the Uniform Fire Code requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 2. Existing Occupancies Unless State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part.2, or the California Fire Code, Title 24 CCR part 9, is more restrictive, every existing structure to which additions are made, where either the addition itself or the building and the addition in total exceeds the Fire area square footage listed in the Uniform Fire Code Table No. A-III-A-1 requiring a fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout therein. 3. Change of Use or Occupancy Every existing structure to which a change of use or occupancy occurs shall install sprinklers when required by State Code or Statutes, California Building Code, Title 24 CCR part 2 or the California Fire Code, Title 24_CCR part 9. Section 1003.3.1 is amended to read as follows: Where Required All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically monitored regardless of the number of sprinkler heads including interior and exterior valves regardless of location or floor. Valve monitoring and water-flow alarm and trouble signals shall be distinctly different and shall be automatically transmitted to an approved central station, remote station or proprietary monitoring station as defined by UFC. Standard 10-2 or, when approved by the chief, shall sound an audible signal at a constantly attended location. An approved sign shall be provide at or near the audible device stating the following: 'SPRINKLER FIRE ALARM-WHEN ALARM SOUNDS CALL 9-1-1" Duct detectors in individual tenant spaces of multi tenant buildings shall be powered from the main building alarm power supply. Fire Alarm Control Panels shall be located in the same room as, and sharing the same access as the fire sprinkler riser, as approved by the Chief. '-~J R:ords',99-13 7 R:ords~99-13 A minimum of one (1) manual pull station shall be provided at each automatic fire sprinkler system riser location. EXCEPTION: Underground key or hub valves in roadway boxes provided by the municipality or public utility need not be monitored. 2. One and two family dwellings provided with an approved residential sprinkler system need not be monitored. Section 1007.3.3.4 is amended to read as follows: Connections to other systems. A fire alarm system shall not be used for any other purpose other than fire warning unless approved [for SFM] by the authority having jurisdiction. Burglary, security systems, robbery and similar uses shall not be permitted to be a part of, or be connected to fire alarm systems. All additional fire suppression and fire detection systems shall be interconnected to the fire alarm system. Appendix Chapter II-A, Section 24 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Cost Recovery Section 24.1. Any person who negligently, or in violation of the law, sets a fire, allows a fire to be set, or allows a fire kindled or attended by him to escape his control or bum any structure, improvement, forest, range or grassland, Js liable for the expense of fighting the fire, and such expense shall be a Charge against that person, and that charge shall constitute a debt of such person which is collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public, or private agency or the County Fire Department incurring such expenses in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.1.1, Any person who negligently, or in violation of any statute regulation or ordinance dumps, or causes to be dumped, or releases or causes to be released, any hazardous or extremely hazardous material or hazardous waste onto the ground or into the erivironment is liable for the expense of mitigating and/or removing the hazard created by said actions or omissions, and such expense shall be a charge against such person or persons. Said charges shall constitute a debt of such person or persons which shall be collectible by the person, or by the federal, state, county, public or private agency or by the County Fire Department and/or the County Health Department incurring the expense of mitigation and/or removal in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under arising contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2. The expense of securing any emergency, which is a result of a violation of this ordinance, is a charge against the person whose violation of this ordinance caused the emergency. Damages caused by and expenses incurred by the Fire Department for securing such emergency shall constitute a debt of such manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.2.1. The expanse of securing any hazardous or extremely hazardous materials or waste incident which is a result of negligence or a violation of any statute, regulation or ordinance is a charge against the parson or parsons whose actions or omissions caused the incident. The expenses incurred by the Fire Department and/or Health Department for securing such incident shall constitute a debt of such person or persons and shall be collectible by the County Fire Chief or Health Officer in the same manner as in the case of an obligation arising under contract, expressed or implied. Section 24.3. Structure, improvement shall mean, for the purposes of this Section only, any building, garage, tent, out-building, barn, corral, fence, or bridge whether or not in actual use at the time of the fire. Section 24.4 Requests for copies of public and legal documents, photographs, etc., relating to department activities is available as authorized by law through the Fire Department's Custodian of Records. All document requests shall be in writing, accompanied by a check made payable to the Riverside County Fire Department, in the amount(s) set forth in Riverside County Ordinance 787. Appendix Chapter Ill-A, Section 5 is hereby amended by adding thereto: Fire-flow requirements for residential trects, commercial, retail, industrial, heavy industrial and multi-family residential developments. R:ordst99-13 5.3 5.4 One and Two family residential tracts with structures less than 3,600 square feet shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 1,500 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 2 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix III-B. Commercial, retail and Multi-family developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 4,000 gpm ~} 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in the accordance with Appendix III-B. 9 5.5 Industrial and heavy industrial developments shall have water mains capable of delivering a fire flow of not less than 6,000 gpm @ 20 psi residual pressure for a 4 hours duration. Fire hydrant locations and distribution shall be in accordance with Appendix III-B. X. Appendix Chapter Ill-B, Section 2 is hereby amended to read as follows: LOCATION Fire hydrants shall be provided at street intersections and along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets. Fire hydrants used or installed for the frontage requirements as stated by Table A III-B-1 shall be on the building side of fire department access roads and adjacent public streets. EXCEPTION: When required hydrants utilized or is installed to the frontage requirements, which serves single-family dwellings on residential streets, such fire hydrant may be on either side of the street. Section 2. All inconsistencies between the Fire Code, as adopted by this Ordinance, and the 2001 edition of the Califomia Fire Code, as set forth in Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, are changes, modifications, amendments, additions or deletions thereto authorized by California Health and Safety Code sections 17958.5 and 17958.7. Section 3. To the extent the provisions of this Ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments. Section 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit hereto is for any reason held to be invalid, such validity shall not affeCt the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof or exhibit thereto. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid, Section 6. State law requires that localities adopt the California Building Standards Code and modifications thereto, by November 1, 2002. It is essential that the City have in effect on the date codes that comport with state law and contain those modifications necessitated by unique topographic, geologic and climatic conditions. In the absence of immediate effectiveness, the provisions of the Fire Code unique to the City's special cimumstances will not be in place and this will have a detrimental effect on the public, health safety and welfare. The modifications to the R:ords~99-t3 10 Codes contain vital provisions regarding administrative procedures, tire-extinguishing systems, and other similar matters necessitated by the City's proximity to active earthquake fault zones, the City's exposure to Santa Ana winds, and the City's limited rainfall in the summer and fall months. For these reasons, the public health, safety and welfare require that this ordinance take effect on November 1, 2002 as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. Section 7. This ordinance shall become operative on November 1, 2002. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October, 2002. Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] --- / R:ords~99-13 11 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 Ordinance No. 02- , was duly introduced and placed upon its first rea. ding .at a regular meeting of the City Council o~'he 8a day of October, 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 22~ day of October, 2002 by the following mil call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:ords~99-13 12 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION, ALONG WITH AMENDMENTS TO EACH CODE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR HEARING COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CODES FOR OCTOBER 22, 2002 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby announce its intention to consider adoption of an Ordinance entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE VOLUME 1, CCR TITLE 24 PART 9, 2001 EDITION AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS VOLUME 2, 2000 EDITION" (the "Ordinance"). On October 8, 2002, the City Council gave first reading to and introduced said Ordinance. The Council will also consider adoption of a Resolution which sets forth the local conditions upon which a determination will be made by the City Council that modifications to Chapter 15.16 adopting the fire codes are reasonable and necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the community (the "Resolution"). Section 2. The City Council hereby sets a public hearing for October 22, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Temecula at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear the comments of the public on said Ordinance and the fire codes to be adopted thereby and on the adoption of said Ordinance and Resolution. Notice of the Public Hearing shall be published in newspaper of general circulation in the City pursuant to Government Code 6066. Section 3. Copies of the fire codes proposed to be adopted by reference and described in Section 1 of this Resolution as well as copies of the proposed codes, Ordinance and Resolution described in Section 1 of this Resolution are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available during the office hours of the City Clerk for public inspection. Section 4. Council. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City R:/Resos 2002/02-_ 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 8th day of October, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMEOULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, 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 this 8th day of October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/02-_ 2