Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
091404 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 11] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SEPTEMBER 14, 2004-7:00 P.M. At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2004-09 Resolution: No. 2004-96 R:/Agenda/091404 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Nagger Prelude Music: Vronti Kelly Invocation: Rabbi Hurwitz of Chabad of Temecula Valley Flag Salute: Councilman Stone ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, Naggar Sister City Association Presentation National Preparedness Month Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR 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. R:/Agenda/091404 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004— City Council/Planning Commission Workshop; 2.2 Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004; 2.3 Approve the minutes of August 24, 2004. 3 Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- 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 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of July 30, 2004. 5 Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2004 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004; 5.2 Approve an appropriation of $700,000 to Police Department budget; 5.3 Approve a budget transfer of $54,000 to Sales Tax reimbursement from Planning Department; 5.4 Approve an appropriation of $52,300 to Rancho California Road Widening and Median east of Ynez Road to be funded from Development Impact Fees — Street Improvements. 6 Two-year Cell Phone Contract Renewal with Sprint RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve a two-year agreement with Sprint for the renewal of City Cellular Services. R:/Agenda/091404 3 7 Microsoft Software Licenses — Annual Renewal RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Authorize the annual purchase of 250 Client Access Licenses (CAL) of Microsoft Windows Professional from ASAP Software for $54,972.50. 8 Approve the Sponsorship Request for The Great Tractor Race Event RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the event sponsorship agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute the following event sponsorship agreement; 8.2 Approve the event sponsorship agreement for actual City -support costs in the amount up to $12,500 for The Great Tractor Race. Amendment to Agreement for Advance Payment of CFD 88-12 Reimbursements RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve an amendment to the City's agreement which provides for advance payment of reimbursements for certain parcels within CFD 88-12; 9.2 Appropriate $65,134 from the unallocated reserves of the General Fund to provide for an increased payment amount. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:/Agenda/091404 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2004-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2004-11 CALL TO ORDER: President Chuck Washington ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Roberts, Stone, Washington PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item 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 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 24, 2004. 2 Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2004 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2004. R:/Agenda/091404 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING, CALLING, AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2004, REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NOS. 26828-1, -2, AND FINAL IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION 3.2 Approve the Election Notice, Ballot, and Procedures for the completion, return, and tabulation of the ballots. 3.3 Authorize staff to mail the ballots to the affected property owners pursuant to the aforementioned process. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, September 28, 2004, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:/Agenda/091404 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2004-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2004-09 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Roberts, Stone, Washington, 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 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 24, 2004. Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2004 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year June 30, 2004; 2.2 Approve an increase of $622,000 for Property Tax increment in the Debt Service Fund; 2.3 Approve an appropriation of $325,550 for Pass -through agreements in the Debt Service Fund; R:/Agenda/091404 2.4 Approve an appropriation of $55,200 for Debt Service Interest in the Debt Service Fund. 3 First Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Temecula Education Center RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND AGK GROUP, LLC., EXTENDING THE INSPECTION DEADLINE FOR THE TEMECULA EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, September 28, 2004, 7:00 PM City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:/Agenda/091404 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and may be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 10 An Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit & r)avalnnmant Plan) — a nrnnnsal to HAvalnn a 9A 9R7 qm Tara fnnt church facility nn a 4 79 acre lot RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration; 10.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND UPHOLIDNG THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS, AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON A 4.72 ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.955-050-017 COUNCIL BUSINESS 11 Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 04-09 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt an interim zoning ordinance entitled: URGENCY ORDINANCE NO.04-09 AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY R:/Agenda/091404 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular City Council Meeting, Tuesday, September 28, 2004, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:/Agenda/091404 10 PROCLAMATIONS mm"►9 PRESENTATIONS co G «° O A c � � U z t T N N d 7 ro U 0 0 U m o ❑ i 3' ^ 00 C6 W .rd' cCCe E � a � 0. 0 8 r VI ii w nUn O E Q O C d T O O VCd oU ci w � x o to d In. Q' N o C Q $O �> U N X N a to O a 'Jt v � ctl z > Z C IRziJ V] rA .AG V] O vi an W � b d d N N U iY ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 10, 2004 There being no Closed Session, the Open Session convened at 7:01 P.M., on Tuesday, August 24, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: 5 Councilmembers: Absent: 0 Councilmembers: PRELUDE MUSIC Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, and Naggar None The prelude music was provided by Eve Craig. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Raisa Slagle of Harvester Church of Temecula. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was presented by Councilman Roberts. PRESENTATION/P ROC LAMATIONS Water Availability Presentation by Dr. Brian Brady. General Manger of Rancho Water District By way of a PowerPoint presentation, Dr. Brian Brady provided a detailed presentation on water availability for the Temecula area, highlighting the following: • Shift in water supply • Drought • Artificial recharge • Ground water production • Reclaimed water • Local supply • Imported supply • Recycled water resources • Master Plan • Treatment capacity • Agriculture rate incentive • Desalting operation/Brine Line In response to the Councilmembers, Dr. Brady addressed the following: • Efforts to utilize reclaimed water RAMinutes\081004 • Agency exercise on the low water level for Diamond Valley Reservoir • Water rights with Vail Lake • Colorado River Water • Pechanga Areas/piping restrictions • Brine Line • Safeguards of the water supply/vulnerability assessment PUBLIC COMMENTS A. On behalf of the First International Temecula Valley Jazz Festival, Mr. Jon Laskin, Temecula, commented on the success of the event and presented to the City Council an event poster in appreciation of its support. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Apprising the City Councilmembers and the public of the upcoming Theater fundraiser — the Third Annual Temecula -on -Stage Event on Labor Day weekend, Councilman Washington provided tickets to each Councilmember and encouraged the community to attend. After the Council's approval of the City's new User Fee Schedule, Mr. Washington expressed concern with increased amounts for specific fees and requested that staff explore possible adjustments. CONSENT CALENDAR Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 2004 — continued from the July 27, 2004 meeting; (Mayor Naggar abstained with regard to Item 2.1.) 2.2 Approve the minutes of July 27, 2004. (Councilman Stone and Councilman Washington abstained with regard to Item 2.2.) RAMinutes\081004 3 Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-87 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 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 2004. 5 Award a Construction Contract for Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Landscape Improvements — Proiect No. PW99-11 LS RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Award a construction contract for Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Landscape Improvements — Project No. PW99-11 LS — to America West Landscape, Inc. in the amount of $199,595.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 5.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed 'the contingency amount of $19,959.50 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 6 Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with Vali Cooper & Associates. Inc. for Inspection Services for various CIP Projects RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 to the agreement with Vali Cooper & Associates, Inc. to provide professional inspection services in an amount not to exceed $121,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 7 Completion and Acceptance of the Slurry Seal Proiect — FY 2003/2004 — Proiect No. PW04-03 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Accept the construction of the Slurry Seal Project — FY 2003-2004 — Project No. PW04-03 as complete; 7.2 Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; R:Winutes\081004 3 7.3 Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Joint Funding Agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and the City of Murrieta for the Murrieta Creek Flood Control — Environmental Restoration and Recreation Project — and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. The estimated commitment from the City of Temecula is approximately $11,000,000 of cash and/or in -kind project contributions and improvements over the next five to eight years. Parcel Map No. 31639 (located at the northwest corner of North General Kearny Road and Margarita Road) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 31639 in conformance with the conditions of approval; 9.2 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Bond as security for the agreement. 10 Approve the Sponsorship Request for the Good Old Days Car Show RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve funding for The Good Old Days Car Show for actual City support costs which are estimated to be approximately $48,850; 10.2 Approve The Good Old Days Car Show Sponsorship Agreement with Central Coast Productions and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 11 Arts Council of Temecula Valley Special Events Community Grant Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve a Special Events Community Grant Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Arts Council of Temecula Valley in the amount of $22,000. RAMinutes\081004 12 Procurement of Updated Pentium Computer Workstations RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Authorize the purchase of 45 Pentium -based Hewlet Packard (HP) computer workstations from HP for the total amount of $50,330.03. 13 Amendment to Animal Friends of the Valley Contract for Animal Control Services RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve a one-year contract extension for Animal Control Services with Animal Friends of the Valley not to exceed $130,000; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve additional service not to exceed 10% of the amount of the agreement. (Supplemental materials was provided regarding this item.) MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-13. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Mayor Naggar who abstained with regard to Item No. 2.1 and Councilman Stone and Councilman Washington who abstained with regard to Item No. 2.2 At 7:33 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and the Temecula Public Financing Authority. At 7:38 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. 14 Update of the Old Town Specific Plan (SP-5) — PA03-0158 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO.04-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 03-0158) 14.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ZONING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION STANDARDS FOR THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 03-0158) R' W inutes=1004 Highlighting the proposed changes, Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), providing particular emphasis on the following: • Transition of the Tourist Serving Residential Planning Area and efforts to preserve the residential fee — development standards would be the same as the Tourist Retail Core: in terms of setbacks with the exception of limiting the building height to two stories and provide for front -yard landscaping, noting that this change will be reflected in the staff recommendation of this item. Mr. Brad Bassi, Temecula, voiced support of the proposed changes and thanked the Old Town Local Review Board for its efforts. Mr. Otto Baron, Temecula, suggested the coordination of historical sites between the City and the Temecula Valley Historical Society ensure a consistent list. MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to adopt Resolution No. 04-88 with the clarification of the development standards as noted by Planning Director Ubnoske (as noted above). Councilman Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to introduce Ordinance No. 04-08. Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. 15 Davidson Communities — Product Review (PA03-0725) — RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA UPHOLDING THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL TO ELIMINATE A PORTION OF THE SECOND STORY OVER THE ENTRY FOR PLAN 2 FOR A PRODUCT REVIEW FOR 99 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE RORIPAUGH SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED SOUTH OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS AND WEST OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS TRACT MAP 29661-2 Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per written material) and highlighted the Planning Commissioners' views of the proposed project, commenting on the Commission's approval contingent upon the elimination of a portion of the second floor and advising of the following: • that the lot sizes are approximately 4,000 square feet RAMinutes\081004 • that if the imposed condition were implemented approximately 169 square feet would be eliminated from the proposed Plan 2 • that originally staff had found this project inconsistent with the Specific Plan and had placed an additional six to seven conditions of approval • that staff and the applicant were able to resolve each issue with the exception of the one issue regarding the removal of a portion of the second story and because that was a Planning Commission condition, staff is unable to negotiate this imposed condition • that the Commission's recommendation for a single -story appearance was not staff driven • that staff has worked with the applicant to incorporate single -story elements • that the Specific Plan does not provide verbiage directing the construction of single - story and two-story residences. In response to Councilman Stone, Planning Commission Chairman Telesio apprised the Councilmembers of the Planning Commission's discussion regarding this project, stating that the two descending votes were more desirous of viewing the product with the elimination of a portion of the second story; that the Commission expressed concern with creating a street view of solely two-story residences; and that because of the small lots, setbacks may not t)a adjusted. Understanding the constraints of the smaller lots, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero suggested additional verbiage to the proposed Specific Plan amendment, implementing a matrix to determine the number of single- or two-story family residences to lot size. Mr. Kevin Everett, representing Ashby USA, Vista, provided background information with regard to this project, noting the following: • that every lot of the first 509 lots located in the panhandle are the same size • that Davidson Communities had exceeded the design guidelines of those submitted by other builders • that the removal of a portion of the second story would result in an 800 square foot residence, which would not be saleable • that of the 509 residences (four builders) in the panhandle, 120 are single -story residences; that this is the only builder to not propose a single -story. Reiterating his suggestion to formulate a matrix to determine the number of single- or two-story family residences to lot size, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero commented on the need for both single -story and two-story residences to which Mr. Everett voiced no opposition. By way of overheads, Ms. Paula Lombardi, Del Mar, representing Davidson Communities, and Mr. Todd Brazen, the architect for Davidson Communities, Solana Beach, relayed their preference to not eliminate or relocate a portion of the second story on Plan 2, noting that the elimination of a portion of the second story was not requested until the last Planning Commission meeting; that the front -area articulation would not appear boxy; that Plan 1 and Plan 3 will provide the one-story setback; that relocation of a portion of the second story to above the two -car garage would create a boxy appearance; and that removing the bedroom from the second story of Plan 2 would create a residence similar in square footage to Plan 1. Councilman Washington questioned whether consideration had been given to increasing the existing lot sizes. RAMinutesk081004 To his recollection of the project, Chairman Telesio had expressed no concern with the appearance of the rear elevation; noted that the Commission discussion entailed more the removal of a portion of the second story versus relocation; and stated that if the portion were relocated, he would prefer it to be relocated to the side of the building over the garage versus its currently proposed location in an effort to create a varied front elevation with a single -story appearance. In response to Mayor Naggar, Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified that of the eight original issues, the applicant has acquiesced to all but the one to eliminate a portion of the second story. At this time, Mayor Naggar opened the public hearing. There being no request to speak, the public hearing was closed. Considering the driving force for having the density in order to finance the needed infrastructure improvements, understanding the builder's challenges with a small lot, and realizing the need to provide sufficient square footage to allow the home to be marketable, Councilman Stone expressed his understanding of the Commission's and the developer's point of view. Mr. Stone voiced no concern with the front elevation, noting that the homes have differing front elevation lines; opposed removing the second -story bedroom and adding it to the garage, stating such a relocation would make the structure appear massive considering the size of the lot and would not be architecturally pleasing. For other sections of Roripaugh, Councilman Stone stated that the City Council will be demanding the single -story products but relayed his support of this project. Echoing Councilman Stone's comments and expressing his support of the Roripaugh negotiations, Councilman Washington expressed his support of the project. Commenting on the constraints with a 4,000 square foot lot and the inability to construct a second -story residence on such a lot, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, echoed by Councilman Roberts, relayed his support of the project without any alteration to the second story. City Manager Nelson expressed support of Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero's recommendation to create a lot matrix to determine the number of allowable single- or two-story residences to lot size during the Specific Plan amendment. Echoing the comments made of his fellow City Councilmembers, Mayor Naggar stated that the issue of product design is not an issue that should have been forwarded to the City Council and would have preferred the applicant to have provided some design modifications/alterations for the Planning Commission to consider/review. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to uphold the appeal, to grant the applicant's request, and to override the Planning Commission's condition to eliminate a portion of the second floor. Councilman Roberts seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. 16 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 04-07 (Fire Sprinklers) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: RAMinutes\081004 ORDINANCE NO. 04-07 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SUBSECTION 15.16.020.51 OF CHAPTER 16.16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONDITIONALLY EXEMPT OPEN BARN STRUCTURES FROM THE REQUIREMENT FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS Briefly reviewing the staff report, Assistant City Attorney Curley introduced Ordinance No. 04- 07. At this time, Mayor Naggar opened the public hearing; There being no public input, the hearing was closed. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to introduce Ordinance No. 04-07. Councilman Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. COUNCIL BUSINESS 17 Consideration of Technology Liaison or Ad hoc Subcommittee (requested by Councilman Washington.) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Consider the appointment of a Council liaison or Ad Hoc Subcommittee to meet 1nrith other entities to encourage coordination and collaboration of technology applications. Information Systems Director Thorson presented the staff report. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to appoint Councilman Washington to serve as the Technology Liaison. Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No additional comments. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT There being no Closed Session, Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that he had nothing to report. RAMinutes\081004 ADJOURNMENT At 8:45 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 24, 2004, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk [SEAL] RAMinutesk081004 10 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 10, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City Council and Planning Commission convened in an adjourned regular joint workshop at 5:01 P.M., on Tuesday, August 10, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL Present Councilmembers: Absent Councilmembers: Present Planning Commissioners: Absent: Planning Commissioner: PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, and Naggar None Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Olhasso, and Telesio Guerriero CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS No comments. CITY COUNCILICOMMISSION BUSINESS 1 General Plan Land Use Issue Discussion RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Provide direction to staff and the consultant on the Community Advisory Committee's recommended Draft General Plan. Clearing up some misconceptions with regard to tonight's meeting, Mayor Naggar explained the upcoming process, noting the following: • That in 2001 the City Council had updated its General Plan • That law dictates that the City to update its General Plan at least every five years • That a consultant was hired and the Community Advisory Committee was established • That this evening, no decisions will be made with regard the General Plan; that the intent of this meeting is purely for informative purposes R:Vvlinutes\081004 That after tonight's meeting, the Community Services Commission, the Public Traffic Safety Commission, and the Planning Commission will be given the opportunity to review the General Plan update in order to make recommendations to the City Council; that the City Council would make its final decisions regarding this Plan in late December or early January 2005. Because the City Councilmembers/Planning Commissioners are members of this community, Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified the potential of conflict of interest due to ownership interest, home values, and other business relations and noted that the discussion of any items with potential conflict will be encapsulated and the Councilmember(s)/Commissioner(s) will be requested to excuse himself/herself from the dais. Councilman Stone apprised the Assistant City Attorney of a potential conflict with regard to Meadowview Homeowners Association due to the location of his residence. Although no decisions will be made this evening, Assistant City Attorney Curley noted that staff would identify any possible conflicts for future meetings. Planning Director Ubnoske introduced the General Plan consulting team. By way of a PowerPoint Presentation, Mr. Bridges of Cotton/Bridges/Associates addressed the City's General Plan Update, noting the following: • Anticipated Time schedule 0 9/04 — Community/Commission Workshops 0 10/04 -11/04 — public review period of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 0 12/04 — Planning Commission Public Hearing 0 1/05 — City Council Public Hearing • proposed changes that will affect Land Use/Circulation Elements • technical changes Proposed Changes to the Land Use Designations Mr. Jeff Henderson of Cotton/Bridges/Associates noted the following: Land Use Designations • Rural Residential Designation — would establish five -acre minimum lot size • Vineyards/Agriculture Designation — intended to identify areas used for agriculture in the Planning Area • Tribal Trust Lands Designation — proposed for properties in the Planning Areas that have been designated as lands held in trust for the Pechanga Band by the Federal Government • Industrial Park Designation — solely a name change from Business Park Land Use designation. R:wlinutes\081004 Land Use Map • Staff recommended changes to the Land Use Map o Chaparral High School from Business Park to Public Institutional o Southeast corner of SR 79 South and Butterfield Stage Road from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial o Great Oak High School from Medium Density Residential to Public Institutional o The Westside Specific Plan and other areas along the western City limits, numerous minor adjustments to reflect the open space conditions as well as tribal and other ownership conditions. Property owner requested changes that were supported/opposed by the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and are and are not included in the Update General Plan Supported o 5 acres on the north side of the Santa Gertrudis channel adjacent to Margarita Road — CAC supported a change from Public Institutional to Professional Office 0 9 acres on the southeast corner of Margarita Road and Solana Way — CAC supported a change from Medium Density Residential to a combination of Professional Office and Open Space o 45 acres on the north side of Loma Linda Road, east of Temecula Lane — CAC supported a change from Professional Office to a combination of Low Medium Residential and Medium Density Residential o 18 acres west of Butterfield Stage Road between Chemin Clinet and Ahern Place — CAC supported a change from Low Density Residential to Low Medium Density Residential o 20 acres at the northeast corner of Winchester and Nicolas Roads — CAC supported a change form Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial Opposed o 7 acres immediately south of the Temecula Creek Village — CAC opposed the requested change from Open Space to a more developable designation 0 3 acres at the northwest corner of Margarita and Dartolo Roads — CAC opposed the requested change from Professional Office to Community Commercial o 304 acres at Temecula Creek Inn — CAC opposed the requested change for parts of the site from Open Space to Low Medium Density Residential as RAMinutes\081004 well as a request to specify the preparation of a Specific Plan on the property o 2 acres at the northeast corner of SR 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road — CAC opposed the requested change from Very Low Density Residential to Professional Office • that approximately 15 land use requests were submitted by various property owners through this process — some of which were supported and opposed by the CAC; that it has been recommended by staff that 5 of these 15 requests be deferred until other issues are resolved: o three requests in the Nicolas Valley area o two requests adjacent to the proposed Temecula Education Project • Changes to the Land Use Map in French Valley Area Circulation Element • Primary changes will allow for additional street dedication around higher volume key intersections as well as the CAC's recommendation to consider opening closed connecting streets to improve City-wide circulation • Roadway Cross -sections o Modified Secondary Arterial — two divided lanes in each direction with no curb, gutter, or sidewalk to maintain the rural character of the area o Limited Secondary Arterial — would have one lane in each direction with a left - turn lane and a separated trail o Rural Highway — would have one lane in each direction with left -turn pockets though in some areas two lanes may be needed Circulation Mau • Proposed new roadways as well as changes to the size designation o Loma Linda/Avenida de Missiones between Pechanga Road Parkway and SR 79 o North General Kearney from Deer Meadow Road (near Nicolas Road) to near 4.he northern segment of Calle Pina Colada o Eastern Bypass consisting of Anza Road, Deer Hollow Way, and a southern connection to Interstate 15 via a new interchange o Sky Canyon Road/Briggs Road parallel route along Winchester Road past the future bottleneck area by French Valley Airport • Growth Management/Public Facilities Element R:\M1nutes\081004 4 Policy change is the addition of a statement discouraging street closures that may limit or delay access to emergency services • Community Design Element o Additional discussion on the Mixed Use Design Concept and on public spaces and public art. In an effort to provide those interested in speaking, Mayor Naggar limited the speaking time to two minutes. Deputy City Clerk Ballreich informed the Council/Commission that written communication uvith regard to the General Plan had been received from Max and Agnes Bosetti, David Dillon, Meadowview Community Association, Jeff and Shiela Noble, and Renee Broderick. Thanking Deputy City Manager Thornhill and City Attorney Thorson for their associated efforts, Ms. Eve Craig, Temecula, provided an update on Wolfs Tomb and discussed the historical significance of this site. Commenting on the proposed widening of Rainbow Canyon Road, Mr. Mark Cerney, Temecula, expressed concern with its impact on property values; questioned the added benefit of such a widening; questioned whether an environmental impact report had been completed; and questioned if realtors will be required to provide disclaimers relative to the proposed widening Addressing the importance of recognizing the City's historical sites, Mr. Darell Farnbach, Temecula, representing the Temecula Historical Society, appreciated the opportunity to create a historical places/sites map. Mr. Bill Harker, representing the Temecula Historical Society, reiterated the importance of identification and preservation of the City's historical sites/structures and noted that the designated historical sites/structures should be included in the General Plan. Ms. Diana Lovett -Webb, Temecula, questioned the benefit to the community with opening/extending North General Kearney Road. Commenting on existing traffic issues, Mr. Robert Kaufman, Temecula, echoed concerns with the opening/extension of North General Kearney Road. Expressing concern with the proposed designation for Rainbow Canyon Road, Ms. Renee Broderick commented on the potential of eminent domain. Relaying some confusion with regard to the Recreation Commercial Overlay and the Open Space Elements, Mr. Sam Alhadeff, Temecula, representing Temecula Creek Inn, requested to be given the opportunity to work with staff to provide for a Resort Commercial Recreation Overlay. Viewing such action as risking neighborhoods and the safety of children, Mr. Mike Budd, Temecula, expressed his opposition to opening closed/gated streets. For Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Hogan advised that a golf course alone would not qualify for a Commercial Recreation Overlay but that it would if it had other amenities such as a health club, spa, resort accommodation facilities, etc. Commissioner Mathewson suggested that resort/fractional units (timeshare) be defined. RAMinutes\081004 For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Assistant City Attorney Curley confirmed that once tribal trust lands have been designated, local jurisdiction no longer is applicable; therefore, the desire to designate. Although golf courses are open space, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero suggested that a special designation be considered for them considering the commercial venture. Concurring with Mr. Harker to provide safeguards in the General Plan to ensure historical sites are protected, Councilman Stone reiterated that these sites should be identified in the Geneiral Plan. Senior Planner Hogan noted that staff is in the process of creating an inventory and location of the sites. For Councilman Roberts, staff further clarified the Vineyard/Agriculture designation. Noting that currently public transportation is being addressed under a subsection of the Transportation Element, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero recommended that a separate Public Transportation Element be created and questioned whether there is right-of-way preservation/bus turnouts/protected lanes/etc. in the General Plan for such uses to which Senior Planner Hogan noted that those issues have not been identified in such detail. Relaying his support of a Public Transportation Element, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that certain negotiations such as for bus turnouts are dependent on the type of projects built. Noting that the City Council has an obligation to plan for tomorrow, Councilman Stone, echoed by Mayor Naggar, spoke in support of a separate Public Transportation Element. Although supporting the concept of a separate Public Transportation Element, Councilman Washington noted that transportation is a regional issue and commended staff and the CAC on a job well done. Concurring with a Commercial Recreation Overlay designation for golf courses, Mayor Naggar as well relayed his support of identifying the City's historical sites and of creating a separate Public Transportation Element. Having communicated with the California High Speed Rail Authority, Councilman Roberts nol:ed that discussions included the location of a High Speed Rail and the land needed for such form of transportation. Chairman Telesio recommended that the City apprise the community of other proposed street openings/closings. Reiterating his support of a separate Public Transportation Element, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero commented on the necessity to preserve the needed right-of-way to ensure such opportunities are not lost. Stating that the rural nature of this community is an attractor to the City, Commissioner Olhasso commented on the need for regional transportation planning. Commissioner Mathewson commented on the need to explore strengthening the existing policy with regard to parking for mixed use and village center developments. Concurring with a park and ride facility, Mayor Naggar suggested to plan for land uses in a dual - use capacity and to explore alternative forms of transportation. RAMinutes\081004 6 City Manager Nelson suggested that staff formulate a time schedule for the completion of the General Plan, including the Public Transportation Element and noted that staff would report to the City Council. In response to Chairman Telelsio's suggestion to explore the possibility of a Historic Preservation Element, the consultant advised that the current draft of the Open Space Conservation Element does include a subsection addressing historic/cultural resources. Councilman Roberts advised that the California High Speed Rail Authority has started its Environmental Impact Report. In an effort to keep the General Plan Update on schedule, Commissioner Chiniaeff favored implementing the Public Transportation Element at a later time. Viewing public transportation as a regional transportation challenge, Councilman Washington commented on the importance of exploring the Public Transportation Element in concert with transportation needs of the future. With regard to the Economic Development Element, Commissioner Olhasso addressed the need to update the verbiage. Thanking those who have commented on the Plan and those that had attended this meeting, Mayor Naggar briefly reviewed the upcoming review process of the General Plan Update. ADJOURNMENT At 6:32 P.M., Mayor Naggar formally adjourned the Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop to the next regular City Council meeting at 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 and to the next regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:00 P.M. on Wednesday, August 18, 2004, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Mike Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\081004 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 24, 2004 With Closed Session convening at 6:00 P.M., the Open Session convened at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, August 24, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: 5 Councilmembers: Absent: 0 Councilmembers: PRELUDE MUSIC Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, and Naggar None The prelude music was provided by Margaret Bird. The invocation was given by Pastor Matt Hsieh of Rancho Baptist Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was presented by Councilman Roberts. PRESE NTATIO NIPROCLAMATIONS Appreciation to the City Council for its donation to the Chaparral High School Robotics Team Presenting the City Council with a Plaque of Appreciation, the Chaparral High School Robotics Team thanked the City Council for its $1,000 contribution which enabled the Team to compete in the Solar Splash event. Awards of Valor Commending the bystanders as well as the City's well -trained lifeguards on their heroic efforts on saving a 15-year old boy from a near -drowning incident at the CRC, Mayor Na9gar presented an Award of Valor to the following individuals: Matt Weisfeld Scott Petrich Celeste Crouch Stephen Butler Russell Noll Jessica "Kyle" Johnston Jeremy Jones RAMinutes\082404 PUBLIC COMMENTS A. By way of PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Richard Shahan, Temecula, introduced his daughter, Kelly (swimming for the Temecula Swim Club), who is an avid swimmer who had attended the Junior Olympics and commented on the need for an Olympic -sized pool in the City. B. Having collected 38 signatures from other store owners in Old Town, Ms. Lorraina Spencer, Temecula, shop owner in Old Town, requested that the City halt the retail portion of the Farmers' Market, noting that the Farmers' Market has a negative impact on the sales of Old Town businesses. C. Although not directly impacted by the retail portion of the Farmers' Market, Mr. Doc Lane, Temecula, echoed Ms. Spencer's concern. D. Mr. Otto Baron, Temecula, commented on the high rents the property owners are asking for businesses located on Old Town Front Street and, therefore, echoed the comments with regard to the Farmers' Market, noting the Market should be limited to produce sales and other agriculture -related vendors. E. Having lived in the City for the past 12 years, Mr. Melvin Robins, Temecula, expressed concern with regard to traffic congestion throughout the City and shared with the Council information regarding funds that could be channeled from the Federal government to address this concern. Interested in what Mr. Robins has to share, Mayor Naggar requested that he forward his information to the City Council and contact him by way of e-mail and as well contact the City Manager. F. Having an interest in public safety and considering the City's current population, Mr. Mark Kramer, Temecula, requested that City consider having its own Police Department and expressed an interest in guiding the City into that direction. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. In response to Mr. Robins, Councilman Roberts commented on the City's efforts to negotiate with Caltrans to relinquish its jurisdiction of Winchester Road (79 North) and SR 79 South, noting that once this relinquishment is approved, City improvements would be made. B. Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero reported that Mayor Naggar and he had the pleasure to attend a luncheon to honor and support the Temecula Citizen Corps, noting that Congressman Issa was in attendance of that luncheon and commending the Corps on a job well done. C. In an effort to raise its goal of $1 million toward building the Community Theater, Councilman Washington reminded the public of the upcoming Theater Foundation Fundraiser on September 4, 2004, Temecula -on -Stage. Mr. Washington as well congratulated the Principal and the School Board President and the School Board on its efforts associated with the grand opening of Great Oaks High School (Temecula's third high school); advised that he visited Temecula Valley High School on the first day of school, noting that traffic issues were handled relatively smoothly; noted that he had as well visited Paloma Elementary School, commenting on a parent's suggestion to promote: a RAMinutes\082404 2 Walk to School Week, and stated that Police Motor officers were in attendance to ensure the safety of the children. D. Commenting on the City's proactive measures for the past two years with regard to the West Nile Virus, Mayor Naggar highlighted an upcoming press release. Informing the Council and the public of a program he had recently attended, Mayor Naggar commended those who volunteer their time for the Top Soccer Program which permits handicapped children to play soccer and advised that he had encouraged this organization to apply for Community Service Funding. CONSENT CALENDAR 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. Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Memorandum of Understanding for Emergency Ambulance Services RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Temecula and the County of Riverside, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Agency, for joint monitoring of Ambulance Services. RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the Settlement Agreement for the Riverside County Farm Bureau, et al. v. County of Riverside, et al. and authorize the Mayor to execute the Settlement Agreement on behalf of the City. RAMinutes%082404 0 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 with PELA for landscape, plancheck, and inspection services for a total contract amount of $11,500. Procurement of Fire Department Panasonic Toughbook Tablet PCs RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize the purchase of eight Panasonic Toughbook Tablet PCs from GTSI Corp. for the total amount of $43,459.55. Accept the Declaration of Dedication and execute the Quitclaim Deed whereby City grants to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) a drainage easement for La Serena Way Storm Drain — Stage 1 (Tract Map No. 23371 — Temeku Hills) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING THE DECLARATION OF DEDICATION AND EXECUTING THE QUITCLAIM DEED WHEREBY CITY GRANTS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) A DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR LA SERENA WAY STORM DRAIN STAGE 1 (TRACT MAP NO. 23371) drainage easement for Margarita Road Storm Drain (Tract Map No. 23371) — RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RM4inutes%082404 0 RESOLUTION NO.04-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING THE DECLARATION OF DEDICATION AND EXECUTING THE QUITCLAIM DEED WHEREBY CITY GRANTS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) A DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR MARGARITA ROAD STORM DRAIN (TRACT MAP NO. 23371) Development RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA EXECUTING A QUITCLAIM DEED WHEREBY THE CITY QUITCLAIMS ALL RIGHTS AND INTERESTS IN AND TO A CERTAIN DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR LA SERENA WAY STORM DRAIN — STAGE 1 AS OFFERED BY A DECLARATION OF DEDICATION FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23371 — TEMEKU HILLS I:�de]uh�I_��►11t7�7[iI►�11 10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND PUJOL STREET FOR THE TEMECULA-ON-STAGE EVENT SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 4, 2004, AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES (Councilman Washington abstained with regard to this item.) R:VNinutes\082404 11 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Tract Map No. 31042 in conformance with the conditions of approval. 12 Winchester Road Widening — Nroiect No. rvvuu-zi — Flcquismon r\greernent — RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute substantially the form attached hereto the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Temecula and California Bank and Trust as successor -in -interest to First Pacific National Bank for the acquisition of certain real property in the amount of $59,500.00 plus the associated escrow fees; 12.2 Direct the City Clerk to record the document; 12.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-95 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 13 Award of Construction Contract for Winchester Road Widening at Jefferson Intersection — Proiect No. PW00-27 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Award a construction contract for the Winchester Road Widening at Jefferson Intersection — Project No. PW00-27 — to Riverside Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,607,570.00; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $160,757.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 13.3 Approve an appropriation in the amount of $775,000.00 from General Fund Capital Reserves to the Winchester Road Widening at Jefferson Avenue Intersection Project — Project No. PW00-27. RAMinutes\082404 14 Second Reading of Ordinance No 04-08 (Old Town Specific Plan) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ZONING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION STANDARDS FOR THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 03-0158) MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 14. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:41 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and the Temecula Public Financing Authority. At 7:49 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. COUNCIL BUSINESS 15 Appointment of City Council Ad hoc Committee for the Temecula Hospital (at the request of Mayor Naggar) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Appoint a City Council Subcommittee to work with staff on the Temecula Hospital project. Mayor Naggar provided a brief staff report (of record). Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero noted that he would be interested in serving on this Committee. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to appoint Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero and Mayor Naggar to serve on the ad hoc committee for the Temecula Hospital. Councilman Roberts seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No additional comments. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that as per the Brown Act, there were no items to report under Closed Session and that with respect to Item No. 1 (RCIP litigation), Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero did not participate due to conflict of interest and with respect to Item No. 2 (real property acquisition), neither Mayor Naggar nor Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero participated due to conflict of interest. R:wlinutes1082404 ADJOURNMENT At 7:51 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to a regular meeting on Tuesday, September 14, 2004, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk [SEAL] RAMInutes\082404 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO.04- 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 $4,294,129.96. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 14th day of September, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- 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. 04- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 14'" day of September, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CHIC City Clerk R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 08/19/04 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $ 1,092,414.09 08/26/04 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 472.006.21 09/02/04 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 2,359,291.85 08/26/04 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 370,417.81 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 09/14/04 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 4,294,129.9'a DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERALFUND $ 1,249,195.48 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 12,706.40 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 188,558.39 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 72.42 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 33,940.88 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 821.34 210 CAPITAL IMPROV PROJECT FUND 1,161,162.08 261 CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 1,500.00 274 JOHN W ARNER AD 34,264.41 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -CIP PROJECT 15,110.97 300 INSURANCE FUND 6,004.68 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 35,864.08 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 2,297.57 340 FACILITIES 17,371.79 380 RDA TABS DEBT SERVICE-TEMECULA 02 4,550.00 460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUND 1,135,618.75 470 HARVESTON CFD 01-2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,938.09 473 CROWNE HILL CFD 03-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 21,734.82 $ 3,923,712.15 001 GENERAL FUND 236,085.79 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 5,224.95 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 91,859.33 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 111.16 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 5,442.33 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 818.82 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -CIP PROJECT 2,358.84 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,064.86 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 17,060.69 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 2,842.75 340 FACILITIES 7,548.29 370,417.81 TOTAL BY FUND: $ 4,294,129.91, PREPARED BY RETA W ESTON. ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT SHAW N NELSON, CITY MANAGER apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 O8/1912004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 93816 08/13/2004 007975 PEREZ,JOSEPHINE Description Entertainment:ee picnic:8/14/04 93817 OB/19/2004 001916 ALBERT A WEBB ASSOCIATES Harveston II special tax admin svcs Win/Harveston I Ann'I Admin svcs Crowne Hill Ann'I Admin svcs CFD 88-12 Ann'I Admin svcs 93818 08/19/2004 000106 ALFAX WHOLESALE FURNITUR TCC conference table 93819 08/19/2004 001281 ALHAMBRA GROUP 93820 08/19/2004 006915 ALLIE'S PARTY EQUIPMENT 93821 08/19/2004 001375 AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION Winchester Widening Idscp design sv Hot Summer Nights equip rental Hot Summer Nights equip rental Hot Summer Nights equip rental Membership: Doug Armstrong 93822 08/19/2004 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening Credit: Case # 37497 is CHP 93823 08/19/2004 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI Membership: Cheryl Kitzerow 123672 Membership: Christine Damko 93824 08/19/2004 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS Lifeguard training supplies:Aquatics 93825 O1111912004 002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALL July Animal control services 93826 08/19/2004 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 93827 08/19/2004 007958 ATLANTIC CITY GAMES INC 93828 08/19/2004 004855 BABER, GABRIELE Temp help PPE 7/24 MA/SL Temp help PPE 7/31 Wills Temp help PPE 7/17 MA/SL Temp help PPE 713 MA/SL Temp help PPE 7/31 James Temp help PPE 7/31 MA/SL Temp help PPE 7/10 MA/SL Temp help PPE 7/31 Alexander Temp help PPE 7/31 BryanVPtacek Entertainment for High Hopes TCSD instructor earnings 93829 08/19/2004 003137 BARKERS FOOD MACHINERY S Repair Ice Maker Machine:City Hall Amount Paid 350.00 20,000.00 2,500.00 2,125.00 1,500.00 445.36 217.32 217.32 217.32 125.00 206.70 -32.50 230.00 210.00 176.00 8,750.00 716.76 697.60 658.68 615.12 575.44 571.56 509.52 261.36 236.25 310.11 168.00 456.34 Check Total 350.00 26,125.00 445.36 651.96 125.00 fYLAA; 440.00 176.00 8,750.00 4,842.29 310.11 168.00 456.34 Page:t apChkLst 08/19/2004 3:06:20PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 2 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93830 08/19/2004 004778 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR INC May/June Prjt Mgmt:R.C. Widening 7,357.14 7,357.14 93831 08/19/2004 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 679.46 679.46 93932 08/19/2004 006721 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE Office Supplies: Finance 36.14 Office Supplies: Code Enforcement 15.04 Office Supplies: Code Enforcement 3.08 54.26 93833 O13119/2004 004462 C D W GOVERNMENT INC 20 SDLT 1101220GB Cartridges: IS 1,236.09 1,236.09 93834 08/19/2004 007829 C S LEGACY CONSTRUCTION I Jul prgss:SR 79S Sidewalk Impr 23,647.50 23,647.50 93835 OS/19/2004 000647 CALIF DEPT OF CONSUMER A Membership: Steve Charette 150.00 150.00 93836 08/19/2004 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY Helium tanks refill:TCSD 41.93 41.93 93837 01111912004 002415 CASTLE AMUSEMENT PARK SMART Excursions to Castle Park 479.60 479.60 93838 08/19/2004 004161 CD TOONS DJ Services for City EE Picnic 350.00 350.00 93839 08/19/2004 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC Police vehicles fuel expense 639.48 City vehicles fuel expense:CM 116.78 756.26 93840 OB/19/2004 006535 DAVIS, TYRELL Reimb: Fire Explorer uniforms 107.64 107.64 93841 O13119/2004 007983 DEPACKH, TERRY Refund: Teen Summer Day Camp 93.00 93.00 93842 08/19/2004 004222 DIAMONDBACK FIRE & RESCU Supplies for Paramedic squad 857.82 857.82 93843 08/19/2004 007865 DIETERICH INTERNATIONAL PW patch truck repairs 1,701.18 1,701.18 93844 08/19/2004 001714 DREAM ENGINEERING INC Jul design svc:Vail Ranch Lght Prjt 254.66 254.66 93845 08/19/2004 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Temp help PPE 7123 J WBJ 6,023.97 Temp help PPE 7/09 J WBJ 5,800.34 Temp help PPE 7/9 Jones 1,859.60 Temp help PPE 7/23 Jones 1,588.88 Temp help PPE 7/23 Sang 1,262.92 Temp help PPE 7/9 Seng 1,091.61 17,627.32 Page2 apChkLst 08/19/2004 3:06:20PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 3 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93846 08/19/2004 003665 EMERITUS COMMUNICATIONS July long distance phone svcs 34.36 34.36 93847 08/19/2004 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICES Fuel expense for City vehicles 55.86 55.86 93848 O13/19/2004 007982 FAIRFIELD, ROLAND Refund:SMART exc. Raging Wtrs/Kno 30.00 30.00 93849 08/19/2004 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC Express mail services 201.17 201.17 93850 08/19/2004 001511 HELDMAN ROLAPP & ASSOCIA Jul Financial analysis: Roripaugh CFD 6,229.90 Harveston II CFD Financial advisory 3,736.93 Credit: Invoice exceeds agrmnt -3.42 9,963.41 93851 08/19/2004 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE Lot book report: Bello 150.00 Lot book report: Pino 150.00 Lot book report: Owen 150.00 450.00 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 O8/1912004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93852 08/19/2004 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 007697 W ESTIN ST. FRANCIS HOTEL, T TT Htl:Accela Conf: 7/18-22 TT 971.88 007994 BUDGET RENT -A -CAR TT Car Rental:Accela Conf:7/18-22 226.29 005750 IRON WOK CHINA BISTRO SJ Refreshments: Closed Session Mt 206.37 007060 COUNTRY GARDEN RESTAURA WH Refreshments:prjt updates/staff m 104.00 007992 CASA DE BANDINI TT Refreshments:Staff Team Bldg 103.67 007993 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DIS TT Tmspt:Staff Team Bldg 73.50 007988 GOLDEN DRAGON TT Meal: Accela Conf: 7/18-22 72.90 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL CW Flowers per council discr 64.60 007226 PIZZA HUT WH Refreshments:Presentation Wrks 59.80 007987 WALMART MN Office supply: Shredder 53.75 007989 SABELLA AND LA TORRE TT Meal: Accela Conf: 7/18-22 43.98 006364 BARNES AND NOBLE TT Books: Google Guide/Adobe 43.57 007990 CHEESECAKE FACTORY TT Meal: Accela Conf: 7/18-22 42.29 006938 EARTHLINK INC Tr Council members internet svcs 38.69 006934 RIVERSIDE BREWING CO. SN Refreshments:County Mtg in RVS 38.54 007991 PRIORITY PARKING -POST ST TT Prkg: Accela Conf: 7/18-22 35.50 000293 STADIUM PIZZA TT Refreshments: Computer issues 8 20.77 007995 OAKLAND INTL AIRPORT TT Meal:Accela Conf:7/18-22 12.83 TT Statement fee 3.00 2,215.93 93853 08/19/2004 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED First Aid for City Employee 176.50 176.50 93854 08/19/2004 004239 FISHER SEHGAL YANEZ INC Aug design svcs:Comm. Theater 10,754.25 10,754.25 93855 O8/19/2004 007866 GCS SUPPLIES INC Printer toner supplies: Citywide 721.99 Printer toner supplies: Ctywide 163.13 885.12 93856 Oa/19/2004 002528 GLASS BLASTERS INC New employee engraved coffee mugs 16.16 16.16 93957 O13119/2004 003792 GRAINGER computer installation hardware:Fire 539.33 computer installation hardware:Fire 452.87 992.20 93858 08/19/2004 001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I Ala" Monitoring:Police Satellite 87.00 87.00 PageA apChkLst O8/19/2004 3:06:20PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93859 Oa/1912004 007736 GRIFFITH COMPANY Jul prgss:Jefferson Rehab Ph II 29,925.00 29,925.00 93860 08/19/2004 004053 HABITAT WEST INC Apr/May/Jun restore Pala pdt habitat 650.00 Aug svcs to Restore Lg Cyn habitat 558.33 1,208.33 93861 08/19/2004 007620 HEWETT, JACYLN Refund:Exc. Sr -Bye Bye Birdie 84.00 84.00 93862 OS/19/2004 007919 HIGGINS, GREGORY Refund:3 SMART exc: Knott's 55.00 Refund: SMART exc: Knott's 15.00 70.00 93863 OS/19/2004 003938 [AN DAVIDSON LANDSCAPE - I Gateway Ldscp design svcs 916.16 916.16 93864 OS/19/2004 004911 IMBSEN & ASSOCIATES INC Ynez Bridge feasibility study 6,581.38 5,581.38 93865 08/19/2004 002166 INGRAM ELECTRIC Electrical upgrade:Fire Sm 84 567.00 Relocate master switch @ C.Museum 190.00 757.00 93866 08/19/2004 001517 INTEGRATED INSIGHTS DBA: H Aug EE Assistance Program 702.81 702.81 93867 08/19/2004 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals 343.29 343.29 93868 08/19/2004 004179 INTL EZ-UP EX UP portable tents: TCSD 1,378.14 1,378.14 93869 08/19/2004 004115 K T U & ASSOCIATES Jul prgss Mstr Plan:Roripaugh trails 11,496.20 11,496.20 93870 Oa/19/2004 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC Fall Car Show banners cleaning svcs 2,866.16 Film Festival banners cleaning Svcs 1,648.13 Race for the Cure banners cleaning s 942.74 Grape Cluster banners cleaning svcs 363.43 Credit: Calculation error -55.49 5,764.97 93871 08/19/2004 000206 KINKOS INC Stationery paper/misc supplies 32.33 32.33 93872 08/19/2004 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS INC Pool repair supplies: Aquatic 581.11 581.11 93873 08/19/2004 002519 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC PW Mntc Safety Supplies 1,403.87 1,403.87 93874 08/19/2004 006744 LAMAR CORPORATION, THE Aug billboard lease -Old Town 2,700.00 Julylboard lease -Old Town 2,700.00 Hot Summer Nights billboard chg-out 450.00 5,850.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 08/19/2004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank; union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93875 08/19/2004 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. TCSD instructor earnings 468.00 TCSD instructor earnings 396.00 TCSD instructor earnings 344.00 TCSD instructor earnings 276.00 1,484.00 93876 08/19/2004 004141 MAINTEX INC Custodial Supplies: Maint Fac 132.05 Custodial Supplies: City Hall 124.83 Custodial Supplies: Sr Center 99.86 Custodial Supplies: CRC 99.86 Custodial Supplies: City Hall 73.39 Custodial Supplies: CRC 36.55 566.54 93877 08/19/2004 004068 MANALILI, AILEEN TCSD Instructor Earnings 507.52 TCSD Instructor Earnings 280.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 210.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 63.00 1,060.52 93878 08/19/2004 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER Temp help PPE 06/30 LK/AA 577.96 Temp help PPE 07/11 Dankworth 329.20 907.16 93879 Oa/19/2004 003427 MEYLER, JAMES A Reimb:City League Conf: 7/28-30/04 641.58 641.58 93880 Oa/19/2004 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS envelopes for City Mgr. Dept. 299.48 business cards: G. Papagolos 114.86 Business cards: Jade Yonker 42.83 457.17 93881 08/19/2004 001892 MOBILE MODULAR Jul modular bldg rental:Fire Stn 92 832.40 B32.40 93882 08/19/2004 004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY Res Impry Prgm: Ristau, Fred 2,459.00 2,459.00 93883 08/19/2004 007985 NAGTALON, MARIA Refund:Level 1 Swim Lessons 12.50 12.50 93884 08/19/2004 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Jul display ads: Hot Smr Nights 351.72 351.72 93885 OB/19/2004 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE 8 SERVICE City Vehicle Repair/Main Svcs 907.47 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 293.20 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 263.59 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 245.37 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 55.40 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 54.93 1,819.96 93886 OS/19/2004 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES Jul Duck Pond water maint. Svcs 665.50 Add'I July charges 82.50 748.00 93887 08/19/2004 006849 ON SCENE OUTFITTERS Fire Prevention materials/promos 2,500.54 2,500.54 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 08M 9/2004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93888 08/19/2004 007384 OREGON MT. CONSTRUCTORS Material Delivery Svcs:Sports Comple 10,440.00 10,440.00 93889 08/19/2004 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 377.84 377.84 93890 08/19/2004 000253 POSTMASTER Express Mail & Postal Svcs 121.90 121.90 93891 08/19/2004 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN Jul recruit ads for H.R. Dept. 6,222.69 Jul display ads: TCSD Events 912.00 7,134.69 93892 08/19/2004 003697 PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTAN 6/7-7/11/04 svcs:Murr.Crk/Ovrind 21,166.98 6/7-7/11/04 Svcs: SR79 Medians 3,570.00 24,736.98 93893 08/19/2004 004318 R J BULLARD CONSTRUCTION Prgs Pmt# 15:Soundwall Imp" 20,163.28 20,163.28 93894 08/19/2004 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST Various Water Meters 12,593.30 Aug 01-08-00038-1 Pechanga Pkwy 406.62 12,999.92 93895 08/19/2004 003761 RANCHO METALS & SUPPLY metal supplies: var park sites 16.16 16.16 93896 08/19/2004 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Oup Blueprints:Roripaugh Fire Stn 845.72 845.72 93897 08/19/2004 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING Electrical Supplies: C. Museum 228.60 228.60 93898 08/19/2004 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI Repair Equipment: Pw Maint Div 71.13 71.13 93899 08/19/2004 004498 REPUBLIC ELECTRIC Jul On -Call Traffic Signal Maint Svcs 1,040.00 1,040.00 93900 08/19/2004 007402 RICHARD BRADY & ASSOCIATE 6/27-7/24/04 Svcs:Maint Fac Expan 90.75 90.75 93901 08/19/2004 006483 RICHARDS, TYREASHA I. TCSD Instructor Earnings 592.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 48.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 24.00 664.00 93902 08/19/2004 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & Ntc/Detennination fee:O.T.Specilic PI 1,314.00 1,314.00 93903 08/19/2004 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW ST 4th of July Event/Parade Patrol Svcs 14,333.88 Jazz Festival Patrol Svcs: 7/17/04 2,585.66 16,919.54 93904 08/19/2004 003587 RIZZO CONSTRUCTION INC window area:C.E. inspection office 4,900.00 Replace broken window @ CRC 475.00 5,375.00 93905 08/19/2004 007896 SEEDEN, FRANCINE Refund:Smart Excur.- Castle Park 10.00 10.00 Page:? apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 08119/2004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 93906 08/19/2004 007986 SKEANS, PATRICIA (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total Refund:Skyhawks Multi -Sports 110.00 110.00 93907 08/19/2004 003804 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEM TCSD Instructor Earnings 93908 08/19/2004 002718 SO CALIF CITY CLERKS ASSN Focused Educ:SJ/GF/CD:10/21104 93909 08/19/2004 002718 SO CALIF CITY CLERKS ASSN General Mtg:Jones/Domenoe:9/23/04 93910 Oa/19/2004 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 93911 08/19/2004 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 93912 OB/19/2004 007984 ST. STEPHENS DIST Jul 2-00-397-5059 Various Mtrs Aug 2-06-105-0654 Various Mtrs Aug 2-25-393-4681 T.E.S. Pool Jul 2-24-151-6582 Various Mtrs Aug 2-24-628-8963 Btrfid Stage various City facilities gas meters Aug 095 167 7907 2 Fire Stn 84 Refund: Sec. Deposit: Sr. Center 93913 08/19/2004 000293 STADIUM PIZZA Rfrshmnts:SMART Prgm:Pala Prk Rfrshmnts:SMART Prgm:V.R. Prk Rfrshmnts:SMART Prgm:Temeku Prk Rfrshmnts:SMART Prgm:Marg. Prk Rfrshmnts:SMART Prgm:Temeku Prk 93914 08/19/2004 006896 TEMECULA MUSIC ACADEMY I TCSD Instructor Earnings 93915 08/19/2004 003228 US BANK TRUST NATIONAL AS Trustee/Arbitrage fees: CFD 93916 OB/19/2004 007118 U S TELPACIFIC CORPORATIO Jul Internet IP Addresses Block Aug Internet IP Addresses Block 93917 08/19/2004 007602 VANCE CORPORATION Prgs Pmt #1:Diaz Rd realignment 93918 08/19/2004 004261 VERIZON Aug xxx-5072 general usage Aug xxx-0073 general usage Aug xxx-1473 P.D. O.T. Stn Aug xxx-1603 City Hall Aug xxx-1941 PTA CD TTACSD Aug xxx-3851 general usage Aug xxx-8573 general usage Aug xxx-3923 Stone 2,204.00 210.00 60.00 4,373.25 2,074.51 742.49 314.44 26.08 1,598.87 121.64 100.00 110.41 110.41 78.73 78.73 31.30 Lr re 3,300.00 539.75 539.75 246,840.67 5,766.96 224.46 112.26 89.90 58.08 39.69 30.40 27.22 2,204.00 210.00 60.00 7,530.77 1,720.51 100.00 409.58 60.00 3,300.00 1,079.50 246,840.67 6,348.97 PageB apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 08/19/2004 3:06:20PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93919 08/19/2004 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Internet svcs/EOC backup @ stn 84 72.35 72.35 93920 08/19/2004 004848 VERIZON SELECT SERVICES I Aug long distance phone svcs 904.77 904.77 93921 08/19/2004 005066 W DEAN DAVIDSON, ARCHITEC Consulting Svcs:T.V.Museum Expert. 1,075.00 Add'I Reimb. expenses 75.00 1,150.00 93922 08/19/2004 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 7/1-15 Citywide tree trimming svcs 290.00 290.00 93923 08/19/2004 001544 YEAGER SKANSKA INC Prgs Pmt #3: Pechanga Pkwy Ph 2 512.367.70 512,367.70 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 1,092,414.09 Page9 apChkLst 06/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 367 08/26/2004 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Disability Ins Payment 17,199.80 17,199.80 368 015/26/2004 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 67,097.35 67,097.35 369 08/26/2004 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SO Nationwide Retirement Payment 18,575.99 18,575.99 370 08/26/2004 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREME PERS ER Paid Member Contr Pmt 73,399.37 73,399.37 371 08/26/2004 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA), OBRA - Project Retirement Payment 5,208.30 5,208.30 372 08/23/2004 003228 U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL AS FY 03104 taxes: CFD 01-2103.1 20,047.91 20,047.91 93924 08/26/2004 004594 2HOT ACTIVEWEAR TCSD Sports Program Awards 1,148.62 1,148.62 93925 08/26/2004 008019 24 HOUR FITNESS Corporate Membership 250.00 250.00 93926 011/26/2004 004148 AT&T Long distance svcs: P.D. 131.58 131.58 93927 011/26/2004 002038 ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPLY Pool sanitizing chemicals 16.81 16.81 93928 08/26/2004 001281 ALHAMBRA GROUP Ldscp dsgn svcs:Japanese Garden 2,850.00 2,850.00 93929 08/26/2004 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES Smart Excur:8/11 Raging Waters 546.37 Day Camp Excur:8/5 MovieExperience 350.88 897.25 93930 08/26/2004 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES on call fee/forensic svcs: Police 500.00 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 212.50 712.50 93931 08/26/2004 004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGE, TE Yearly Rental: IS off site storage unit 1,836.00 1,836.00 93932 08/26/2004 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. Temp help:PPE 8/7/04 Wills 697.60 Temp help:PPE 8/7/04 Lee/Alexander 615.12 Temp help PPE 8/7/04 Alexander 304.92 1,617.64 93933 08/26/2004 006721 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE Misc office supplies:finance 83.60 83.60 93934 08/26/2004 008013 BOSTRE-LE, ANNIE Refund:Day Camp 98.00 98.00 Page:1 apChkLst O8/2612004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 2 Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93935 O11126/2004 000128 BROWN & BROWN OF CALIF. I Insurance policy renewal 1/04-1/07 3,510.00 3,510.00 93936 08/26/2004 005055 BROWN, STEVE Reimb:Accela Conf:7/19-22/04 563.13 563.13 93937 08/26/2004 004225 BURL SLONE COUNTRY MUSIC Entertainment:Hot Smr Nights:7/16 100.00 100.00 93938 08/26/2004 008000 C C P O A CONFERENCE Conference:L.Fanene 9/21-24/04 185.00 185.00 93939 O8/26/2004 008000 C C P O A CONFERENCE Conference:L. Callahan 9/21-24/04 185.00 185.00 93940 08/26/2004 006046 C S A I A SPRING TRAINING CSAIA Training:10/12-16:13. Gray 380.00 380.00 93941 08/26/2004 000154 C S M F O App Fee:Oper Budget Award Prgm 50.00 50.00 93942 08/26/2004 000154 C S M F O App Fee:CIP Budget Award Prgm 25.00 25.00 93943 08/26/2004 007116 CAL -DUCT, INC. Misc repairs & parts Public Works 367.89 367.89 93944 O8/26/2004 000837 CALIF DEPT OF FRANCHISE T Payment: PIT #552981879 2,228.93 2,228.93 93945 08/26/2004 004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT Drug & alcohol analysis: Police 525.00 525.00 93946 Oa/26/2004 005660 CALIF EMS AUTHORITY License Renewal: P. Rawlings 130.00 130.00 93947 08/26/2004 005660 CALIF EMS AUTHORITY License Renewal: T. Buckley 130.00 130.00 93948 O8/26/2004 004971 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, Copier Lease:Station 73/CRC 346.52 Copier Lease:Station 12 69.96 Copier Lease Station 12 69.96 Copier Lease:CRC -17.89 468.55 93949 08/26/2004 008007 CARVAJAL, EVA Refund:Toddler Swim Lessons 23.00 23.00 93950 OS/26/2004 007927 CASCADIA SPORTS SYSTEMS Hockey Rink Rivets 215.00 215.00 93951 08/26/2004 002415 CASTLE AMUSEMENT PARK Day Camp:B/12 Castle Park 1,232.93 1,232.93 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 08/26/2004 1:02:36PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check M Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93952 08/26/2004 005417 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY First aid supplies:CRC/C. Museum 237.74 First aid supplies:TCSD Vehicle 24.32 262.06 93953 08/26/2004 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI Community Health Charities Payment 163.00 163.00 93954 08/26/2004 001193 COMP U S A INC Computer Supplies 104.45 104.45 93955 08/26/2004 003739 COTTON BRIDGES ASSOCIATE Jul Update City General Plan 4,972.23 4,972.23 93956 O8/2612004 006042 CREATIVE EVENT SOLUTIONS EMS Conf:100/04 J. McBride 119.00 119.00 93957 08/26/2004 006042 CREATIVE EVENT SOLUTIONS EMS Conf:10/7/04 B. Deyo 119.00 119.00 93956 O1112612004 006042 CREATIVE EVENT SOLUTIONS EMS COnf:I Of7/04 G. Adams 119.00 119.00 93959 O8/26/2004 004123 D L PHARES & ASSOCIATES Rental pmt Sept:police storefront 2,086.14 2,086.14 93960 08/26/2004 004569 DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATE Jul consulting svcs:Roripaugh CFD 5,882.15 5,882.15 93961 08/26/2004 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL Portable Restroom:Long Canyon Pk 57.48 Portable Restroom:Veterans Pk 57.48 Portable Restroom:Vail Ranch Pk 57.48 Portable Restroom:Riverton Pk 57.48 229.92 93962 OS/26/2004 008009 DUNBAR, ANTOINETTE Refund:Level 3 & 4/5 Swim Lessons 65.00 65.00 93963 08/26/2004 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Temp help PPE 816104 Jensen/Heer 5,959.04 Temp help PPE 816104 Grove 2,213.60 Temp help PPE 8/6/04 Jones 1,896.50 Temp help PPE 8/6/04 Cammarota 1,403.20 Temp help PPE 816104 Novotny 1,327.84 Temp help PPE 8/6/04 Seng 1,303.35 Temp help PPE 8/6/04 Gutierrez 1,192.80 Temp help PPE 8/6/04 Lontok 600.00 15,896.33 93964 08/26/2004 000523 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER 95366-02 Diego Or Ldscp 570.09 570.09 93965 08/26/2004 004990 ELEMENT K JOURNALS Annual subscription: Info Sys 107.00 107.00 93966 08/26/2004 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL CACE Conf:ColeNoshall 10/5-8/04 849.36 849.36 Page3 apChkLst 011/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 4 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93967 08/26/2004 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL HtI:CCPOA Conf:L.Callahan 9/21-24 538.35 538.35 93968 08/26/2004 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL Htl:000PA Conf:L. Fanene 9121-24 538.35 538.35 93969 08/26/2004 000164 ESGIL CORPORATION Jul Plan Check Svcs: B&S dept. 12,021.68 12,021.68 93970 08/26/2004 002797 EXPERTEES"""""' Shirts for City marketing/promotion 8,915.71 deduction: PIT#552981879 -2,228.93 6,686.78 93971 08/26/2004 007633 FABRICATION ARTS Signage:childrens museum 3,064.11 3,064.11 93972 08/26/2004 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC Express mail services 121.34 121.34 93973 08/26/2004 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE Lot book report: Ford 150.00 150.00 93974 08/26/2004 008016 G & M CUSTOM UPHOLSTERY Code Enforcement Vehicle Repair 300.00 300.00 93975 08/26/2004 007866 G C S SUPPLIES INC Toner Supplies:Citywide 762.85 Toner Supplies:Citywide 592.11 Toner Supplies:Citywide 306.16 Toner Supplies:Citywide 269.38 Toner Supplies:Citywide 105.80 2,036.30 93976 08/26/2004 005998 GLAZE RANKIN, SUSAN Entertainment:Summer Nts 8/20/04 1,000.00 1,000.00 93977 08/26/2004 000175 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFI App Fee:Budget Award Prgm 500.00 500.00 93978 08/26/2004 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED LITHOG City Seal Stickers:PD/HR/FD/CC/CC 868.47 868.47 93979 08/26/2004 008012 GRIGGS, MICHELLE Refund:Parent & Me Swim Lessons 30.00 30.00 93980 08/26/2004 007688 HILTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON Consultant svcs: AB939 Annual Rprt 588.25 588.25 93981 08/26/2004 005748 HODSON, CHERYL A. Support Payment 5.85 5.85 93982 08/26/2004 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT TRUST 45 1 C M A Retirement Payment 7,339.10 7,339.10 93983 08/26/2004 002166 INGRAM ELECTRIC Electrical srvcs:City Hall 270.00 Electrical srvcs:TCSD 220.00 490.00 Page:4 apChkLst 08/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 93984 08/26/2004 006713 INTEGRATED MEDIA SYSTEMS Panel Password:Council Chambers 950.00 950.00 93985 08/26/2004 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals 426.44 426.44 93986 08/26/2004 007654 INTERACTIVE DESIGN Architectural Serv:Old Town 9,589.38 Credit:Amt. exceeds contract -3,854.88 5,734.50 93987 08/26/2004 004265 JEWELL FENCE COMPANY Res Imp Pgnn:J. Strand 2,179.00 2,179.00 93988 08/26/2004 008001 JOHN NAPIER SOCCER CAMP Refund:Security Deposit 100.00 100.00 93989 08/26/2004 008011 JOHNSON, DEBBIE Refund: Level 4/5 Swim Lessons 30.00 30.00 93990 08/26/2004 007007 JONES, ASHLEY Reimb:Tem. Citizen Corps Mtg: 8/21 194.95 194.95 93991 Oa/26/2004 008005 KOFOED, TERESA Refund:Book making for kids 30.00 30.00 93992 08/26/2004 001719 L P A INC Jul Design: Library Project 5,200.00 5,200.00 93993 O1312612004 008008 LAWLESS, CHRISY Refund:Level 2 Swim Lessons 60.00 60.00 93994 08/26/2004 002863 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Misc. supplies Public Works 42.46 42.46 93995 Oa/2612004 000586 LEXISNEXIS MATTHEW BENDE purchase 5 add'I Municipal Codes 404.07 404.07 93996 08/26/2004 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC Medic Supplies 766.50 766.50 93997 08/26/2004 008010 LOPEZ, SHARON Refund: Level 617 Swim Lessons 30.00 30.00 93996 08/26/2004 006654 LOST CANYON RANGERS Entertainment: Hot Smr Nights: 8/6 600.00 600.00 93999 08/26/2004 004697 LOWES HIW INC Smart Program Supplies 85.90 85.90 94000 08/26/2004 008014 MAGENHEIM, JOSEF Refund:Level 6/7 Swim Lessons 30.00 30.00 94001 08/26/2004 004141 MAINTEX INC Custodial Supplies: T. Museum 21.01 21.01 Pages apChkLst Final Check List O8126/2004 1:02:36PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 94002 08/26/2004 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER Temp help w/e 07/18 Dankworth Temp help We 08101 Dankworth Temp help We 07/25 Dankworth 94003 08/26/2004 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC CIP/AOB design covers blank stock for AOB/CIP AOB tab dividers CIP tab dividers Combs for CIP/AOB 94004 08/26/2004 003800 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING Prgs Pmt #10:J.W. Street:PW0207 94005 O11126/2004 004208 MILANOS Refreshments:Council Mtg:a/10/04 94006 08/26/2004 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS business cards:MH/AE/TWBC/SR/SW letterhead: City Mgr Dept. business cards: S. Nelson letterhead: B & S Dept. business cards: D. Lanier business cards: M. Nagger letterhead: City Mgr Dept. business cards: Z. Smith 94007 08/26/2004 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUIP playground equipment parts: Parks 94008 08126t2004 001892 MOBILE MODULAR Aug modular bldg rental:Fire Stn 92 94009 Oa/2612004 003974 MOTIF BARBERSHOP QUARTE Entertainment:Hot Smr Nights:8120 94010 O1112612004 007224 N E C BUSINESS NETWORK phone equipment: I.S. Dept. 94011 08/26/2004 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES 94012 08/26/2004 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 94013 08/26/2004 004491 OLD TYME FOLK Jul recruitment ads: H.R. Dept. City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs Credit: calculation error/inv# 28511 Entertainment:Hot Smr Nights:8/20/04 94014 08/26/2004 001619 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER I recruitment ads: H.R. Dept. Amount Paid 658.40 489,69 296.28 1,074.27 693.91 633.57 471.95 413.76 34,264.41 393.75 401.05 312.12 272.55 144.07 114.86 114.86 83.72 42.83 92.46 832.40 200.00 600.88 1,455.60 367.40 121.83 38.65 31.34 21.34 -10.00 c r r fir, 577.75 Page: 6 Check Total 1,444.37 3,287.46 34,264.41 393.75 1,486.06 92.46 832.40 200.00 600.88 1,455.60 570.56 300.00 4YANIR Pages apChkLst 08/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 7 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94015 08/26/2004 003218 PELA Jul Plan Check Svcs: Planning 5,456.00 Jul Plan Check Svcs: TCSD 2,000.00 7,456.00 94016 08/26/2004 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG PERS Long Tenn Care Payment 288.55 288.55 94017 08/26/2004 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 453.84 453.84 94018 08/26/2004 002579 POTAMUS PRESS Bid Packet Acknowledgement books 299.60 299.60 94019 08/26/2004 006664 R R M DESIGN GROUP Jul consulting:Citywide dsgn guideline 4,265.48 4,265.48 94020 08/26/2004 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK ASS Plan ck fees: Maint Fac Expan 150.00 150.00 94021 08/26/2004 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST Various Water Meters 31,953.82 Various Water Meters 12.139.94 Aug 01-02-98010-0 Fire Stn 84 123.12 Aug 01-04-10033-2 Marg. Rd. 13.64 Aug 01-02-98000.0 Fire Stn 84 3.58 44,234.10 94022 08/26/2004 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Dup. Blueprints: Veteran's Memorial 101.94 Dup. Blueprints: Veteran's Memorial 46.95 Dup. Blueprints: W. C. Sport Complex 24.73 Dup. Blueprints: V. R. Middle School 16.70 Dup. Blueprints: PW CIP Div 14.84 205.16 94023 08/26/2004 008017 REKBI, IBRAHIM Refund: Taxi Fee 107.00 107.00 94024 08/26/2004 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE trash/debris clean-up: City's R-O-W's 5,000.00 5,000.00 94025 08/26/2004 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI Propane gas: PW Maint Div 18.87 18.87 94026 08/26/2004 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR Jun parking cite assessments 1,656.00 1,656.00 94027 08/26/2004 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CD - Cit files: PW Land Dev 42.50 42.50 94028 08/26/2004 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO Jun emerg. radio rental: Police 1,235.60 1,235.60 94029 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Traf. Collision ReconstrA 1/29-12/10 423.00 423.00 94030 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Traf. Collision Investigation:10/18-29 417.00 417.00 Page:? apChkLst 08/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 8 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94031 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Traf. Collision Investigation:10/18-29 417.00 417.00 94032 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Radar Operator Trn:9/13-15/04 126.00 126.00 94033 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Radar Operator Tm: 11115-17/04 63.00 63.00 94034 08/26/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Laser Operator Tm:9/16/04 50.00 50.00 94035 Oa/2612004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Laser Operator Tm: 11/18/04 25.00 25.00 94036 08/26/2004 003587 RIZZO CONSTRUCTION INC Remove/Install Rain Gutters: Stn 84 1,180.00 1,180.00 94037 08/26/2004 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. Reimb: SCAG Mtgs: 8/05/04 17.95 17.95 94038 Oa/2612004 008002 RULLODA, DINA Refund:Sec. Deposit: TCC 100.00 100.00 94039 Oa/2612004 005227 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF Support Payment 33.24 33.24 94040 Oa/26/2004 006815 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF Support Payment 12.50 12.50 94041 08/26/2004 004609 SHREDFORCE INC On -site shredding svcs:Reoords Mgmt 304.47 304.47 94042 08/26/2004 000645 SMART & FINAL INC SMART Program supplies 275.92 Temecula Citizen Corps supplies 227.05 ee reoogn. supplies: H.R. Dept. 220.00 Teen Programs supplies 105.65 Summer Day Camp supplies 70.61 899.23 94043 08/26/2004 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Aug 2-02-351.4946 Sr Ctr 1,625.00 Jul 2-19-999-9442 Various Mtrs 1,261.24 Aug 2-18-937.3152 T. Museum 1,032.32 Aug 2-23-365-5992 Fire Stn 92 742.63 Aug 2-20-817-9929 O.T. P.D. Stn 360.46 Aug 2-22-891-0550 Various Mtrs 257.45 Aug 2-11-007-0455 6th St. 253.38 Aug 2-21-911-7892 O.T. Prk Lot 128.02 Aug 2-19-171-8568 Wedding Chpl 77.80 Aug 2-21-981-4720 Hwy 79 59.95 Aug 2-14-204-1615 Front St Rdio 22.48 5,820.73 94044 08/26/2004 008018 SO CALIF WASTE MGMT FORU Waste Mgmt Forum:PR/BS:11/4/04 180.00 180.00 PageB apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 08/26/2004 1:02:36PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94045 08/26/2004 007851 SOUTHCOAST HEATING & AIR HVAC repair/maint: T. Museum 321.75 321.75 94046 08/26/2004 004163 SPORTS CHALET Softballs: Softball Leagues 1,637.37 1,637.37 94047 08/26/2004 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET CL Custodial Svcs: C. Museum 1,200.00 Custodial Svcs: CRC 500.00 Carpet Cleaning: Sr Ctr 350.00 2,050.00 94048 08/26/2004 001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS INC Replace broken window 0 TCC 137.97 137.97 94049 08/26/2004 000305 TARGET STORE SMART Program supplies 232.91 SMART Program supplies 130.74 Aquatics Program supplies 95.49 Summer Day Camp supplies 57.41 SMART Program supplies 38.15 SMART Program supplies 25.30 580.00 94050 08/26/2004 005412 TEMECULA GARDEN & POWER equip repair/maint: PW Maint Div 103.47 equip repair/maint: PW Maint Div 25.73 129.20 94051 08/26/2004 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN Cert. Holders:Council Presentations 867.39 ee recogn award: C. Domenoe 61.63 929.02 94052 08/26/2004 007340 TEMECULA VALLEY FIRE EQUI fire extinguisher maint: TCSD Van. 137.44 fire extinguisher maint: CRC 118.26 fire extinguisher maint: City Hall 90.00 fire extinguisher maint: Various Prks 77.45 fire extinguisher maint: Maint Fac 59.25 fire extinguisher maint: T. Museum 52.50 fire extinguisher maint: TCC 49.90 fire extinguisher maint: Sr Ctr 45.00 fire extinguisher maint: C. Museum 6.57 636.37 94053 08/26/2004 008004 TEMECULA VALLEY NATIONAL Refund:Sec. Deposit:CRC 200.00 200.00 94054 08/26t2004 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED S FY 04/05 Field Renovation 20,075.00 Jul City vehicles fuel usage 547.49 20,622.49 94055 08/26/2004 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC Sound Tech/System: Movies/Park 10,000.00 Sound Tech Svcs:Smr Concert Series 3,600.00 13,600.00 94056 08/26/2004 002452 TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL misc equip parts: PW Maint Div 7.84 misc equip parts: PW Maint Div 7.55 15.39 94057 08/26/2004 008003 TORRES, MARIA Refund:Sec. Deposit: TCC 100.00 100.00 Page9 apChkLst O8/26/2004 1:02:36PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 10 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94058 08/26/2004 005873 TRI AD ACTUARIES INC Aug Administration Fees 357.00 Credit: 41 participants for August -8.50 348.50 94059 08/26/2004 006192 TRISTAFF GROUP Temp Help We 08/O1 Long 624.00 Temp Help We 08/08 Long 499.20 1,123.20 94060 08/26/2004 008006 TURNER, HEATHER Refund:Yoga-Postnatal Yoga 52.00 52.00 94061 08/26/2004 000325 UNITED WAY United Way Charities Payment 218.00 218.00 94062 08/26/2004 000524 VAN TECH ENGINEERING SAFE Safety jackets/vests: PW Land Dev 281.79 281.79 94063 O8/26/2004 008015 VERA, MARIA Refund:Level 2 & 4/5 Swim Lessons 65.00 65.00 94064 08/26/2004 004261 VERIZON Aug xxx-0074 general usage 246.38 Aug xxx-3564 alarm 55.95 302.33 94065 08/26/2004 001890 VORTEX DOORS garage doors repair/maint: Fire Stn 84 928.58 928.58 94066 08/26/2004 004774 WOODCREST UNIFORMS Coat alterations: J. Nunley 40.00 40.00 94067 08/26/2004 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION Paramedic supplies 501.44 501.44 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 472,006.21 Page:10 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check N Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 373 08/30/2004 005460 U S BANK CFD 88-12 Debt Svc Pmt 1,132,318.75 1,132,318.75 94068 09/02/2004 005288 ADAMS, GREG Reimb: Cameras supplies for Paramed 1,466.32 1,466.32 94069 09/02/2004 004064 ADELPHIA Aug -Sept high speed internal svcs 40.95 40.95 94070 09/02/2004 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES Excursion bus:Pharoah's Lost Kgdm 1,678.19 Excursion bus:Knott's Berry Farm 559.40 2,237.59 94071 09/02/2004 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 500.00 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 32.50 532.50 94072 09/02/2004 007280 AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONS Heartsaver CPR & AED cards 180.00 180.00 94073 09/02/2004 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS Staff recertification cards & materials 32.00 32.00 94074 09/02/2004 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. Temp help PPE 8/14 AJ/GK/DP 897.75 Temp help PPE 8/14 Wills 697.60 Temp help PPE 8/14 SVRP 636.00 Temp help PPE 8/14 Pee 545.31 Temp help PPE 8/14 Ptacek 540.00 3,316.66 94075 09/02/2004 008025 ASTUTE TECHNOLOGY COMPA Refund: Eng despt TR3883 Lot 24 995.00 995.00 94076 09/02/2004 004546 AUNT KIZZYZ BOYZ 8/27 Hot Summer Nights Entertainment 600.00 600.00 94077 09/02/2004 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA Membership: Juan Jaime 82822462 44.00 44.00 94078 09/02/2004 003137 BARKERS FOOD MACHINERY S Repair freezer at the CRC 223.36 223.36 94079 09/02/2004 008061 BATTERYZONE, INC. city 15 replacement batteries: Police 900.00 900.00 94080 09/02/2004 007385 BAUDVILLE INC Employee recognition awards 282.72 282.72 94081 09/02/2004 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV Guard rail repair:Rainbow Cyn Rd 2,228.00 2,228.00 94082 09/02t2004 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 564.78 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 560.18 1,124.96 94083 09/02/2004 004176 BROADWING Jul -Aug Long distance & internal svcs 1,775.02 1,775.02 Page:1 apChkLst 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA page: 2 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94084 09/02/2004 008026 CASTRO, GLADYS Refund: Citation 14714 ovrpmt 100.00 100.00 94085 09/02/2004 002534 CATERERS CAFE Refreshments:Facility expansion mtg 120.37 120.37 94086 09/02/2004 005708 CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTI Hot Summer Nights broadcasting 1,200.00 1,200.00 94087 09/02/2004 001193 COMP U S A INC 1GB mini usb2 flash driver: IS 237.04 10 computer optical mouses 203.56 440.60 94088 09/02/2004 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET City vehicles radios mntc contract 17,967.50 17,967.50 94089 09/02/2004 008020 CORBIN & ASSOCIATES, INC. SRO Train:Bailey,Seades,Pauling 1,155.00 1,155.00 94090 09/02/2004 008060 DANA MEDIATION INSTITUTE Mediator Certification:Gutierrez 10/4-8 1,495.00 1,495.00 94091 09/02/2004 002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATES Sept Federal lobbyist svcs 3,000.00 3,000.00 94092 09/02/2004 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL Movies series portable toilet rentals 263.10 263.10 94093 09/02/2004 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK Aug 04 special events premiums 1,833.79 1,833.79 94094 09/02/2004 003610 DOMENOE, JIM Reimb:Sandisk/battery 269.89 269.89 94095 09/02/2004 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATI Supplies for graffiti removal 41.42 41.42 94096 09/02/2004 000395 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO 9/23 EDC Otrly Mtg:JO/GY/AA/GW 120.00 120.00 94097 09/02t2004 000395 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO 9/23/04 Citify Mtg: Nagger 30.00 30.00 94098 09/02/2004 002577 ENGINEERING RESOURCES Pechanga Pkwy IIA storm drain Impr 650.00 650.00 94099 09/02/2004 007928 FESTIVAL FUN PARKS, LLC all Raging Wtrs SMART Excursions 671.62 671.62 94100 09/02/2004 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE Lot book report: Andes 150.00 150.00 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94101 09/02/2004 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 001256 MARRIOTT HOTEL HP Meal:League Cf:7/28-30:HP- 818.49 003716 SO CAL CINEMAS HP Day camp excursion:Movie Exp. 756.00 008039 PORTOLA PLAZA HOTEL JC Hotel:Mayors-Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 530.66 000845 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES JC Mayors -Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 430.00 003296 INTL CODE COUNCIL, AE'04 Ann'I Conf:9/26-29:Elmo 400.00 008050 DOMAIN BANK.NET HP web register names for City's Mus 400.00 007028 AMERICAN AIRLINES JC Air:Mayors-Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 307.90 007034 HERTZ RENT -A -CAR JC Car Rental:Mayors-Council Cf: 294.18 003296 INTL CODE COUNCIL, AE Mb:Anthony Elmo 0547650 280.00 008042 DOLLAR RENT A CAR HP Car Rental:League of Cities 7/28 270.99 008030 THOMSON MEDIA INC GR Calif Finance Cf:9/12-14:GR 245.00 006937 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES GR Airfare:Calif Finance Cf:9/12-14 144.70 008036 DOMENICOS ON THE WHARF JC Meal: Mayors -Council Cf., 7/28-8/1 142.09 000727 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION AE Mb: Anthony Elmo 2P-940-1A 135.00 008053 NRPA HOUSING HP Hotel:Harrah's Reno:10/12-16 96.05 007023 HUNGRY HUNTER DU Refreshments:Planning Comm Mt 81.69 008040 ABALONETTI HP Meal:League of Cities 7/28-30 74.67 007227 MEXICO CHIOUITO DU Refreshments:Planning Comm Mt 49.15 008027 ISLANDS TEMECULA GR Refreshments: Interveiw Panel 49.09 006942 ONTARIO AIRPORT JC Airpt Prkg:Mayors-Council Cf: 42.00 006937 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES JC Airfare: 7/28 addl flight chrgs 36.00 000213 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMIS DU Smart Growth Codes:7/23:West 35.00 5,618.66 94102 09/02/2004 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED First aid for employee 211.29 First aid for employee 165.69 First aid for employee 84.55 Pre -employment spine x-ray 54.00 Pre -employment physical 25.00 Pre -employment physical 25.00 Pre -employment physical 25.00 Pre -employment physical 25.00 615.53 94103 09/02/2004 005947 GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT Express Mail Service:Fire Prevention 44.55 44.55 Page3 apChkLst 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 4 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94104 09/02/2004 003792 GRAINGER Cabinets for Paramedics 1,008.54 1,008.54 94105 09/02/2004 004833 IMPERIAL PAVING COMPANY I Construct trffc cntd berm: Margarita R 11,732.00 11,732.00 94106 09/02/2004 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals 254.29 254.29 94107 09/02/2004 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC Race for the Cure banners cleaning 52.41 52.41 94108 09/02/2004 000206 KINKOS INC Trffc Safety posters for school district 678.83 Stationery paper/misc supplies 13.74 Stationery paper/misc supplies 13.58 706.15 94109 09/02/2004 004051 L 0 R GEOTECHNICAL GROUP Jun -Aug Geotech:Pechanga storm dr 1,662.50 Jun -Aug Geotech:Pechanga storm dr 1,565.00 3,227.50 94110 09/02/2004 001719 L P A INC Jul Svcs: T.Library construction doc 15,254.82 15,254.82 94111 09/02/2004 000482 LEIGHTON CONSULTING INC Jun -Aug Geotech: Rancho Cal Rd 487.50 487.50 94112 09/02/2004 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC Supplies for Paramedic squad 6,868.99 6,868.99 94113 09/02/2004 003054 LYNDE ORDWAY Paper folder mntc contract 275.00 275.00 94114 09/02/2004 000394 MAINTENANCE Haz-Mat first response:9/29/04 75.00 75.00 94115 09/02/2004 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER Temp Help We 08/15 Dankworth 658.40 658.40 94116 09/02/2004 002693 MATROS, ANDREA TCSD Instructor Earnings 323.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 91.20 414.20 94117 09/02/2004 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC Inside Temecula Comm.Nwsltr Printin 5,585.76 Printing svcs: Comm. Recogn. Dinner 215.50 5,801.26 94118 09/02/2004 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS Reimb expenses: Hot Smr Nights 185.20 185.20 94119 09/02/2004 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS Stationery for City's Mgrs department 39.21 39.21 94120 09/02/2004 004534 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES Sept EOC Stn Satellite Phone Svcs 70.75 70.75 94121 09/02/2004 004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY Res Imp Prgm: Barnhart, Teresa 3,510.00 3,510.00 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94122 09/02/2004 001986 MUZAK -SOUTHERN CALIFORN Sep "On -Hold" Phone music:City Hall 120.86 Sept music broadcast:Old Town 64.86 185.72 94123 09/02/2004 001599 NORTH COUNTY BASKETBALL Basketball forfeits/assignment fees 234.00 234.00 94124 09/02/2004 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Jul Public Ntcs:PW/PINCity Clerk 1,232.88 1,232.88 94125 09/02/2004 006592 O'DONNELL SCHOOL OF MUST TCSD Instructor Earnings 448.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 240.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 240.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 112.00 1,040.00 94126 09/02/2004 002292 OASIS VENDING Aug coffee/kitchen supplies: City Hall 258.60 Aug coffeelkitchen supplies: Mntc Fac 129.30 387.90 94127 09/02/2004 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office Supplies for Planning 226.59 Office Supplies for Planning 7.11 233.70 94128 09/02/2004 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 126.14 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 121.83 247.97 94129 09/02/2004 003299 OLDER THAN DIRT GANG Musician: Hot Smr Nights: 011/27/04 300.00 300.00 94130 09/02/2004 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY Day Camp Supplies 229.35 Teen Programs supplies 160.50 389.85 94131 09/02/2004 002256 P & D CONSULTANTS INC Jul temp bldg inspection: Henderson 10,936.92 10,936.92 94132 09/02/2004 002331 PEP BOYS INC parts/supplies: PW Maint Div. 75.39 75.39 94133 09/02t2004 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 621.38 621.38 94134 09/02/2004 003362 PHAROAHS LOST KINGDOM Summer Day Camp Excursion: 08119 1,233.91 1,233.91 94135 09/02/2004 001999 PITNEY BOW ES Oct -Dec Postage Meter Reset 269.11 269.11 94136 09/02/2004 005075 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPL uniforms/fir mats/towel rentals: City 930.10 Credit: Charges not per contract -29.10 Credit: Charges not per contract -47.06 853.94 94137 09/02/2004 007852 QUINLAN PUBLISHING GROUP 1 yr subscrp:Zoning Bulletin:Pln 127.00 127.00 94138 09/02t2004 002012 R D O EQUIPMENT COMPANY PW Back Hoe Maintenance Svcs 1,344.69 Credit: Sales tax on service call -5.81 1,338.88 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94139 09/02/2004 006664 R R M DESIGN GROUP Jun consult svcs: dsgn guidelines 2,569.81 Apr consult svcs: dsgn guidelines 1,877.01 4,446.82 94140 09/02/2004 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST Various Water Meters 1,630.42 Aug 01-99-02003-0 Floating Mtr 257.39 Aug 01-08-38009-0 Fire Sm 92 109.51 1,997.32 94141 09/02/2004 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Dup. Blueprints: W.C. Spris Complex 1,090.54 1,090.64 94142 09/02/2004 000526 REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF Acts/Zoning Laws:E. Papp:9/22-12/8 94143 09/02/2004 000267 RIVERSIDE CO FIRE 94144 09/02/2004 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD 94145 09/02/2004 001365 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OF 94146 09/02/2004 001097 ROADLINE PRODUCTS INC 94147 09/02/2004 004598 S T K ARCHITECTURE INC 94148 09/02/2004 001288 SAN DIEGO BUSINESS 94149 09/02/2004 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE Apr -Jun 2004: Fire Services Extension filing fee: R.C. Bridge renew permit: TCC maint supplies: PW stencil truck Jul dsgn svcs:Ph I Rodpaugh Fire Sin 1 yr subscription: Econ Dev 4106049 Jul recruitment ads for H.R. Dept. 94150 09/02/2004 000793 SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO Inspection request forms: B&S dept. Inspection request form modifications 94151 09/02/2004 004562 SCHIRMER ENGINEERING COR Jul plan check srvcs:Fire Prev 94152 09/02/2004 005278 SCIENCE ENRICHMENT SRVCS TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings 94153 09/02/2004 007342 SHUTE, MIHALY & W EINBERGE Jul legal services pmt 94154 09/02/2004 003804 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEM TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings 94155 09/02/2004 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Junior Life Guard program supplies 417.00 758,804.04 35.00 446.00 334.25 3,932.50 89.00 3,191.01 883.34 150.00 2,800.00 4,014.80 3,647.20 1,172.00 1,080.50 2,024.00 1,428.00 443.62 417.00 758,804.04 35.00 446.00 334.25 3,932.50 89.00 3,191.01 1,033.34 2,800.00 8,834.00 1,080.50 3,452.00 443.62 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94156 09/02/2004 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Aug 2-00-397-5042 City Hall 7,887.21 Aug 2-02-502-8077 Maint Fac 2,343.55 Aug 2-00-397-5067 Various Mtrs 966.50 Aug 2-22-575-0876 O.T. Front St. 239.34 Aug 2-18-528-9980 Santiago Rd 44.00 11,480.60 94157 09/02/2004 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST Pest Control Svcs: Fire Stn 92 42.00 Pest Control Svcs: City Hall 39.00 81.00 94158 09/02/2004 007851 SOUTHCOAST HEATING & AIR HVAC repairs: Fire Stn 84 81.59 81.59 94159 09/02/2004 005786 SPRINT 07/15-O8/14/04 Cellular Services 7,972.99 Aug Acct Level Chrgs 33.88 Credit: Equipment not ordered -259.26 Credit: Demo phones returned -337.10 7,410.51 94160 09/02/2004 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FUN Aug workers' comp premium 51,300.54 51,300.54 94161 09/02/2004 007908 STEVEN BURNS PHOTOGRAPH Photos of Councilmember R. Roberts 115.29 115.29 94162 09/02/2004 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN TCSD Instructor Earnings 576.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 256.00 832.00 94163 09/02/2004 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL 5/29-7/2 Dsgn svcs:Roripaugh Bridge 4,257.99 4,257.99 94164 09/02/2004 000305 TARGET STORE SMART Program supplies 53.56 53.56 94165 09/02/2004 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN 2 rubber approval stamps front counts 411.61 411.61 94166 09/02/2004 007340 TEMECULA VALLEY FIRE EQUI fire supression sys inspections:City 257.16 recharge PW vehicles fire extinguish 110.48 367.64 94167 09/02/2004 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY Locksmith svcs: City Facs 66.97 Locksmith svcs: City Hall 10.86 77.83 94168 09/02/2004 003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWON TCSD Instructor Earnings 268.80 TCSD Instructor Earnings 100.80 369.60 94169 09/02/2004 007636 THERMO ELECTRON CORP Stn 84-gas detector for engine 84 1,538.94 1,538.94 94170 09/02/2004 005937 TOMCZAK, MARIA T. TCSD Instructor Earnings 72.00 72.00 94171 09/02/2004 007433 TOVEY SHULTZ CONSTRUCTIO Prgs pmt #5: Community theater 223,058.52 223,058.52 Page:? apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 09/02/2004 12:34:23PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94172 09/02t2004 006192 TRISTAFF GROUP Temp help We 08✓15 Long/Tidwell 956.80 956.80 94173 09/02/2004 000459 TUMBLE JUNGLE FITNESS GY TCSD Instructor Earnings 105.60 105.60 94174 09/02/2004 008059 TURNER PUBLISHING COMPAN 2 CDF yearbooks: Fire Prev 181.00 (3) CDF deluxe edition yearbooks 180.00 361.00 94175 09/02/2004 003228 U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL AS 2002 RDA Trustee/Arbitrage fees 4,550.00 4,550.00 94176 09/02/2004 004261 VERIZON Aug xxx-2016 general usage 104.53 Aug xxx-9897 general usage 89.90 Aug xxx-3526 fire alarm 83.93 Aug xxx-2676 general usage 27.98 306.34 94177 09/02t2004 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Aug Internet svcs: XX7411 72.35 72.35 94178 09/02/2004 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Aug Internet svos: xx0544 72.35 72.35 94179 09/02/2004 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Aug Internet svcs: xx9549 62.33 62.33 94180 09/02/2004 005995 WESTWAYS & JOURNEY PUBL Sept/Oct ad in Westways Magazine 4,250.00 4,250.00 94181 09/02/2004 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION Paramedic Supplies 204.29 204.29 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 2,359,291.85 PageB ITEM 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY, DIRECTOR OF F CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of July 30, 2004 PREPARED BY: Karin Grance, Revenue Manager` Shannon Domenigoni, Accountan RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of July 30, 2004. DISCUSSION: Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 require reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio, receipts, and disbursements respectively. Attached is the City Treasurer's Report that provides this information. The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635 as of July 30, 2004. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: City Treasurer's Report as of July 30, 2004 City of Temecula City Treasurer's Report As of July 30, 2004 Cash Activity for the Month of July: Casb and Investments as of July 1, 2004 $ 128,229,594 Cash Receipts 6,119,671 Cash Disbursements _ (5,077,365) Cash and Investments as of July 30, 2004 $ 129,271,900 Cash and Investments Portfolio: Maturity/ Purchase Termination Market Par/Book Type of Investment Institution Yield Date Date Value _ Balance Petty Cash City Hall n/a $ 1,500 General Checking Union Bank n/a 764,698 (1) Flex Benefit Demand Deposits Union Bank n/a 1,868 (1) Local Agency Investment Fund Smte Treasurer-LAIF 1.604% 56,068,911 (2) Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank 1.885 % 06262003 01232006 988,750 1,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank 2.500 % 07/16/2003 08/142006 1,980,620 2,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank - BDS 3.000 % 04/072004 01/072008 2,864,012 2,965,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank - BDS 3.000 % 0422/2004 01222008 1,958,120 2,000,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Bank 3.000% 03292004 12282007 3,921,240 4,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank - BDS 3.070 % 04/152004 01/152008 1,963,120 2,000,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Bank -BDS 3.100% 04/082004 01/082008 2,998,546 3,050,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Bank -BDS 3.125 % 04/162004 01/162008 983,440 1,000,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Bank -BDS 3.150% 04/142004 01/142008 984,380 1,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank - BDS 3.520 % 04/302004 01/302008 1,990,000 2,000,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Bank -BDS 3.810% 05/132004 02/132008 1,000,630 1,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Bank 2.250 % 06/262003 07242006 985,940 1,000,000 Federal Agency -Callable Federal Home Loan Mortgage Cc 2.000% 06/062003 06/302006 983,690 1,000,000 Federal Agency- Callable Federal Home Loan Mortgage Co 3.000 % 12/302003 03292007 980,880 996,000 Checking Account- Parking Citations Union Bank n/a 4,656 Certificate of Deposit - Retention Escrow Community National Bank n/a 272,176 Bond Fund - CFD 88-12 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) n/a 0 (Money Market Account) Delinquency Maintenance Account -CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Corp 5A30% 09/01/2017 500,000 (Investment Agreement) Delinquency Maintenance Account - CFD 88-12 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 596,012 (Money Market Account) Reserve Fund-CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Corp 5.430% 09/012017 1,531,469 (Investment Agreement) Reserve Account - CFD 88-12 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.730 % 16 (Money Market Account) Improvement Fund - CFD 01-2 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 3,540,063 (Money Markel Account) Special Tax Fund - CFD 01-2 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 842,256 (Money Market Account) Admin Expense Fund - CFD 01-2 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 761,166 (Money Market Account) Variable Bond Fund - CFD 01-2 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 2,754 (Money Market Account) Interest Differential Fund - CFD 01-2 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 131,330 (Money Market Account) City Improvement Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 170,097 (Money Market Account) City Improvement Fund -CFD 03-1 State Treasures-LAIF 1,604% 1,230,603 (Local Agency Investment Fund) Cal Trans Improvement Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 0.740 % 1,116 (Money Market Account) Cal Trans Improvement Fund -CFD 03-1 State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % 1,006,643 (Local Agency Investment Fund) Acquisition Account Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 1,328 (Money Market Account) Acquisition Account Fund -CFD 03-1 State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % 1,287,764 (Local Agency Investment Fund) Special Tax Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bards (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 413,922 (Money Market Account) Capital Interest Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % 44,719 (Money Market Account) Pans 1 City of Temecula City Treasurer's Report As of July 30, 2004 Reserve Fund - CFD 03-1 Aig Match Fed Corp Ref 4.830 % (Investment Agreement) Reserve Fund - CFD 03-1 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Markel Account) City Improvement Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) City lmprovernait Fund -CFD 03-3 State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % (Local Agency Investment Fund) EMWD Improvement Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0,740 % (Money Market Account) EMWD Improvement Fund - CFD 03-3 State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % (Local Agency Investment Fund) Acquisition Account Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Acquisition Account Fund - CFD 03-3 State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % (Local Agency Investment Fund) Capital Interest Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Capital Interest Fund - CFD 03-3 Stale Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % (Local Agency Investment Fund) Reserve Fund - CFD 03-3 Cdc Funding Corp 3.000 % (Investment Agreement) Reserve Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Markel Account) Cost of Issuance Fund - CFD 03-3 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Improvement Fund - AD 03-04 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Redemption Fund - AD 03-04 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0,740 % (Money Market Account) Admin Expense Fund - AD 03.4 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Reserve Fund - AD 03-04 U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Project Account -RDA TABS U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0,740 % (Money Market Account) Project Account-RDATABs State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604% (Local Agency Investment Fund) Interest Account- RDA TABS U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Reserve Account - RDA TABS U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) n/a (Surety Bond) Project Fund -TCSD COPS U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Market Account) Project Fund -TCSD COPS State Treasurer-LAIF 1.604 % (Local Agency Investment Fund) Installment Payment Fund - TCSD COPS U.S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 0.740 % (Money Markel Account) (I) -This amount is net of outstanding checks. (2)-At July 30, 2004 total market value (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) was $51,910,881,272. The City's proportianate share of that value is $55,979,314. All investments are liquid and currently available. The City of Temecula's portfolio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds will be available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures of the City for the next six months. 863,900 9,716 514 7,429,683 2,950 3,642,112 9,944 9,950,879 1,422 837,278 2,171,120 4,515 90,026 323,162 64,981 31,286 99,849 31,253 5,903,258 802,183 1 9,517 2,806,184 101 $ 129,271,900 Pane 9 CITY OF TEMECULA CASH AND INVESTMENT REPORT JULY 2004 Fund Total 001 GENERAL FUND 25,913,900.32 100 STATE GAS TAX FUND 0.00 101 STATE TRANSPORTATION FUND 73,622.02 120 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND 14,855,904.12 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 0.00 150 AB 2766 FUND 139,979.97 160 AB 3229 COPS 0.00 165 RDA DEV LOW/MOD 20% SET ASIDE 7,926,366.12 170 MEASURE A FUND 4,146,171.46 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 641,403.09 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "B" STREET LIGHTS 124,277.91 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPEISLOPE 256,229.57 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "D" REFUSE/RECYCLING 13,666.73 195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "R" STREET/ROAD MAINT 29,259.80 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUND 21,997,563.60 261 CID 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 17,527.31 271 CFD 01-2 HARVESTON IMPROVEMENT FUND 3,536,132.51 273 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL IMPROVEMENT FUND 3,697,550.75 274 AD 03-4 JOHN WARNER IMPROVEMENT FUND 681,222.30 275 CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK IMPROVEMENT FUND 21,036,081.30 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 8,357,198.85 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,323,194.10 310 VEHICLES FUND 71,642.74 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 807,005.93 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 228,115.21 340 FACILITIES 138,541.27 380 RDA 2002 TABS DEBT SERVICE 2,694,512.31 390 TCSD 2001 COP'S DEBT SERVICE 2,272.91 460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND 3,643,691.78 470 CFD 01-2 HARVESTON DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,106,805.10 471 CFD 98-1 WINCHESTER HILLS DEB SERVICE 11,550.73 473 CID 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,503,107.52 474 AD 03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE 192,881.34 475 CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND 3,104,521.54 GRAND TOTAL 129,271,900.21 ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIREC?' CITY MAIQAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 PREPARED BY: Jason Simpson, Assistant Finance Director Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency members: 1. Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004. 2. Approve an appropriation of $700,000 to Police Department budget. 3. Approve a budget transfer of $54,000 to Sales Tax reimbursement from Planning Department. 4. Approve an appropriation of $52,300 to Rancho California Road Widening and Median East of Ynez to be funded from Development Impact Fees- Street Improvements. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the City for the Fiscal year Ended June 30, 2004. Please see the attached financial statements for an analytical review of financial activity. The supplemental for the Police department is a result of increasing activities at the Promenade mall and overtime wages related to the Stop Light Abuse Program(S.L.A.P). The budget transfer request for Sales Tax reimbursement is due to increasing Sales tax revenues from business which results in an increase of the City's obligation to reimburse property owners based on our existing agreements with them. The budget transfer needed for Rancho California Road Widening and Median Modifications East of Ynez Road Project is a result of on -going construction oversight and administrative duties associated with this project, additional administration costs have been incurred through this Fiscal Year. FISCAL IMPACT: Budget savings in General Fund will offsets the operating budget transfers for the Police Department, non -departmental budgets. The Capital Improvement project Rancho California Road Widening and Median Modifications East of Ynez Road will be allocated $52,300 from Development Impact Fees -Street Improvements. ATTACHMENTS: Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Combining Balance Sheet (Internal Service Funds) as of June 30, 2004 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings (Internal Service Funds) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,2004 Combining Balance Sheet (Community Facilities Districts) as of June 30, 2004 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balarce (Community Facilities Districts) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 CITY OF TEMECULA Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 and the Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 And the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes In Retained Earnings For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department City of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Due from other funds Advances to other funds Deposits Total assets Liabilities and fund balances Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Deferred revenue Total liabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Undesignated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Please note that these balances are unaudited General Gas Tax State Trans Dev Impact Fund Fund Fund Fund $ 25,458,786 $ 73,378 $ 14,695,283 6,300,439 244 51,795 L027,908 $ 137,137 $ 3,024,703 49,609 $ 35,861,445 $ 137,137 $ 73,622 $ 14,747,078 $ 8,140,115 642,027 8,782,142 $ 69,971 69,971 3,074,312 24,004,991 $ 137,137 $ 73,622 14,677,107 CDBG Fund 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 27,079,303 137,137 73,622 14,677,107 $ 35,861,445 $ 137,137 $ 73,622 $ 14,747,078 $ 7,500 1 City of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 AB 2766 AB3229 Measure A Fund Fund Fund CIP Fund Total Assets: Cash and investments $ 139,578 $ 3,992,234 $ 20,173,784 $ 64,533,043 Receivables 402 14,462 61,477 6,428,819 Due from other funds 23,627 328,272 1,472,850 2,997,294 Advances to other funds 3,024,703 Deposits 49,609 Total assets $ 163,607 $ 4,334,968 $ 21,708,111 $ 77,033,468 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds $ 2,104,408 $ 2,104,4013 Other current liabilities 2,284,399 10,432,014 Deferred revenue 1,282,642 1,994,640 Total liabilities 5,671,449 14,531,06:1 Fund balances Reserved 3,074,312 Designated $ 163,607 $ 4,334,968 43,391,432 Undesignated 16,036,662 16,036,662 Total fund balances 163,607 4,334,968 16,036,662 62,502,406 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 163,607 $ 4,334,968 $ 21,708,111 $ 77,033,468 Please note that these balances are unaudited 04 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -Budget and Actual General Pond For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Sales tax $ 24,067,000 $ 25,392,314 106% Developmental services: Planning 397,650 533,120 134% Building & Safety 1,855,400 2,377,353 128% Land Development 2,203,727 2,871,450 130% Fire 255,000 253,054 99% Grants 222,823 235,268 106%o Motor vehicle in lieu 2,461,660 3,447,348 140% Property tax 2,602,190 3,060,738 119% Properly transfer tax 963,960 991,654 115% Franchise fees 2,052,000 2,030,834 99% Transient occupancy tax 1,672,540 1,637,497 98% Reimbursements 371,600 529,002 142% Reimbursements- Redhawk 259,965 Reimbursements from TCSD 162,000 162,000 100% Reimbursements from RDA 225,000 225,000 100% Reimbursements from CIP 1,699,908 1,454,510 86% Investment interest 530,000 536,517 101% Business licenses 215,000 292,361 136% Vehicle code fines 839,230 1,113,900 133% Miscellaneous 51,500 149,011 289% Parking citations/impound fees 78,000 81,019 104% Operating transfers in 1,515,350 1,538,437 102% Total Revenues 44,341,528 49,172,342 111% (2) (3) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual YTD Amended YTD Activity Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. + Encumbr f B oudget Expenditures: City Council $ 434,250 $ 339,491 $ 339,491 78% Community Support 477,000 450,469 $ 10,000 460,469 97% City Manager 941,751 913,730 15,000 928,730 99% Economic Development 821,833 733,725 54,413 788,138 96% City Clerk 956,785 837,037 837,037 87% City Attorney 915,000 737,730 737,730 81% Finance 1,703,060 1,540,735 38,961 1,579,696 93% Human Resources 447,480 434,915 5,000 439,915 98% Planning 3,048,885 2,658,297 110,448 2,768,745 91% Building & Safety 2,482,503 2,311,777 5,000 2,316,777 93% Land Development 1,825,125 1,678,643 11,040 1,689,683 93% Public Works 5,463,558 4,631,833 376,602 5,008,435 92% CIP Admin 2,101,882 1,938,853 1,938,853 920/0' Police 11,549,945 12,151,907 57,964 12,209,871 1069b Fire 4,255,823 4,148,051 23,698 4,171,749 98% Animal Control 132,000 90,701 90,701 69% Non -departmental 6,522,246 5,892,108 683,971 6,576,079 10195 Total Expenditures (Excluding Transfers) 44,079,026 41,490,002 1,392,097 42,882,099 979i Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 262,502 7,682,340 Operating Transfers Out 7,313,956 7,313,956 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures and Operating Transfers (7,051,454) 368,384 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 26,710,919 26,710,919 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 19,659,465 $ 27,079,303 Notes: 1) Developmental services increased as a result of continued development in the city. 2) Motor Vehicle in lieu budget was reduced at midyear in anticipation of revenue loss to the State. 3) Propety tax revenues increased due to continued development in the city. 4) Reimbursements increased due to litigation settlement proceeds. 5) Business license increased due to influx of contractors and new businesses to the city. 6) Vehicle code fines increased due to the implementation of the Stop Light Abuse Program (S.L.A.P.) 7) The increase is mostly a result of Temeku Kiosk advertising in the city. 8) The variance is due to a decrease in conferences and other outside services during this fiscal year. 9) The variance is due to increasing actitivies at the Promenade mall and overtime wages related to the Stop Light Abuse Program(S.L.A.P). 10)The variance is due to sales tax reimbursment is higher than expected as a result of increased sales tax revenues for this fiscal year. (8) (9) (10) City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Gas Tax Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Section 2105-2107 Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Operating transfers out Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 1,365,350 $ 1,420,900 104% 3,500 1,233 35% (1) 1,368,850 1,422,133 104% 1,368, 850 1,426,714 104% (4,581) 141,719 141,719 $ 141,719 $ 137,137 Notes: 1) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual State Transportation Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Investment interest Traffic congestion relief Total Revenues Expenditures: Operating transfers out Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 1,160 (1) 1,160 $ 20,435 20,435 100% (20,435) (19,275) 92,897 92,897 $ 72,462 $ 73,622 Notes: 1) Funding from the State was suspended for fiscal year 2003-04. F City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Development Impact Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Open Space Investment interest Public facilities Quimby Street improvements Traffic signals Parks Corporate facilities Fire protection Library Public Art Police Total Revenues Expenditures: Operating transfers out Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 75,000 $ 453,999 $ 605% 208,503 10,000 682,500 1,005,854 147 % 1,145,324 2,256,773 197% 240,777 357,958 149% 914,195 936,256 102% 399,836 464,718 119% 107,616 388,104 361% 354,787 548,668 155% 25,000 23,250 93% 120,960 3,935,035 6,775,043 172% (1) 9,649,512 2,586,584 (5,714,477) 4,189,459 10,488,648 10,488,648 $ 4,774,171 $ 14,677,107 27% (2) Notes: 1) The increase overall DIF revenues is due to continued development in the City. 2) The variance is due to Capital Improvement Projects funded with DIF that have not been completed during this fiscal year. 7 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Pond Balance - Budget and Actual Community Development Block Grant For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Grant revenue $ 386,964 $ 91,305 24% (1) Total Revenues 386,964 91,305 24% Expenditures: Other outside services Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 58,044 58,044 329,920 33,261 386,964 91,305 Notes: 1) Funding is being continued for future years for the Temecula Community Center Expansion, history Museum Expansion and Old Town Gymnasium. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual AB 2766 Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: AB 2766 Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures•: Operating transfers out Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 70,000 $ 87,475 125% 1,287 70,000 88,762 127% 70,000 (1) 88,762 74,845 74,845 $ 74,845 $ 163,607 Notes: 1)The Temecula Park and Ride CIP project budgeted from this fund was not started this fiscal year. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual AB 3229 COPS For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: AB 3229-COPS Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Operating transfers out Revenues Overl(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 145,000 $ 111,723 77% (1) 1,500 146,500 111,723 76% 146,500 111,723 76% Ending Fond Balance, June 30, 2004 $ $ Note: 1) The variance is due to a reduction in the funding allocation from the State was reduced during this fiscal year. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Measure "A" For the Fiscal Yen Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Measure "A" Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Debt service - principal Debt service - interest Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Overl(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 2,728,600 $ 2,957,171 108% (1) 61,277 2,728,600 3,018,449 111% 432,600 432,355 100% 134,000 133,900 100% 3,485,121 1,820,000 52% (2) 4,051,721 2,386,255 59% (1,323,121) 632,193 3,702,775 3,702,775 $ 2,379,654 $ 4,334,968 Notes: (1) The variance is due to a RCTC audit adjustment in revenue recognition which results in in additional payments from the County for prior fiscal year. (2) The CIP projects (Rancho CA Widening Old Town Front Street, Jefferson Pavement Rehab and pavement Rehab budgeted from this fund were not completed during this fiscal year. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Operating transfers in $ 40,859,758 $ 14,694,235 $ 14,694,235 36% Grants 1,282,403 715,880 715,880 56% Reimbursements 3,490,523 387,204 387,204 11% Reimbursements- TUMF 1,924,000 Reimbursements- AD 925,259 Reimbursements- CFD'S 20,011,725 Investment interest 275,339 275,339 Total Revenues 68,493,668 16,072,659 16,072,658 23% Expenditures: Murrieta Creek Bridge/Overland Ext 165-602 420,471 43,985 $ 376,273 420,258 100% Pauba Rd Improvements B 165-606 13,216 7,006 7,006 53% Intersection Monitoring System 165-607 519,769 381,221 14,535 395,756 76°% Winchester Rd Widening 165-608 1,534,475 410,086 6,466 416,552 27% Rancho Ca Rd Wide/Ynez Rd 165-611 757,379 558,911 250,678 809,599 107% Guardrail Installation/Rainbow Canyon 165-619 329,918 24,815 8,213 33,028 10% Jefferson Pavement Rehabilitation 165-621 2,558,770 145,978 2,257,176 2,403,154 94% Medians Citywide 165-622 107,824 Rancho Ca Wide Old Town Front 165-624 892,300 72,485 77,650 150,135 17% 79 South Medians 165-625 724,103 130,171 82,328 212,499 29% Traffic Signals-Diaz@Rancho Way 165-626 1'000 421 421 42% Bus Bench Upgrades 165-629 242,550 6,025 6,025 2% Pala Road bridge 165-631 48,191 12,131 36,040 48,171 100% Diaz Realignment Vincent Moraga 165-632 1,036,883 404,340 631,172 1,035,512 100% Pavement Rehabilitation 165-655 1,367,614 704,580 704,580 52% I15/79SInterchange- Ultimate 165-662 2,571,693 7,568 18,000 25,568 1% Pechanga Parkway Improvements 165-668 11,760,226 3,341,649 4,635,988 7,977,637 68% Flashing Beacons 165-670 20,000 Diaz Road Extension at Cherry St 165-684 120,794 3,432 112,217 115,649 96% I15/Santiago Interchange 165-705 27,201 12,367 12,367 45% Rancho Ca Bridge/Murrieta Creek 165-710 4,179,427 2,744,185 1,433,806 4,177,991 100% Traffic Signal Equipment Installation 165-712 209,986 Localized Storm Drain Improvements 165-715 50,000 4,832 4,832 10% French Valley Parkway S.B. Offramp 165-719 2,823,832 116,785 268,459 385,244 14% Bridge Barrier Rail Replacement 165-722 246,632 2,726 20,666 23,392 9% Butterfield Stage Rd Extension 165-723 18,375,000 (1) (1) 12 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget French Valley Parkway I15 Offramp 165-726 5,865,402 2,579,077 456,630 3,035,707 52% Fire Station Wolf Creek 165-733 2,493,731 4,203 53,905 58,108 2% 79S Sidewalk/Landscape 165-734 305,289 40,428 175,529 215,956 71% Murrieta Creek Improvements 165-735 150,000 Info Systems 165-740 1,199 Fire Station Roripaugh Ranch 165-741 3,049,180 3,203 3,203 0% Maintenance Facility Expansion 165-742 305,876 194,663 10,572 205,235 67% Main St Bridge/Murriet Creek 165-743 500,000 85,152 277,865 363,017 73% Signals - Meadows @ La Serena 165-744 120,000 22,481 294 22,775 19% Signals- Meadows @ Rancho Vista 165-745 160,000 19,796 294 20,090 13% Long Canyon Detention Basin 165-746 90,000 99 99 0% Temecula Park & Ride 165-747 87,470 Mordent Creek Multi -Purpose Trail 190-142 240,397 81,618 143,936 225,554 94% Vail Ranch Park Site D 190-160 24,904 Children'sMuseum 190-165 1,353,508 1,217,696 69,155 1,296,851 95% Community Theater 190-167 8,981,142 1,627,766 7,091,078 8,708,844 97% Sports Complex 190-173 6,393,066 747,608 195,377 942,985 15% Rancho Ca Sports Park ADA Access 190-190 55,571 33,873 33,873 61% Pablo Apis Park Add Amenities 190-192 395,265 18,843 359,893 378,736 96% Mercantile Building Retrofit 190-183 349 348 348 100% Margarita Community Park Erosion 190-184 90,000 Multi -Trails System Citywide 190-185 65,230 22,992 40,236 63,228 97% Old Town Gymnasium 190-186 310,500 Vail Ranch Middle School Basketball 190-188 150,000 15,563 6,277 21,840 15 °% Veteran's Memorial Phase I 190-189 310,435 98,174 104,084 202,258 65%n Library 199-129 548,767 153,870 189,040 342,910 62% Old Town District Acquisition 199-130 3,000,000 2,918,449 7,552 2,826,001 94% Total Expenditures (Excluding Transfers) 95,974,534 18,921,602 19,401,383 38,322,985 45% (2) Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (17,480,866) (2,848,944) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 18,885,606 18,885,606 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 1,404,739 $ 16,036,662 Notes: 1) The variance in Rancho California widening at Ynez is due to 4th quarter admin charges that was not included in the budget. 2) The variances in CIP Fund revenues and in projected expenditures are due to the timing of when the various projects are actually started and costs are incurred. 13 Internal Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Prepaid assets Property, plant and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation) Total assets Liabilities and fund equity: Liabilities: Current liabilities Capital leases payable Total liabilities Fund equity: Contributed capital Retained earnings Total fund equity Total liabilities and fund equity Information Support Insurance Vehicles Systems Services Facilities Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total $ 1,458,163 $ 71,643 $ 978,526 $ 250,051 $ 187,932 $ 2,946,315 4,352 6,798 2,116 663 '.3,929 159,727 159,727 1,463,233 375,719 65,357 1,904,309 $ 1,622,242 $ 1,534,876 $ 1,361,043 $ 317,524 $ 188,595 $ 5,024,280 $ 374,831 $ 436,000 $ 128,329 $ 89,587 $ 39,505 $ 1,068,252 19,871 19,871 374,831 436,000 128,329 109,458 39,505 1,088,123 1,247,411 1,098,876 1,232,714 208,066 149,090 3,936,157 1,247,411 1,099,876 1,232,714 208,066 149,090 3,936,157 $ 1,622,242 $ 1,534,876 $ 1,361,043 $ 317,524 $ 188,595 $ 5,024,280 Please note that these balances are unaudited. 14 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings Internal Service Funds For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Charges for services Investment interest Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenses: Salaries & wages Operating expenses Interest Depreciation Total Expenses Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Retained Earnings, July 1, 2003 Retained Earnings, June 30, 2004 Information Support Insurance Vehicles Systems Services Facilities Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total $ 564,070 $ 333,172 $ 1,748,607 $ 278,952 $ 522,553 $ 3.447,354 19,892 2,366 9,223 2,828 666 34,975 3,275 5,490 971 70 72,266 82,072 587,237 341,028 1,758,801 281,850 595,485 3,564,401 44,957 906,068 111,650 286,749 1,349,424 617,538 581,210 80,838 236,472 1,516,058 3,179 3,179 279,614 268,706 86,118 634,438 662,495 279,614 1,755,984 281,785 523,221 3.50,099 (75,258) 61,414 2,817 65 72,264 61,302 1,322,669 1,037,462 1,229,897 208,001 76,826 3,874,855 $ 1,247,411 $ 1,098,876 $ 1,232,714 $ 208,066 $ 149,090 $ 3,936,157 Community Facilities Districts Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 CFD 88-12 CFD 01-2 CFD 03-1 AD 034 CFD 03-3 Admin Harveston Cmvme Hill John Warner Wolf Creek Expense Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Assets: Cash and investments $ 19,873 $ 3,535,963 $ 3,681,474 $ 681,615 $ 21,351,513 Receivables 41,881 1,375 16,077 307 78,678 Total assets $ 61,754 $ 3,537,338 $ 3,697,551 681,922 $ 21,430,191 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Cwrent liabilities $ 12,180 $ 1,205 $ 310,601 Total liabilities 12,180 1,205 310,601 Fund balances: Reserved Designated 49,574 3,536,133 3,697,551 371,321 21,430,191 Total fund balances 49,574 3,536,133 3,697,551 371,321 21,430,191 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 61,754 $ 3,537,338 $ 3,697,551 681,922 $ 21,430,191 Please note that these balances are unaudited 16 Community Facilities Districts Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30,2004 CFD 88-12 CFD 01-2 CFD 98-1 CFD 03-1 AD 034 CFD 03-3 Debt Harveston Winchester Hills Cmwne Hill John Warner Wolf Creek Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total Assets: Cash and investments $ 3,640,974 $ 2,133,892 $ 11,512 $ 1,501,912 $ 189,120 $ 3,100,779 $ 39,848,627 Receivables 97,191 2,758 39 20,805 205 4,173 263,479 Total assets 3,738,155 $ 2,136,650 $ 11,551 $ 1,522,717 $ 189,325 $ 3,104,952 $ 40,112,106 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Current liabilities $ 2,500 $ 430 $ 326,916 Totalliabilities 2,500 430 326,916 Fund balances: Reserved Designated 3,738,155 2,134,150 11,551 1,522,717 189,325 3,104,522 39,785,190 Total fund balances 3,738,155 2,134,150 11,551 1,522,717 189,325 3,104,522 39,785,190 Total liabilities and fund balances 3,738,155 $ 2,136,650 $ 11,551 $ 1,522,717 $ 189,325 $ 3,104,952 $ 40,112,106 Please note that these balances are unaudited 17 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Community Facilities Districts For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 CFD 88-12 CFD 01-2 CFD 03-1 AD 03-4 CFD 03-3 Admin Harveston Crowne Hill John Warner Wolf Creek Expense Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Revenues: Investment interest $ 392 $ 19,989 $ 16,096 $ 1,261 $ 78,688 Reimbursements Special assessments 53,801 Bond Proceeds 4,805,854 862,252 21,351,503 Operating Transfers In 1,042,043 Total Revenues 54,193 19,989 4,821,950 1,905,556 21,430,191 Expenditures: Trustee Admin Fees 3,300 Legal services Consulting services 8,250 Other outside services 2,000 City Adman Charges 30,000 Expense to developer 666,045 1,124,399 Construction In Progress 1,534,235 Debt service - principal Debt service- interest Bond Premium Expense Operating Transfers Out 425,988 Total Expenditures 43,550 1,092,033 1,124,399 1,534,235 Revenues Overl(Under) Expenditures 10,643 (1,072,044) 3,697,551 371,321 21,430,191 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 38,931 4,609,177 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 49,574 $ 3,536,133 $ 3,697,551 $ 371,321 $ 21,430,191 18 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Community Facilities Districts For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Investment interest Reimbursements Special assessments Bond Proceeds Operating Transfers In Total Revenues Expenditures: Trustee Admin Fees Legal services Consulting services Other outside services City Admin Charges Expense to developer Construction In Progress Debt service - principal Debt service - interest Bond Premium Expense Operating Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 CFD 88-12 CFD 01-2 CFD 98-1 CFD 03-1 AD 03-4 CFD 03-3 Debt Harveston Winchester hills Croume Hill John Warner Wolf Creek Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Debt Service Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total $ 122,780 $ 13,279 $ 184 $ 28,155 $ 10,179 $ 3T210 $ 329,213 3,049 3,049 1,374,275 794,964 845,008 125,870 3,193,918 7,399,146 167,957 9,638,496 44,225,208 1,042,043 7497,055 808,243 184 8,272,309 307,055 9,675,706 48,792,431 10,158 1,433 4,205 5,849 24.945 12,500 6,375 27,125 2,000 25,000 68,000 50,000 173,000 1,790,444 1,534,235 700,000 700,000 811,788 169,908 378,596 27,457 245,631 1,633,379 15,021 6,295,197 96,068 6,269,704 12.665.981 425,988 1,511,788 232,587 6,749,592 117,730 6,571,184 18.977 098 (14,733) 575,656 184 1,522,717 189,325 3,104,522 29,815.334 3,752,887 1,558,494 11,367 9,969,856 $ 3,738155 $ 2,134,150 $ 11,551 $ 1,522,717 $ 189,325 $ 3,104,522 $ 39,785,189 19 ITEM 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Tim Thorson, Director of Information Systems DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Two Year Cell Phone Contract Renewal with Sprint RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a two-year agreement with Sprint forthe renewal City Cellular Services. BACKGROUND: The current two year contract with Sprint expires on 1 October 2004. The attached renewal reflects Western States Contracting Alliance (WSCA) pricing, which in every category is less than the current agreement. The benefits of renewing the Sprint contract are significant in both cost savings and disruption to emergency services relying on wireless connections to City hall. The Sprint service plan is broken down in the following comparison matrix: Plan Sprint current Ian Sprint PCS Renewal Any Time Minutes 800 Minutes = $70.00 1100 Minutes = $65.00 Command Directory $5.00 — Voice Activated $5.00 — Voice Activated Push -to- Talk $20.00 — Ready Link $10.00 — Ready Link PCS Vision $15.00 — Internet access $15.00 — Internet access Data Cards $80.00 - Unlimited $70.58 - Unlimited Service Credit $150.00 $200.00 This competitively quoted price is provided by an authorized WSCA contractor. Under this agreement it is within the City's discretion to take advantage of the pricing on another governmental entity contract. The contract is made available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county or local governmental agency empowered to expend public funds. Therefore, this purchase is exempt from competitive bidding requirements. Staffs research has determined that the WSCA price is the most competitive. Also, it has been determined that the WSCA program is consistent with the City's procurement policies and regulations and that it is used by many cities as an industry standard. EQUIPMENT IMPACT: All phone lines on this renewal will receive a $200.00 service credit, which will be applied to the designated replacement phone (Sanyo 4920 costs $200.00). These phones will be swapped with the existing Sanyo 4700 phones to City Staff. All recently procured phones, e.g., PDA phones (Treo600) or flip phones will be rolled over to a new numbering plan and the service credit deducted from the first month's bill. PHONE NUMBER IMPACT: This renewal will coincide with the 909 Area Code split, which wilt' require new phone numbers to support the 951 Area Code assigned to the South West Riverside County. Existing phones will need to have the new numbers entered manually by the IS Department. All replacement phones will arrive with new numbers already installed. These new numbers will be assigned out of the local Temecula phone exchange and will not incur a local long distance charge as was the case with the previous cellular phone numbers. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds were appropriated in the 2004-05 Fiscal Year Budget. ATTACHMENT: WSCA Terms and Conditions Acceptance Form dated August 12, 2004 BSG0408-0028R2 Date: August 12, 2004 WESTERN STATE CONTRACTING ALLIANCE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ACCEPTANCE FORM TERM 2-Year *Early Termination Fee applies (see below). Agreement. The undersigned political subdivision ("Customer") of California ("State") by signing below agrees to the terms and conditions set out in the Western States Contracting Alliance Wireless Communication Services and Equipment Master Price Agreement, 13-00115 dated July 1, 2001 as amended (the "Master Agreement"), entered into between Sprint Spectrum L.P. ("Sprint") and the New Mexico State Purchasing Agent. Customer represents that it is a political subdivision of the State and that the State has signed a Participating Addendum to the Master Agreement. The terns and conditions of the Master Agreement, including the State's Participating Addendum are incorporated herein, except that the Term herein shall govern Customer's relationship with Sprint. Terms not defined herein, have the same meaning as those set out in the Master Agreement or Participating Addendum. Pricing. By agreeing to the terms of the Master Agreement, Customer is authorized to take advantage of the pricing made available to participating states and their political subdivisions under the Master Agreement. After the termination of the Master Agreement or the termination or expiration of the State's Participating Addendum with Sprint, Customer will no longer be eligible to receive the pricing, discounts or credits set out in the Master Agreement. (A) PCS VISION CONNECTION CARD PLANS The following Business Plan includes only data services. Voice calls made on the Network with PCS Connection Cards with voice capability will incur a charge of 200 per minute, including long distance. MRC* $70.58 Vision (data) Services in Megabytes ("MB") Unlimited Shared Data with MRC Not Available Overage per kilobyte Not Applicable *Net $60 after the 15% WSCA Discount (B) PCS FREE & CLEAR PLANS FOR BUSINESS (1) Each Business Plan in this Section provides for a set number of Anytime Minutes, unlimited Night & Weekend minutes, unlimited PCS to PCS minutes and no charge nationwide long distance while on Network at a fixed MRC. (2) This Business Plan includes several options that may be added for an additional MRC per Line. Any minutes of use that exceed the Anytime Minutes purchased will be billed at the Overage rate. Domestic Roaming and Domestic Roaming Long Distance are billed at the per -minute rates described below: MRC $35.00 $65.00 Anytime Minutes 300 1100 Unlimited Night & Weekend Minutes INCL INCL Nationwide LD INCL INCL Unlimited PCS-to-PCS INCL INCL BSG0408-0028R2 Date: August 12, 2004 continued Overage Rate 0.40 0.40 Domestic Roaming 0.50 0.50 Domestic Roaming Long Distance 0.25 0.25 Featured Options (AN Additional MRC Shared Minutes 5.00 5.00 Extended Nights & Weekends Hours 5.00 5.00 PCS Vision Pack 10.00 10.00 Unlimited PCS Ready Link 12.50 12.50 Unlimited PCS Ready Link with PCS Vision Access Pack 20.00 20.00 (C) LIMITATIONS This Business Plan requires PCS Connection Cards. Customer will use this Business Plan only as an individual's method of accessing data or information. Customer will not use this Business Plan in connection with server devices, host computer applications or other systems that drive continuous heavy traffic or data sessions, or as substitutes for private lines or frame relay connections. Unlimited access to company email and server requires access to company server via a company - established remote access method. Not available while Roaming. Premium Services are not included. If these limitations are violated, Sprint may terminate the Business Plan. (D) SUBSCRIBER LEVEL WARRANTY AND NVP DISCOUNT On the Effective Date: (1)Customer warrants and represents that its selected Subscriber Level (specified below) is a good faith estimate of the number of Contributing Lines that will be activated under Customer's Sprint account hierarchy during the Grace Period and maintained throughout the Term of the Agreement; and (2) Sprint, during the Grace Period, will provide the benefit of the Western States Contract Alliance Wireless Communication Services and Equipment Master Price Agreement Discount. If Customer's Contributing Lines are not equal to or greater than the selected Subscriber Level by the end of the Grace Period, the Discount Customer received during the Grace Period will be reduced to the "Reduced Discount" set forth in the table below. If at any time after the expiration of the Grace Period Customer's actual Subscriber Level is less than the selected BSG0408-0028R2 Date: August 12, 2004 Subscriber Level set forth below, Customer's Discount will be reduced to the "Reduced Discount" for the remainder of the Tenn.. SUBSCRIBER GRACE REDUCED LEVEL PERIOD NVP MINIMUM(MONTHS) DISCOUNT 100 Lines 3 5% The discounts specified are associated with Customer's designated Subscriber Level contained in the first column. Service Credit. Depending on the Term commitment selected above, Customer may receive a credit towards charges for Service ("Service Credit"). Unless otherwise provided in the Master Term Agreement, the Service Credit is $200 for a 2-year commitment. The Service Credit is applied on your first invoice against charges for Services provided to Customer. Unused Service Credit carries over to the next invoicing cycle(s) (up to a maximum of 12 invoicing cycles) until completely use. The Service Credit is non -transferable and has no cash value. The Service Credit cannot be applied to offset a termination fee. No Service Credits will be offered after the expiration or termination of the Term. Early Termination. Customer may terminate this Acceptance Form Agreement before the expiration of the Term upon notice to Sprint and the payment of an early termination fee. THE PER PHONE EARLY TERMINATION FEE DURING THE TERM IS $200 FOR A 2-YEAR AGREEGMENT). Sprint may terminate this Acceptance Form Agreement if you default under the terms herein or the Master Term Agreement or State's Participating Addendum, in which case the early termination fee will apply. Financial Liability. Customer will deal directly with Sprint with respect to its invoices, charges, credits, disputes, service requirements, requests for information and assistance, and other transactions and communications. Customer agrees to be financially responsible for all charges and obligations for orders it places under the Master Agreement. Customer represents and warrants that it is not a party to a current agreement with Sprint for services that are the same or similar to the Services provided under the Agreement. Employee Advantage Program. If Customer elects to participate in the EAP, Sprint will make the discount set out in the Master Term Agreement available to Customer's Employees who enter a services agreement with Sprint for at least one (1) year. Customer's Employees will be eligible for service plans available to Employees at the time of activation. An "Employee" is a person in the service of Customer and from whose gross pay Customer withholds FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) contributions. The provision of Services and Products by Sprint to Employees is not governed by this Agreement. Each Employee must enter into a separate agreement with Sprint for Services and Products under the EAP. Employees must meet and maintain satisfactory credit with Sprint in order to receive and to continue to receive Services and purchase Products under the EAP. If Customer elects to participate in the EAP: L Customer and Sprint must agree to Sprint's standard authorization process for Employees to participate in the EAP or to a mutually satisfactory written authorization process; 2. Customer agrees, throughout the Term, to cooperate with and assist Sprint in verifying the employment status of persons claiming to be Customer's Employees; 3. Upon request, and subject to prior approval by Customer, Customer will permit Sprint to send marketing messages to the Employee base in a manner to be determined in consultation with Customer; All Company communications described above must be accurate with respect to the offer available under this Agreement. Customer must coordinate the details and content of such communications and marketing with Sprint. Incorporation of 60-day Vision Experience. Company is eligible to participate in Sprint's 60-day Vision Experience, the terms of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. BSG0408-0028R2 Date: August 12, 2004 Customer Information: Customer's Legal Name: Federal Tax Identification Number: Address: Primary Contact (title and phone number): CITY OF TEMECULA Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Sprint Spectrum L.P., on behalf of itself and its affiliates By: _ Name: Title: Regional Vice President ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY _ DIRECTOR OF FINA E _ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Tim Thorson, Director of Information Systems DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Microsoft Software Licenses — Annual Renewal RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the annual purchase of 250 Client Access Licenses (CAL) of Microsoft Windows Professional from ASAP Software for $54,972.50. DISCUSSION: The City is currently enrolled in a Microsoft Enterprise Agreement for 250 workstations, which makes the City fully compliant and supports the scheduled move to Active Directory/Exchange Email 2003 in November 2004. While this is a three-year agreement totaling $164,917.50, it will be equally divided and be separately budgeted in each fiscal year. The Microsoft Enterprise Agreement is available on the State of California County Information Services Directors Association (CCISA) Multiple Award Schedules under Microsoft State and Local Enterprise Agreement. The competitively quoted price is provided by an authorized CCISA contractor. Under this agreement, it is within the City's discretion to take advantage of the pricing on another governmental entity contract. The contract is made available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county, or local governmental agency empowered to expend public funds. Therefore, this purchase is exempt from competitive bidding requirements. Staffs research has determined that the CCISA price is the most competitive and that there are no local vendors on the CCISA suppliers list. Also, it has been determined that the CCISA program is consistent with the City's procurement policies and regulations and that it is used by many cities as an industry standard. The attached enrollment form is for the purchase of Microsoft licenses from ASAP Software: FISCAL IMPACT: $54,972.50 was appropriated in the 2004-05 Fiscal Year Budget for the Information Services Internal Services fund. Attachment: ASAP Software Enterprise Agreement Enrollment/Quote R:IS/caseym/agendareports/microsoRlicense ITEM 8 CITY ATTORNEY, DIRECTOR OF FI CITY MANAGER t CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Approve the Sponsorship Request for The Great Tractor Race event. PREPARED BY: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve the event sponsorship agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute the following event sponsorship agreement; 2. Approve the event sponsorship agreement for actual City -support costs in the amount up to $12,500 for The Great Tractor Race. BACKGROUND: Staff has received a sponsorship request from Southwest Events for The Great Tractor Race event. The Economic Development Subcommittee, consisting of Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Comerchero and Councilmember Ron Roberts, and Staff met to discuss the Economic Development funding requests on Tuesday, March 30th. The subcommittee recommended that the City sponsor support costs if a suitable location within the City of Temecula could be found. The support costs were incorporated in the City's FY 2004-05 Operating Budget, which was approved by the City Council on Tuesday, June 8, 2004. The Great Tractor Race Staff has received a request from Southwest Events to provide city -support costs in the amount up to $12,500 for the 281h Annual Great Tractor Race event. The Tractor Race has long been a Temecula tradition. The event will be held October 1 — 3, 2004 at the property located at Cherry and Adams streets. Staff has received written approval from the Flood Control District for use of this property. The event will benefit Rancho Damacitas, a local non-profit charity that benefits abused and neglected children. Other revenue recipients will include local charities that work during the event which include the: Elks, Lions Club, React and the Temecula Sheriffs Posse. \\Sanftity manager\Wolnickg\4gendareports\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc Last year, approximately 8,000 people attended The Great Tractor Race. Venues included tractor races, and mud games including mud surfing and mud tug-of-war. Southwest Events was able to provide a small donation in the amount of $700 to the Rancho Damacitas charity. Other revenue recipients included The Elks, Lions Club, React and the Temecula Sheriff's Posse as they provided services during the event. The 2003 Great Tractor Race marketing and publicity included newspapers, radio, cable television, direct mail, posters, flyers and their website. In addition to the fundraising for the local charities, the event has the potential to provide tourism and economic benefits to the City of Temecula. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated city -support costs for The Great Tractor Race are $12,500. Funds are available in the FY2004-05 Operating Budget of the various support departments affected. ATTACHMENT (S): The Great Tractor Race Attachment A — Sponsorship Benefits Attachment B — Estimated City Support Services and Costs Attachment C — 2004 Event & Media Promotions Attachment D-2004 Budget Attachment E — 2003 Great Tractor Race Recap Attachment F -- Sponsorship Agreement \\San3\city manager\Wolnickgagendareporta\Temecula Tractor Race'64.doc Attachment A The Great Tractor Race Sponsorship Benefits Mariftity manager\Wolnickg\Agendareports\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc R SINCE 19�� --' .�• 278GO DEL RIORD. 7EMECVLACA. 92590 (909) S06.4408 • FAX (909)506-4409 SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS TO THE CITY As a Special Event Sponsor the City will receive: The City of Temecula will be included in all advertising including Flyers, Posters, Newspaper Ads, Program, and all promotional materials. 10 Tickets to Saturday and Sunday Shows. The City of Temecula will have First Right of Refusal for next years event. Attachment B The Great Tractor Race Estimated City Support Services and Costs Below are the estimated City generated services and their costs provided to Southwest Events for "The Great Temecula Race." Police Services Service costs: $7,150.00 Fire Services Service costs: $ 4,400.00 Public Works Service costs: $ 400.00 Community Services Service costs: $ N/A Code Enforcement Service costs: $ 550.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED SERVICE COSTS: $12,500.00 \\San3\city manager\Wolnickgwgendareports\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc 4 Attachment C The Great Tractor Race 2004 Event & Media Promotions \\San3bity manager\WolnickgWgendareporta\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc .ri 4�At•'C11AC70� 278(60 DEU RIO RD, TEMECULA CA. 92S90 (909) 506-4408 • FAX (909)506-4409 PUBLICITY AND ADVERTISING Publicity for the 2004 Great Tractor Race will be the same as last year. We will be in the newspapers, Radio, Cable TV, Posters, Flyers, and our Website. We have added a new sign at our.new location.. CHARITY Our goal this year will be to raise more money for Rancho Damacitas. We will also continue our support for the Elks, Lions Club, React and the Temecula Sheriff's Posse, for the services they provide at the event. TICKET PRICES Ticket Prices for 2004t.will be $10.00 for Adults, $4.00 for Children under 10 years of age and 3 years of age and under will be at no charge. We will also offer a Family Package of 4 (2 Adults and 2 Children) for $24.00. O LL vo CD LU NZ �0 am w Mai °a l0 LL N w co 7 0 d 0 4 N a� 0 �y O Q m O I- ca �a t W�� o E c H oco (v v'O ® C i � C > C ctl 9CN (r UL Ey r0i d O yt12oo.uU A (a WCco 9 VLNO d 'NN ulwa L U L U L m-a33 CD E N ` 4 E m O U a E L cc « ` a) ma❑ vi > ally ~ Ot CD > 3 c U O m— E com Cc 0 CO O to a �. w Y O c+ -C O N C 3 o oiymm�m C > a F m L a N m U C L = 0 ci CL �O O ~ CO N C C Q N 3 N ` .m. — 0,0 C C O a)U m N M "'a N 0)0 L .` c 0 U p« a Y U O �y0ca� C m ca U m y E X a) 7 CD L L a) > L w 0) > 2c H 3•cLu 0- 0 u N 2 m N +�+ a 0 a 7 aI E (D I- rn a m y E', a> �Ca .0 G 2 w 76 �I c7! LL a) U o y (D U C 0 a) C � � -0 �°- 3 3y a) E Ca CY)m0 m m co0 co y L cm a)3 a) •m +- U m y= 3 a) m �{ m C 6s N L N N m I— 0 o 3 U E L 0 � D 10 O N m T N C N L 06a -m0 N Y �0 y (0 C v a N 3 O 0 ;r E m m- ml— d0 0 a a)Q- 0 3 m E fIJ y T y 0 .. m_ m oC .- d y.—._ u E E > y as m o u.> �O =L I-aLLQ att-- GW'C o C 0 N N CArnu cm y p of o d u ?A CO` t t m N V d V 0 c £ L0 a d � _ o c Q*� po O m N DC =) Z CSC 0 0 N W N Y O U p U U p O .-. Y CD0 O) O N 0 N N •N lem CL C U U p •- Uits m U U- CL w 0 p 0_ m v yo n ��cp0 rn_ E a)t a o o (7 8E. a '° m�°rn c m CO at W yC a� Tmw- 3 N mm c Cgamic..•a N m a) m co Mtn ova 0)m c ►. vA y m t c 7 m ago 7a - E m.-w �fn .. c N E --o=lp H-0 m m y�v tn 0 m to E d a 7 a �� cY,�<nm ami o TmY>fLY r.. ai N•N� 0--00 a)•tU-n o �Qaa�� m 0 m E� u��� E m ++ C 7 O 7 7 7 H L CY fq .- .- .- .- .- 7 •C 7 F.. N p 'y U U U L O N �� O)(j2�j2 O c 0'07 7 7 7 m N+-' U c c 7 7 7ci w Oi/i0 C p ��to NQ 0 2222� QM tp to (D 0�222 rn O) "C 0 mo 3 7 aom�) �� m c�00000 o upi a�vv m f0 c--ootoo� N � S� m m� V "'d 0 NMvto� �+N moj � w NCO to 3U �C��oo222OOZCL >2 I CC T i l l I d CDoo m �� I I I¢ C7 t 000M 00 .--tf)to MtoO C) = O O O O O Z CL � O to O OO V m 0 000 N N `.: O %O o O N N M 7 M ce) O (a 666 � �� �.-NMa L60(i00i N M4 to H a > W of �. 3 ItsE c 0 L. v E a d> d 3 0 c} c o d L 0 v to c a a 0 `0 `0 3 `e l+- � u u Y u L. C ,� �ti-� 0?��' o M c0 O cu a 1� u - W eq P4 I z n LL J_ LL Rw cZ °0 Va LL l0 � J d0 E � V m Y Q m ED F�I E L L y H a) p O L p � C C C O CD C p O C f`aas CO� - E E a 0 o' lZ N a) v, 3 w : In Y N C y a5 w (D Y E L) E c .� Co. ` Cc N a7 C ca m .. i a) i C Cl i s ca N O C J „ r 3 E o O a) �. w 'Q U a L m a) ;o cf0i ° o c p w (D� `mom E m o 0 Cl)CL as _c o , orra' a' E> E S a) U co c�V cc VJ ` C W L ' i•r to Y Y a,E w oU to��a �y p o o3a��a C� c� as c 0 o 0 3'x Y Ci O Y O y p L 0 o f c° U wc'� a�iw 3 3` O�A 3 C� n C-L opt �ti"yaai' _ E o L� a w ay ti `O V , a� Z° u> w a L o o U > rn 0 w rn = x b n C is a1 to E y0 .�. L" CD L V C a) O'" 'C N t 00 E m@ -Cc �a 4 o L > c o a Z` o E p p 4) Lz ° h� 0w or- o oo>„3Qca Eao Urns w 0 M o0•.3 C Y c c a Epaci woc 0 to °A' o .i as E °c m uoi ^_ocj.d' 3 8 co a5 d y Y ry" 7 O a y ��"' 01 a7— O a)2 U � O O Y G .. CDN CC rn m oo to .r 3 Y C, 3 c o c 'o w o .. S W 00 cc D � b O.0 M 40 n h QI LL O M Y EA W 1 bO Rf W al C to ¢; � o E; O ¢I U �i to U U cl, 3 WibH O O ��'�LC -a, to r ti' y F1 t, U bA Ry � � k•' mow° c i � i �+ O � N N Q RS y � • A �C � ✓gin .Y: �U1 V E-1 O too ° oc h = .b { Y c 3 AIT oob `° o > d0 0 !A U U .x b � O Qoy ° U U � b L cz a 3y•°0.1� 0 a > o °aU y� c y�•�3>0tz z� �� o a o � U o Q° a>U��:U� v� 3 ='cry Cc y ; d 0 ''�' Q 3°° ts U,4 O cd 'c a u r. o ° U� a a� > � .� � � mu, •o .� 0 0 U ( 4) a o o z> U o` b U ° C Q y w `«, o ov�q Z; E"0 3 oO y 3 nb y c« 00 mow° y m o Q d N o a 9 E y Q o a❑° 3 3 y ° d Q•� Y > �. O Q N Q 'O O �% Q bA ..L. > o'� C 0 3 a� c U b 4� O y" toN 0.1 bO� ° L1': ca3 �iw >w0 0 C O O N 00 7 O 00 00 9 El =M=7 p U •Y � Y p U � p O V y •• Y s4 O w i m U Ol cpd l6 y O �io Nt h NWV'O 13 C C W .a, hY tj o 41 •� a,UOww� aL�+ coo U)cm T � Qy � CC 0 O � � T >p N 3 oaU Q od p W 0 to '[ '�; U w � o 0 w 0 N V Cd a 0 E, ro ocqs W L Y O N 0 O 00 F � � G V �s a E .. Y N C O Ri W L s to sb° m d axi ti O y s � Y N 0 a In . � o � r- 'IT ON O\ O\ rn ti O z O m y °' L O O Occ L �- , �.� ❑T V A cd In O£ •L E d o ro 3 0 8 c "0 0 O � � � � bq � y ►a Or U •b y � O cd � d�wwwwi�x U U V � � Y � b W Tro y 7 0 0 0 N b 00 00 W 0 M N bq Pr I_1 N x w w abi O V N E •C y y A OU .lull ¢ 0 c � � .ctb— Y E - O Y co . Z O •^ u U u c� °Q)0ed a z > o� 3¢ °� W °' �cn ti 0= w 3 oA�> .00Ca .� a U fl �. E x F 3 ark o O o a ao .- 0 A b cA 0 W C) a W Eyx m A Ca ca a� •y c° cl o 0 x Y Y co .�4E 100j)w E A N w WO U U Vi V1 U -le� y„^co m U cbG �Q+ a x 0 U .to m ro- > �_ 3 U Cl o U a)a r o E C d U a d U •G Cn cl c3 bA C.) .b ,� U < p U c c 0� ,. d Mu tyox 010 N U m U 0^ o on a b oa d o ob nE D _ d A¢C14 ^_ O N U �Q 0 D � W b y r ° y r QD r 0 o Q) E o y x 3'a 3 b a� b •o c 7 d 7 Tcr ate'. O G x U Cull, C w „ * +x+ o C ti to0 o � � a 3 ,.4 C v im` •••• �EiEi U¢ U f~tl c'tl U x E E° E O N y ° a 0 o y CJ :7 0 0 N 00 Cd � y ° NC U �'° ti 7to � 7 .3 tm y N V A C WO 3 ❑ P ❑ W V ae .E 3 Cd .o CQ b.a A D O O U 'C a x� ?: on w0 � A '� U CA '3 p � .^ •� � U w Ei F � > TUp E y u y U U❑ N y G .0 y bD a� 0 0°0� w v w o O U O E c O y U p y Eop�p3 �y w4�w^ Q A A A A A M 0 0 N 00 w a F G � a � 3 > > � x � U U �y U a � � 3 b G U U U T o a 7 A 'b iy U ." U `d a>i o y p O L 7 > y y O N G > t� z z A ¢ U ¢ A Q A A A A A A v � O Q U GG ¢' U � ° o y F Y 000o1E o ° 0 T p o 00.0 Ui 0`'..' O.F ow O 0 >°, ° U a � O E3� G y Q' h r 'O xWr G w . ,- �N0> Fio >'G'> O .G ° r V7 r > OO F p w aGi G C O rn T G. A F > a ":I O > U �D A A 0 0 N 00 0 0 U cdd a G O w- N 0. U �' U W tptl vi i3 p m c abi w> 3 a d N O b0 V 0. N O 'COC O' .� p ttl T7 cy q p O rA 0 y 0. ..to U ❑ 7 71 C 14 r C a�i ❑ '� o0 m m O !"" 0 A b Q U u r 7 .+ G 0 U cl N a a w (�b ° on tip to 3 Ccl o W 3 E b itl a+ l h O y h O + o.'ti v� �� cd o E E to C A F. to � w y A A A 0 0 N W 00 \ W } \ - ) 2 / - ~ / f / * 4 4 / e) _ ( z § \ ƒ < A w Attachment D The Great Tractor Race 2004 Budget \\San3Ncity manager\WolnickgWgendareports\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc R September 1, 2004 RE: GREAT TRACTORRACE 2004-PROPOSED BUDGET Dear Mr. O'Grady, The following table shows the Southwest Events proposed budget for the 2004 Great Tractor Race: REVENUE Gate Receipts $20,000 Beverage Sales $8,000 Entry Fees $3,200 parlang $2,250 RV Parlor $700 SMnsorships $8,000 Vendor Receipts $9,500 TOTAL REVENUE: $51,650 EXPENSES: Advertising $9,200 T hies, etc. $2,000 Adult Beverages $3,800 Co ties $2,000 Donations for Services $2,000 Misc. Equipment Rental $3,000 Insurance $3,500 Licenses & Permits %W Media Day $250 Restroom Facilities $2 750 Security$4 00p Si $1600 Site Pfcparation $2,000 Trash Removal $2,750 Tent $500 s for Volunteers $850 City S Services 7PROnT $12,500 AL EXPENSES $53 ,00 /LOSS Sl 50 Attachment E The Great Tractor Race 2003 Great Tractor Race Recap \lSan3\city manager\Wolnickg\Agendareports\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc FVVffy I 21 4.4•t TRA�T� (909) S06-4408 0 FAX (909)506-4409 2003 RECAP Southwest Events would like to thank the City of Temecula, and our tremendous sponsors for helping to make this event a success. Our Volunteers and given so much to this event. We were able to give money to Rancho Damacitas and also provide some income for several local non-profit organiza- tions including The ELks, Lions Club, Temecula Posse and React. All of these fine people give alot back the this community. We would especially like to thank the City of Temecula. for their support in our effort to.preserve the oldest event in our valley,"THE GREAT TRACTOR RACE". ear w A I 'F U7 IM 27860 DEL RIO RD, TEMECULA CA. 92-590 (909) 506-4408 • FAX (909)506-4409 BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 2003 Current Assets: Cash on Hand Accounts Receivable Other Current Assets Total Current Assets: Long -tern Assets: Current Liabilities: Notes Payable Accounts Payable: Current Current Portion Long -Term Debt Other Current Liabilities Total Current Liabilities: Long-term Liabilities: Total New Worth: Total Liabilities $ 27,758.05 -0- -0- $27,758.05 -0- -0- $27,045.66 -0- -0- $27,045.66 -0- $27,758.05 ($27,045.66) Income: Mal 27860 DEL. RIO RD. TEMECULA CA. 92590 (909) 506-4408 • FAX (9O9)506-4409 ANNUAL PROFIT & LOSS - 2003 Gate Receipts & Donations $27,758.05 Total Income: $27,758.05 Expenses: Supplies $ 2,179.SI Telephone $ 986.16 Promotions $ 6,881.64 Occupancy $ 3,000.00 Subcontractors $ 2,075.19 Misc. $ 9,730.55 Insurance 2,192.61 Total Expenses: $27,045.66 Net Income: $ 712.39 Less Income Tax -0- Net Income After Tax S 712.39 Attachment F The Great Tractor Race Sponsorship Agreement \\San3\city manager\Wolnickg\Agendareporte\Temecula Tractor Race'04.doc ADVERTISING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND SOUTHWEST EVENTS This Agreement, made this 14th day of September. 2004, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and SOUTHWEST EVENTS, a California nonprofit corporation. A. Southwest Events will operate "The Great Tractor Race" on October 1 - 3, 2004. The Great Tractor Race is a special event located at Cherry and Adams streets in Temecula. The event features tractor races and mud games including mud surfing and mud tug-of- war. The event is expected to draw between 7,000 — 9,000 people for the 3-day event. B. The City of Temecula desires to be a "Special Event Sponsor" of the 2004 Great Tractor Race. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows: A. In exchange for providing city -support costs up to $12,500 for the costs of Public Works, Code Enforcement, Fire and Police, the City of Temecula shall be designated as a "Special Event Sponsor" of the 2004 Great Tractor Race. Profits of the event will be donated to the local charities as listed below in item B. In exchange for being a "Special Event Sponsor," the City of Temecula will receive the benefits as listed in Attachment A. B. The Great Tractor Race will serve as a fundraiser for the Thessalonika Family Services, the Rancho Damacitas branch, local non-profit organizations benefiting youth. Southwest Events will continue support for the Elks, Lions Club, React and the Temecula Sheriffs Posse for services they provide at the event. C. Within 60 days following The Great Tractor Race, Southwest Events shall prepare and submit to the Assistant City Manager a written report evaluating The Great Tractor Race, its attendance, and describing the materials in which the City was listed as a "Special Event Sponsor." The report should also include samples of media press clippings, flyers, pamphlets, etc, in a presentation notebook format. D. In addition, Southwest Events will provide complete financial statements, which includes a balance sheet and income statement of The Great Tractor Race. This must be submitted to the City 60 days following the event. Financial statements must be compiled by a certified public accountant. E. Southwest Events shall file a Temporary Use Permit application with the City of Temecula no later than 60 days preceding the first day of The Great Tractor Race. F. Once the Temporary Use Permit application has been submitted and the event agreement has been executed in final form, Southwest Events will receive city - support services at the time of the event. G. Southwest Events agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the City and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees free and harmless from all claims for damage to persons or property by reason of Southwest Event's acts or omissions or those of Southwest Event's employees, officers, agents, or invites in connection with The Great Tractor Race to the maximum extent allowed by law. H. Southwest Events shall secure from a good and responsible company or companies doing insurance business in the State of California, pay for and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability and liquor liability in which the City and Redevelopment Agency is named insured or is named as an additional insured with Southwest Events and shall furnish a Certificate of Liability by the City. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy or any subsequent endorsement attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall; 1. Include the City as the insured or named as an additional insured covering all claims arising out of, or in connection with, The Great Tractor Race. 2. Include the City, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of their duties under this Agreement against all claims arising out of, or in connection with The Great Tractor Race. 3. Provide the following minimum limits: (A) General Liability: $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage with a $2,000,000 aggregate. (B) Liquor Liability: $2,000,000 combines single limit per occurrence for bodily injury personal injury and property damage. 4. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from The Great Tractor Race. 5. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any K reason whatsoever, the City shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less than thirty (30) days beforehand. 6. Any deductible or self -insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible or self -insured retention as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees or Southwest Events shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. I. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. 107414103 SOUTHWEST EVENTS CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Dave Johnson, President Southwest Events 27860 Del Rio Road, Suite A Temecula, CA 92590 Mike Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney 4 ATTACHMENT A THE GREAT TRACTOR RACE SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS 4�pf 'CRA\p0� • ��N�E �911 w X' 278GO DEL. RIO RD. 7EMECULA CA. 92.590 (909) 506-4408 - FAX (909) 506-4409 SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS TO THE CITY As a Special Event Sponsor the City will receive: The City of Temecula will be included in all advertising including Flyers, Posters, Newspaper Ads, Program, and all promotional materials. 10 Tickets to Saturday and Sunday Shows. The City of Temecula will have First Right of Refusal for next years event. ITEM 9 9a=T97"T CITY ATTORNEY. DIRECTOR OF FIP CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council r FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manag q7V DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement for Advance Payment of CFD 88-12 Reimbursements RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve an amendment to the City's agreement which provides for advance payment of reimbursements for certain parcels within CFD 88-12. Appropriate $65,134 from the unallocated reserves of the General Fund to provide for an increased payment amount. BACKGROUND: On January 27, 2004, the City Council approved in substantial form an agreement which would provide for advance repayment of the City's reimbursement obligations for Community Facilities District 88-12. This advance repayment was in the amount of $683,971 and would facilitate the construction of the loop road and other public facilities necessary for the expansion of the Temecula Auto Mall. The agreement also fully repays the City's future reimbursement obligations at a discount which recognizes the time value of money and thus provides a benefit to the City. The agreement has recently been finalized and is now being routed for signatures by the various parties. However because of the substantial passage of time since the agreement was originally drafted, we have recently entered into a new "assessment year". As a result, the amount of money that is due at closing to satisfy the assessment obligations will increase by approximately $80,000. This amount will go to the City, but that amount also becomes eligible for future reimbursement to the property owners. The anticipated reimbursement schedule and interest rates have also changed somewhat since the original agreement was prepared. As a result, it is necessary to amend the January 27 agreement to reflect these changes. The attached amendment provides for a new advance payment amount of $749,105. FISCAL IMPACT: An initial expenditure of $749,105 would be required, which represents an increase of $65,134 from the previous agreement amount. Funds for the original agreement were previously appropriated, and funds for the increased amount are available in the unallocated reserves of the General Fund. The City would avoid anticipated future payments of $848, 519. ATTACHMENT: Proposed agreement Y:1AUTO MALL\Council Report - CFO 88-12 Advance Payment Agreement, 99-14-C4.doc RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Attn: City Clerk Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Govt. Code Section 27383 (Space above for recorder's use) FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT REGARDING RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF PROPERTY AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REIMBURSEMENT DISTRIBUTION THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of September 14, 2004, by and between the City Of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City"), Dick Kennedy and Gorden L. Romberger, as Trustees of the Donna L. Reeves Trust dated July 25, 1990 ("Reeves"), MEG Investments, a California general partnership ("MEG"), Glendora Motorcars, Inc., a California corporation ("Glendora"), Oremor Management & Investment Company, a California corporation ("Oremor"), DCH Investments Inc. (California), a California corporation ("DCH"), Davidson Enterprises, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Davidson"), The John A. Hine, Jr. Trust ("Hine"),and North Plaza, LLC, a California limited liability company ("North Plaza"). For the purposes of this Agreement, Reeves, MEG, Glendora, Oremor, DCH, Davidson, and Hine may be referred to as "Dealers" and Dealers and North Plaza may be referred to as "Owners." RECITALS A. The parties entered into that certain "Agreement Regarding Restrictions on Use of Property and Community Facilities District Reimbursement Distribution" on September __, 2004 which document was recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County as Document No. 2004- on September _. 2004 ("Original Agreement"). B. The Original Agreement described the City's estimate that over the next six years, the owners of the Property will be entitled to substantial sales tax reimbursements under the 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - I - Sales Tax Agreement of approximately $768,000. The Orginal Agreement also decribed the City's estimate that pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement, the City would be paying $302,000 to the owners of the Property in October 2004, and $80,000 to the owners of the Property per year thereafter. C. Since the Original Agreement was approved by the City Council in January 2004, the estimates of the payments to the owners of the Property have increased due to another year of special tax obligations being incurred under CFD 88-12 and the failure of the current owner to pay these special taxes. The City now estimates that over the next six years, the owners of the Property will be entitled to sales tax reimbursements under the Sales Tax Agreement of approximately $848,519. The time for the City to make the estimated $302,000 payment to the owners of the Property in October 2004 pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement has passed and such a payment would not be until October 2005 provided that all requirements of the Sales Tax Agreement have been fulfilled. The Original Agreement and this First Amendment would take the place of this payment. D. City, North Plaza and the Dealers now desire to enter into this First Amendment in order to advance the sales tax reimbursements, as updated, which will be due to the owners of the Property over the next six years so that North Plaza and the Dealers can address the title and infrastructure improvement issues on the Property as part of the escrow for the sale of the Property. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, the covenants contained in the Agreement and this First Amendment, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, City and Owners hereby agree as follows: Section 3 of the Original Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "I Advance Payment of Reimbursements to be Made by City. Upon the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 2, the City shall pay to Dealers the sum of seven hundred forty nine thousand one hundred and five dollars ($749,105.00) as prepayment of the sums payable by City under Section 2 of the Agreement ("Prepayment Amount"). Owner and Dealers hereby direct the City to pay such sum to the Dealers' fund control account at Mission Oaks Bank, Temecula, which account is designated as: "Mission Oaks Bank FBO Felicita Financial Corporation as Developer of North Plaza Auto Park." Following this payment, City shall pay the yearly reimbursements for current year special taxes paid on the CFD 88-12 bonds to the individual Owners, or their successors in interest in the Property, provided all other conditions precedent to the City's obligation to reimburse current taxes under the Sales Tax Agreement are fulfilled. City shall not pay any sales tax reimbursements for prior years special taxes to Owners, or their successors in interest in the Property, or to any other person with an 791493.1 September 7, 2004 -2- interest in the Property, pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement until such time as the future sales tax reimbursements applicable to the Property exceed the Prepayment Amount plus interest on the sums advanced at an annual rate of four and one half percent (4.5%)." 2. Except as specifically set forth herein, all other terms of the Original Agreement remain in full force and effect. 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 3 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Attest: Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney NORTH PLAZA, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Name: William Johnson Title: Managing Member MEG INVESTMENTS, a California general partnership By: _ Name Title: Eric Gosch General Partner 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 4 - GLENDORA MOTORCARS, INC., a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: OREMOR MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT COMPANY, a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: DCH INVESTMENTS (CALIFORNIA) INC., a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 5 - By: _ Name: Title: DAVIDSON ENTERPRISES, LLC, a California limited liability company By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: THE JOHN A. HINE, JR. TRUST, John A. Hine, Jr. Trustee 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 6 - DICK KENNEDY AND GORDEN L. ROMBERGER, AS TRUSTEES OF THE DONNA L. REEVES TRUST DATED JULY 259 1990 Dick Kennedy, Trustee Gorden L. Romberger, Tnistee 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 7 - State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary 791493.1 September 7, 2004 - 8 - State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California County of Riverside On ss before me, , personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the ba..is of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary EXHIBIT "A" Description of Land APN Numbers: 92173004-2, 5-3, 6-4, 13-0, 14-1, 15-2 and 23-9 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Attn: City Clerk Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Govt. Code Section 27383 (Space above for recorder's use) AGREEMENT REGARDING RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF PROPERTY AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REIMBURSEMENT DISTRIBUTION THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of August , 2004, by and between the City Of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City"), Dick Kennedy and Gorden L. Romberger, as Trustees of the Donna L. Reeves Trust dated July 25, 1990 ("Reeves"), MEG Investments, a California general partnership ("MEG"), Glendora Motorcars, Inc., a California corporation ("Glendora"), Oremor Management & Investment Company, a California corporation ("Oremor"), DCH Investments Inc. (California), a California corporation ("DCH"), Davidson Enterprises, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Davidson"), The John A. Hine, Jr. Trust ("Hine"),and North Plaza, LLC, a California limited liability company ("North Plaza"). For the purposes of this Agreement, Reeves, MEG, Glendora, Oremor, DCH, Davidson, and Hine may be referred to as "Dealers" and Dealers and North Plaza may be referred to as "Owners." RECITALS A. North Plaza is the owner of certain property in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, which is described on Exhibit A, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference ("Property"). B. Dealers are in escrow to purchase a portion the Property from Reeves who is concurrently purchasing said portion from North Plaza. North Plaza will retain ownership of a portion of the Property. 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - I - C. In order to close escrow on the Property, the costs of resolving certain title issues and the costs of certain unanticipated infrastructure improvements must be addressed and allocated between the parties to the purchase and sale agreement for the Property. D. City and North Plaza's predecessors -in -interest executed that certain "Agreement Regarding Sales Tax Revenues As To Businesses located within the Boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 88-12 (Ynez Corridor) of the County of Riverside, State of California" dated as of June 14, 1991 (the "Sales Tax Agreement"). E. Community Facilities District 88-12 ("CFD 88-12") was organized to finance extensive road improvements along Ynez Road in the City of Temecula. A portion of the improvements constructed as part of CFD 88-12 are adjacent to the Property and are of benefit to the Property. The Sales Tax Agreement provides a mechanism by which the owners of property within Community Facilities District 88-12 ("CFD 88-12") may be reimbursed for special tax payments made to pay the debt service on the bonds out of the sales taxes generated with CFD 88-12 as the City's contribution to the regional improvements funded by CFD 88-12. F. Over the next six years, City estimates that the owners of the Property will be entitled to substantial sales tax reimbursements under the Sales Tax Agreement of approximately $768,000. Pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement, the City estimates paying $302,000 to the owners of the Property in October 2004, and $80,000 to the owners of the Property per year thereafter. G. City, North Plaza and the Dealers now desire to enter into this Agreement in order to advance the sales tax reimbursements, which will be due to the owners of the Property over the next six years so that North Plaza and the Dealers can address the title and infrastructure improvement issues on the Property as part of the escrow for the sale of the Property. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, the covenants contained in the Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, City and Owners hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions. Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Sales Tax Agreement. 2. Conditions Precedent. The effectiveness of this Agreement is conditioned upon the satisfaction (or the express written waiver by the City) on or before December 31, 2004 (or such date as the City may approve in writing) of the following conditions precedent: (i) The acquisition by Dealers of not less than twenty (20) acres of the Property; (ii) The payment of all property taxes and assessments on the Property due as of the close of escrow of the sale to Dealers; (iii) The Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California in the case of 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 2 - In Re North Plaza, Case No. 04-00769 PB11, issues a final order in which the sale of the Property from North Plaza to Reeves and this Agreement: is approved and said Order and no appeal of the order is filed within the applicable appeal period; and (iv) A final judgment has been entered pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 860, et seq., establishing that this Agreement is valid and binding against the parties and enforceable against each party in accordance with its terms and that each term hereof is valid and lawful under applicable law. 3. Advance Payment of Reimbursements to be Made by City. Upon the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 2, the City shall pay to Dealers the sum of six hundred eighty three thousand nine hundred seventy one dollars ($683,971.00) as prepayment of the sums payable by City under Section 2 of the Agreement ("Prepayment Amount"). Owner and Dealers hereby direct the City to pay such sum to the Dealers' find control account at Mission Oaks Bank, Temecula, which account is designated as: "Mission Oaks Bank FBO Felicita Financial Corporation as Developer of North Plaza Auto Park." Following this payment, City shall pay the yearly reimbursements for current year special taxes paid on the CFD 88-12 bonds to the individual Owners, or their successors in interest in the Property, provided all other conditions precedent to the City's obligation to reimburse current taxes under the Sales Tax Agreement are fulfilled. City shall not pay any sales tax reimbursements for prior years special taxes to Owners, or their successors in interest in the Property, or to any other person with an interest in the Property, pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement until such time as the future sales tax reimbursements applicable to the Property exceed the Prepayment Amount plus interest on the, sums advanced at an annual rate of four percent (4%). 4. Findings Concerning Agreement. A. The City finds and determines that the amount of money advanced to Owner pursuant this Agreement does not exceed the amount required to perform the public improvement work which will be required for Owner's development of the Property and that the City will not maintain any proprietary interest in the overall Project. The public improvement work required of Owner's in connection with development of the Property consists of roads, drainage facilities, traffic signals, sidewalks and related improvements on Ynez Road and on the Property as described in the Development Agreement between the City and North Plaza, dated as of January 16, 2004 ("Development Agreement") and has an estimated cost of $2.2 million. The money advanced pursuant to this Agreement will be repaid at 4% interest which is substantially in excess of the return on investment which the City would receive had the money been invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund, which is now paying approximately 1.57% interest and is expected to pay interest below 4% for the term of this Agreement. Additionally, the money advanced is money which would be paid to the Owners over the course of the next six years pursuant to the Sales Tax Agreement. B. The City further finds and determines that the money advanced by City to Owners as an owner of the Property by this Agreement when compared to the Owner's 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 3 - investment in the land costs, public improvement costs, and construction costs of the Project is de minimus, comprising less than two percent (2%) of the total project cost. C. The City further finds and declares that the City has not retained nor will it retain a proprietary interest in the Property. D. The City further finds and declares that the City is not making any monetary contribution to the Project because the money advanced is money which the Owners would eventually be entitled to under the Sales Tax Agreement and the Owners are paying a market rate of interest for the advance of the money. E. Therefore, based on the above findings, the City and Owners, have determined that prevailing wages are not required to be paid on the anticipated public improvements nor on the private improvements, in accordance with Labor Code Sections 1720, et seq. F. Owners hereby represent to City that each understands and acknowledges the relationship of the sales tax reimbursement advance described in this Agreement and the potential impact on the application of prevailing wages to public improvements on the Property and development on the Property. Accordingly, Owners on behalf of themselves and their successors in interest, hereby expressly and knowingly waive their respective rights under Labor Code Sections 1726 and 1781 to seek recovery against the City of any prevailing wage liabilities they may incur based upon this Agreement. Owners hereby acknowledges that they have either consulted with legal counsel, or had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel, regarding the provisions of the California Civil code section 1542, which provides as follows: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor" Owners acknowledges that they may have claims which are presently unknown and unsuspected, and such claims in the future. Nevertheless, Owners herby acknowledge that this Agreement has been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that situation, and hereby expressly waive any and all rights which they may have under California Civil Code Section 1542, or under any statute or common law or equitable principal of similar effect. 5. Representations and Agreements of Owners Concerning Use of Property. a. Owners individually hereby agree on behalf of themselves and their successors and assigns, that neither said Owners nor Owners' lessee or licensee on the Property shall be a Vehicle Dealer or Big Box Retailer that is Relocating from the territorial jurisdiction of one Local Agency to the territorial jurisdiction of another Local Agency but within the same Market Area. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the Development Agreement, and specifically Section 3.1.2.1.1. of the Development Agreement, certain parcels were identified as suitable for employee parking and new car storage, which may be utilized by existing Vehicle Dealers who selling new vehicles in the City of Temecula. 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 4 - b. As used in this section, "Vehicle Dealer" is defined in Government Code Section 53084 and means a retailer that is also a dealer as defined by Section 285 of the Vehicle Code. C. As used in this Section "Big box retailer" is defined in Government Cede Section 53084 and means a store of greater than 75,000 square feet of gross buildable area that will generate sales or use tax pursuant to the Bradley -Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1.5 (commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code). d. As used in this Section "Local agency" is defined in Government Code Section 53084 and means a chartered or general law city, a chartered or general law county, or a city and county. "Local agency" does not include a redevelopment agency that is subject to Section 33426.7 of the Health and Safety Code. e. As used in this Section "Market area" is defined in Government Code Section 53084 and means a geographical area that is described in independent and recognized commercial trade literature, recognized and established business or manufacturing policies or practices, or publications of recognized independent research organizations as being an area that is large enough to support the location of the specific vehicle dealer or the specific big box retailer that is relocating. With respect to a vehicle dealer, a "market area" shall not extend further than 40 miles, as measured by the most reasonable route on roads between two points, starting from the location from which the vehicle dealer is relocating and ending at the location to which the vehicle dealer is relocating. With respect to a big box retailer, a "market area" shall not extend further than 25 miles, as measured by the most reasonable route on roads between two points, starting from the location from which the big box retailer is relocating and ending at the location to which the big box retailer is relocating. f. As used in this Section 'Relocating" is defined in Government Code Section 53084 and means the closing of a vehicle dealer or big box retailer in one location and the opening of a vehicle dealer or big box retailer in another location within a 365-day period when a person or business entity has an ownership interest in both the vehicle dealer or big box retailer that has closed or will close and the one that is opening. "Relocating" does not mean and shall not include the closing of a vehicle dealer or big box retailer because the vehicle dealer or big box retailer has been or will be acquired or has been or will be closed as a result of the use of eminent domain. 6. Termination of Agreement. City may terminate this Agreement on ten (10) business days written notice to Owners, or their successors in interest in the Property, if any of the events described in Section 2 do not occur within the time required as described in Section 2. 7. Covenant Runs With Land. The covenants set forth in this Agreement shall be covenants running with the land and shall be binding upon the Property and any future owners of the Property, or portions thereof, and shall run to the benefit of the City, until this Agreement i s released or modified by the City. This Agreement and the covenants contained herein shall run with the land and shall be a burden upon the Property and shall be for the benefit of all real 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 5 - property owned or controlled by the City which is located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California. This instrument is intended to be a covenant running with the land and such intention shall be liberally construed in favor of the City. Owners each warrant and represent to the City that all actions necessary to make this Agreement binding upon its successors and assigns to the Property have been completed and that this is a legal and valid Agreement and is binding upon Owners, each of them, and their successors and assigns to the Property. 8. Indemnification. Owners agree to indemnify and hold harmless, the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees, agents and attorneys against all claims or proceedings by contractors or subcontractors or other persons against the indemnified parties alleging prevailing wage law violations or seeking payment of prevailing wages, or claims or proceedings by any persons to set aside, void or annul this Agreement (either directly or by way of answering the validation action) or alleging a violation of the Sales Tax Agreement, including costs of defense and attorney fees 9. Authority. Each party hereto represents and warrants to the other parties that it has the power and authority to enter into this Agreement, and that each person executing this Agreement on its behalf has been duly authorized so to act for and on behalf of such party. 10. Incorporation of Provisions Required by Law. Each provision and clause required by law to be inserted into this Agreement shall be deemed to be included herein, and this Agreement shall be read and enforced as though each such provision were included herein, it being specifically provided that if through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not inserted or is not correctly inserted, this Agreement shall be amended to make such insertion upon application by any party hereto. 11. Severability. Each section and provision of this Agreement is severable from each other provision, and if any provision or part hereof shall be declared invalid, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect. 12. Entire Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this Agreement embodies the entire agreement of the parties in relationship to the subject matter hereof, and that no other agreement or understanding, verbal or otherwise, relative to the subject matter hereof exists between the parties at the time of execution, and that this Agreement may be modified or amended only by writing signed by the duly authorized and empowered representatives of each and all of the parties hereto. 13. Notices. Any notices required or permitted to be served by any party upon the others shall be addressed to the respective parties as set forth below, or to such other address as shall be designated by proper notice given from time to time by the respective parties hereto: TO CITY: City of Temecula 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 Attn: City Manager Tel. No. (951) 694-6440 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 6 - TO NORTH PLAZA: TO REEVES: With a copy to: Peter M. Thorson, Esq. Richards, Watson & Gershon 355 South Grand Avenue, 40`h Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-1469 Tel. No. (213) 626-8484 Fax. No. (213) 626-0078 North Plaza LLC William Johnson, Managing Member 29400 Rancho California Road Temecula, Ca. Tel. No. (951) Fax. No. (951) 92591 Dick Kennedy and Gorden Romberger TO MEG: MEG Investments, a California general partnership Eric Gosch, General Partner C/o Rosenthal & Excell 1600 East Florida Ave., Suite 110 Hemet, Ca. 92544 Tel. No. (951) 658-2559 Fax. No. (951658-7690 TO GLENDORA Glendora Motorcars, Inc., a California corporation TO OREMOR Oremor Management and Investment Company, a California corporation R.J. Romero, President 1377 Kettering Loop Ontario, Ca. 91761 Tel. No. (951) 390-9898 Fax. No. (951) 390-0315 With a copy to: 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 7 - Penny Reeves, Esq. Manning, Leaver, Burder, & Berberich 5750 Wilshire Bl., Suite 655 Los Angeles, Ca. 90036 Tel. No. (323) 937-4730 Fax. No. (323) 937-6727 TO DCH DCH Investments Inc. (California), a California corporation Mr. George Liang, Senior Vice President 1815 West Redondo Beach Bl. Gardena, Ca. 90247 Tel. No. Fax. No. With a copy to: Robert W. Schroeder, Esq. Schroeder, Comis, Nelson & Kahn 300 Esplanade Drive, Ste. 1170 Oxnard, Ca. 93036 Tel. No. (805) 604-4100 Fax. No. (805) 604-4150 TO DAVIDSON Davidson Enterprises, LLC, a California limited liability company Dan Davidson, Manager 3150 Adams Riverside, Ca. 92504 Tel. No. (951) 353-0906 Fax. No. (951) 353-0845 With a copy to: Barry R. Fink, Esq. Saul Breskal, Esq. Christensen, Miller et al. 10250 Constellation Bl., 19`h Fl. Los Angeles, Ca. 90067 Tel. No. (310) 556-7844 Fax. No. (310) 556-2920 TO HINE The John A. Hine, Jr. Trust John A. Hine, Jr., Trustee 1545 Camino Del Rio South San Diego, Ca. 92108 Tel. No. (619) 682-3711 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 8 - Fax. No. (619) 297-6268 With a copy to: Robert J. Kolodny, Esq. Kolodny & Pressman 11975 El Camino Real No. 201 San Diego, Ca. 92130 Tel. No. (858) 453-0309 Fax. No. (858) 792-7008 Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 14. Applicable Law. This Agreement is made in the State of California under the laws of such State, and is to be so construed. 15. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its; contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 16. Financial Contract. This Agreement pertains to and affects the ability of the Agency to finance its statutory obligations and for all parties to finance and carry out the purposes of this Agreement and the goals of the Plan and is intended to be a Contract within the meaning of Government Code Section 53511. 17. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which, taken together, shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument. 18. Limitations on Owner Liability. The parties acknowledge that the Owners are each independent businesses and that following the Close of Escrow, a breach of this Agreement or a misrepresentation of any individual Owner shall result in liability only to that breaching or misrepresenting Owner, and shall not result in any joint and severable liability or termination of this Agreement with respect to any non -breaching or non -misrepresenting individual Owner. 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 9 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Attest: Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney NORTH PLAZA, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Name: William Johnson Title: Managing Member MEG INVESTMENTS, a California general partnership By: Name: Eric Gosch Title: General Partner 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 10 - GLENDORA MOTORCARS, INC., a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: OREMOR MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT COMPANY, a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: DCH INVESTMENTS (CALIFORNIA) INC., a California corporation By: _ Name: Title: 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 11 - By: _ Name: Title: DAVIDSON ENTERPRISES, LLC, a California limited liability company By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: THE JOHN A. HINE, JR TRUST, John A. Hine, Jr. Trustee 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 12 - DICK KENNEDY AND GORDEN L. ROMBERGER, AS TRUSTEES OF THE DONNA L. REEVES TRUST DATED JULY 25, 1990 Dick Kennedy, Trustee Gorden L. Romberger, Trustee 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 13 - State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary 759829.5 August 21, 2004 - 14 - State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary EXHIBIT "A" Description of Land APN Numbers: 92173004-2, 5-3, 6-4, 13-0, 14-1, 15-2 and 23-9 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AUGUST 24, 2004 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:41 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Roberts, Stone, and Washington ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were Assistant General Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Attorney Curley, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes I:KeIulirl_►17ti1[eP►i 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004 2 Award the Construction Contract for Project No. PW04-10CSD — Veterans' Memorial Project — RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Award a construction contract for Project No. PW04-10CSD — Veterans' Memorial Project — to SFM Constructors, Inc. in the amount of $160,000.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract; 2.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,000.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 2.3 Approve an appropriation in the amount of $40,000.00 from General Fund Capital Reserves to the Veterans' Memorial Project — Project No. PW04-10CSD. (Discussed under separate discussion; see page two.) RAMinutes. csd\082404 Acceptance of Landscape Easement Deeds from property owners within Tract Map Map No. 19872 — adiacent to Pechanga Parkway RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Accept 24 Landscape Easement Deeds from property owners within Tract Map No. 19872 — adjacent to Pechanga Parkway; 3.2 Authorize the City Clerk to record the Landscape Easement Deeds. MOTION: Director Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 3 (Item Nc. 2 was considered under separate discussion; see page 2.) The motion was seconded by Director Stone and electronic vote reflected unanimous. Consent Calendar Item No. 2 considered under separate discussion 2 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Award a construction contract for Project No. PW04-10CSD — Veterans' Memorial Project — to SFM Constructors, Inc. in the amount of $160,000.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract; 2.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,000.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 2.3 Approve an appropriation in the amount of $40,000.00 from General Fund Capital Reserves to the Veterans' Memorial Project — Project No. PW04-10CSD. For Director Stone, Community Services Director Parker advised that it is staff's goal to formerly dedicate the Veterans' Memorial at the Duck Pond on Veterans' Day, November 11, 2004, and that an invitation and a rendering of the memorial will be sent to Pennsylvania Avenue. In light of the artist's willingness to create miniature, bronze replicas of this memorial, Mr. Stone suggested that they be made available at the museum with proceeds to profit the museum. Commenting on the Veterans' of Foreign Wars efforts with the walkway pavers, Community Services Director Parker advised that 700 have been sold. Anticipating a huge participation, Director Naggar suggested that shuttling services be explored for this event. President Washington as well relayed his excitement with the completion of this memorial and commented on other possible festivities that will be coordinated for this event. MOTION: Director Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 3. The motion was seconded by Director Comerchero and electronic vote reflected unanimous. RAMinutes.csd1082404 DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No other comments. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comments. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:46 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 14, 2004, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chuck Washington, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] RAMinutes.csd\082404 3 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 PREPARED BY: Jason Simpson, Assistant Finance Director Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Community Services District for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004. Please see the attached financial statements for an analytical review of financial activity. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 And the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change; in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department Temecula Community Services District Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30. 2004 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Due from other funds Total assets Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Please note that these balances are unaudited Parks & Senice Service Recreation LevelB Level $ 1,175,134 $ 158,665 $ 399,212 110,846 14,474 33,355 85,000 $ 1,370,980 $ 173,139 $ 422,567 $ 599,075 $ 599,075 249 $ 127,509 249 127,509 771,905 172,890 295,058 771,905 172,890 295,058 $ 1,370,980 $ 173,139 $ 422,567 1 Temecula Community Services District Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Due from other funds Total assets Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Please note that these balances are unaudited Service Service Debt Level D Level R Service Total $ 5,766 $ 29,169 $ 2,266 $ 1,760,212 105,470 535 7 264,687 85,000 $ 111,236 $ 29,704 $ 2,273 $ 2,109,899 $ 85,000 6,103 91,103 $ 85,000 732,936 917,936 20,133 $ 29,704 $ 2,273 1,291,963 20,133 29,704 2,273 1,291,963 $ 111,236 $ 29,704 $ 2,273 $ 2,109,999 2 Temecula Community Services District Citywide Operations Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Yea Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Special tax $ 2,742,295 $ 2,733,775 $ 2,733,775 100% TCSD admin fee credit/"REST" 3,117,275 3,117,275 3,117,275 100% Recreation programs 810,000 809,594 809,594 100% Investment interest 15,000 4,325 4,325 29% (1) Miscellaneous 156,365 152,908 152,909 98% Operating transfer in Total Revenues 6,840,935 6,817,877 6,817,877 100% Expenditures Parks, medians and arterial street lighting 4,248,103 4,140,119 $ 32,315 4,172,434 98% Seniors 196,815 196,705 196,705 100% Community Recreation Center (CRC) 409,291 390,409 390,409 95% Recreation programs 692,138 637,526 23,048 660,574 97% Temecula Community Center (TCC) 147,890 144,469 447 144,916 98% Museum 196,825 175,577 5,000 180,577 92% Aquatics 434,800 424,126 424,126 98% Sports 206,065 182,753 192,753 89% Children's Museum 178,200 145,026 1,337 146,363 82% Operating transfers out 554,200 554,200 554,200 100% Total Expenditures 7,254,327 6,990,910 62,147 7,053,057 97% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (413,392) (173,033) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 944,938 944,938 $ 531,546 $ 771,905 Notes: 1) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates. Temecula Community Services District Service Level B Residential Street Lights Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Assessments Street lighting fees Miscellaneous Operating Transfer in Total Revenues Expenditures: Salaries & Wages Street lighting Miscellaneous Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 454,022 $ 459,556 101% 20,000 18,072 90% 1,000 1,106 111% 56,075 56,075 100% 531,097 534,809 101% 6,600 6,594 100% 533,090 462,526 87% 18,250 9,460 52% 557,940 478,580 86% (26,843) 56,229 116,661 116,661 $ 89,818 $ 172,890 4 Temecula Community Services District Service Level C Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Assessments Investment interest Plan check and inspections Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures: Salaries and wages Landscape mantenance Utilities Other expenditures Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget $ 988,935 $ 986.712 100% 4,000 3,173 79% 56,000 33,635 60% 400 758 190% 1,049,335 1,024,278 98% 230,165 215,581 94% 603,750 560,657 93% 220,850 220,842 100% 76,300 64,579 85% 1,131,065 1,061,659 94% (81,730) (37,381) 332,439 332,439 $ 250,709 $ 295,058 5 Temecula Community Services District Service Level D Refuse Collection, Recycling and Street Sweeping Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Assessments $ 3,375,938 $ 3,309,481 $ 3,309,481 98% Grants 38,024 20,499 20,499 54% (1) Investment interest 4,500 3,496 3,496 78% Recycling Program 5,000 5,000 5,000 100% Operating Transfer in 73,125 73,125 73,125 100% Total Revenues 3,496,587 3,411,601 3,411,601 98% Expenditures Salaries and wages 36,100 34,828 34,828 96% Refuse hauling 3,375,940 3,383,806 3,383.806 100% Other expenditures 60,069 45,440 $ 7,250 52,690 88% Total Expenditures 3,472,109 3,464,074 7,250 3,471,324 100% Revenues Overl(Under) Expenditures 24,478 (52,473) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 72,606 72,606 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 97,084 $ 20,133 Notes: 1) The variance in Grant revenue is due to timing of the receivables. 6 Temecula Community Services District Service Level R Streets and Roads Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Assessments Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Emergency street maintenance Other expenditures Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget $ 12,754 13,114 $ 13,114 103% 300 340 340 113% 13,054 13,454 13,454 103% 17,080 4,058 S 1,945 6,003 35% (1) 80 80 80 100% 17,160 4,138 1,945 6,083 35% (4,106) 9,316 20,387 20,387 $ 16,281 $ 29,704 Notes: 1) The variance is due to a decrease in Emergency Street Maintenance repairs during the fiscal year. 7 Temecula Community Services District Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Operating transfers in $ 498,125 $ 498,125 $ 100% Investment interest 20,000 502 3% (1) Total Revenues 518,125 498,627 96% Expenditures: Debt service - principal Debt service - interest Other expenditures Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 225,000 225,000 100% 268,625 268,625 100% 4,500 3,850 86% 498,125 497,475 100% 20,000 1,152 1,121 1,121 $ 21,121 $ 2,273 Notes: 1) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates and low cash balances. 8 ITEM 3 APPROVAL I��j��� CITYATTORNEY ii ������vv DIRECTOR OF FINA CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services, DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Tract Map No. 26828-1, -2 and Final - Service Level B, Proposed Residential Street Lighting; Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance and Service Level D, Refuse and Recycling Collection Services Rates and Charges PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst iQ;'� RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2004 REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NOS. 26828-1, -2 AND FINAL IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION. 2. Approve the Election Notice, Ballot, and Procedures for the Completion, Return and Tabulation of the Ballots. 3. Authorize staff to mail the ballots to the affected property owners pursuant to the aforementioned process. BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) operates under the authority of Community Services District Law and provides residential street lighting services, perimeter and slope maintenance, and refuse/recycling collection services to numerous residential subdivisions within the City of Temecula through Service Levels B, C and D. Rdsn ithb\E1ectiomU6828 Election\Staff-Notice of ElectionAoc 09/032004 Pursuant to the request of the property owner, staff has initiated proceedings to assume the responsibility for long-term residential street lighting services, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and refuse/recycling collection services within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final beginning Fiscal Year 2005-2006. On July 13, 2004 and in accordance with Proposition 218, the Board of Directors adopted the resolution of intention to file the levy report on lots 1-35 within Tract Map No. 26828-1; lots 1-45 within Tract Map No. 26828-2 and lots 1-50 within Tract Map No. 26828. The Notice of Public Hearing was subsequently mailed to the property owner identifying the proposed TCSD Rates and Charges for each affected parcel as follows: Service Level B $25.68 per residential parcel Service Level C $70.00 per residential parcel Service Level D $180.70 per occupied residential parcel At tonight's Public Hearing, the Board of Directors must hear and consider all objections or protests to the levy report for Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final and the proposed rates and charges. If the property owner presents a written protest, the Board must reject the proposed fee and abandon any further proceedings. In this instance, a homeowner's association would be required to assume the street lighting and perimeter landscape maintenance responsibilities. However, if the property owner does not submit a written protest against the proposed rates and charges, the Board of Directors may then adopt the proposed fee subject to an election requiring a majority approval of the affected property owners. In this instance, the Board of Directors can order and call an election for November 3, 2004, and authorize staff to proceed with mailing a notice: and ballot to the property owner of Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final, a copy of which is attached for your review. Pursuant to the ballot process, staff is also recommending the approval of the attached Procedures for the Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots. The ballot procedure explains the process for completion, return and tabulation of the ballot and will be included as part of the mailed ballot documents. The ballot can only be completed by the property owner of each parcel. In order to be counted, the ballot must be completed in compliance with these procedures and returned to the: City Clerk/District Secretary prior to 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004. The City Clerk/District Secretary will open the ballot on November 3, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. in the Main Conference Room in City Hall. The results of the election shall be announced by the City Clerk/District Secretary at that time, and presented to the Community Services District for formal certification at it's meeting on November 23, 2004. FISCAL IMPACT: In the event that the Board of Directors calls for an election, staff will prepare the notices, ballot and election procedures in-house. If approved, upon build -out of the development, the proposed rates and charges of $25.68 and $70.00 per parcel will generate an annual levy of $3,338.40 and $9,100.00 respectively, for the Service Level B and Service Level C maintenance programs. The proposed Service Level D charge of $180.70 per parcel will generate an annual levy of $23,491.00. Asper the contractual agreement with CR&R„ Inc., the City franchised trash/recycling hauler, this rate shall be adjusted with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and Riverside County Tip Fee. Pursuant of Proposition 218, these amounts may be increased by the TCSD only after conducting a public hearing, however, mailed ballot proceedings are not required to increase Service Level D rates and charges. Actual costs for providing long-term residential :street lighting and perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance services within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final will be absorbed into Service Level B and Service Level C upon installation of said improvements. Rasnmhb\E1ections\26828 Election\Smff-Notice of Election.doc 09/032004 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution Calling and Noticing the Election and Exhibits. 2. Procedures for Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots. 3. Vicinity Map RAstnithb\Elections\26828 Eleaion\$aff-No[ice of Elecdon.doc 09/03/2004 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2004 REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NOS. 26828-1, -2 AND FINAL IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES, DECLARES, DETERMINES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, effective December 1, 1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ('TCSD"), to provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction. Section 2. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for services furnished by it, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, property taxes collected within the TCSD in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. Section 3. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, the TCSD caused a written report ('Report") to be prepared and filed by the Secretary of the TCSD, which Report contains a description of each parcel of real property within Tract Mao Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final and the proposed amount of the rates and charges against each parcel for fiscal year 2005-2006. The Report containing the proposed rates and charges is attached hereto as Exhibit A, entitled 'Project Summary," and incorporated herein by this reference. A copy of the Report is on file in the office of the Secretary of the TCSD, and is available for public inspection. Section 4. By previous resolution, the Board of Directors acknowledged the filing of the Report, and appointed a time and place for a public hearing on the Report and the proposed rates and charges. Notice of the public hearing was mailed and published as required by law and affidavits of publication and mailing are on file with the Secretary of the TCSD. Section 5. On September 14, 2004, the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing on the Report and the proposed rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of Directors heard and considered all oral and written objections, protests and comments by any interested person concerning the Report, the proposed rates and charges, and the method of collection of such rates and charges. RAsmift Elections\26828 Election\Reso-Election.DOC Section 6. The Board of Directors hereby finds and determines that, based on the Report and the District budget, the rates and charges as set out on Exhibit A do not exceed the reasonable cost of the services to be provided by the TCSD within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final for fiscal year 2005-2006. Section 7. The Board of Directors hereby finds and determines that written protests have not been filed by a majority of owners of identified parcels. The Board of Directors hereby overrules any and all objections and protests and adopts the rates and charges for fiscal year 2005-2006 as set out on Exhibit A for the services to be provided by the TCSD for fiscal year 2005-2006. Section 8. The TCSD shall collect such rates and charges at the same time and in the same manner and by the same persons as, together with and not separately from, the property taxes collected within the TCSD. These rates and charges shall be delinquent at the same time and thereafter be subject to the same delinquency penalties as such property taxes. All laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund and redemption, are applicable to these rates and charges, except for California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 4831. However, if for the first year the charge is levied, the real property to which the charge relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and attaches thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes appear on the roll, then the charge shall not result in a lien against the property, but instead shall be transferred to the unsecured roll for collection. Section 9. If a property owner subject to these rates and charges questions the classification of the owner's property for fiscal year 2005-2006, or claims that an error has been made with respect to the implementation of the rates and charges or the application of the rates and charges to the owner's property for that fiscal year, such property owner must appeal the levy by filing an appeal with the Secretary of the TCSD before 5:00 p.m. on December 1, 2005, pursuant to procedures established by the TCSD, in order to be considered under the appeal of classification or correction of errors program. Section 10. If a property owner subject to these rates and charges believes that payment of the rates and charges for fiscal year 2005-2006 would create a hardship for that property owner during that fiscal year, such property owner must appeal the levy by filing a hardship appeal with the Secretary of the TCSD before 5:00 p.m. on December 1, 2005, pursuant to procedures established by the TCSD, in order to be considered under the hardship appeal program. Section 11. The Secretary of the TCSD is hereby ordered to transmit or cause to be transmitted to the County Auditor of the County of Riverside, California before August 10, 2005 the Report and the property tax roll with such rates and charges enumerated for each parcel not exempt there from; and the County Auditor is hereby designated, required, empowered, authorized, instructed, directed and ordered to make collection of all such rates and charges as shown on that roll and to perform any and all duties necessary therefore. RSsmithbTlectionst26828 Election\Reso-Election.DOC - 2 - Section 12. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the levy and collection of these rates and charges is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and Section 15273 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the rates and charges are necessary to maintain existing improvements within the TCSD. Section 13. The Secretary of the TCSD shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Section 14. The Service Level B and Service Level C rates and changes adopted by this resolution shall take effect only if they are approved by a majority of the property owners of the property subject to the rates and charges voting at an election to be held on November 3, 2004. The Board of Directors hereby calls said election and orders that said election be conducted as a mail ballot election pursuant to the requirements of Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California State Constitution. Section 15. The notice and ballot to be submitted to the property owners shall be substantially in the form attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Section 16. The Board of Directors hereby approves the Procedures for the Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots ('Ballot Procedures") presented to the Board at this meeting and directs such procedures be placed on file in the office of the Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District and open to public inspection. Section 17. All ballots must be received by the Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District no later than 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided in the Ballot Procedures. Section 18. The Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District is hereby authorized to canvass the returns of the election. The officers and staff of the Temecula Community Services District are hereby authorized and directed to take such further action as may be necessary or appropriate in preparing for and conducting the election. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District this 14th day of September, 2004. R:\smithb\E1ections\26828 Election\Reso-Election.DOC -3- Chuck Washington, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMS, District Secretary, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 04- was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at the regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of September, 2004, by the following vote of the Board of Directors. AYES: DIRECTORS: NOES: DIRECTORS: ABSENT: DIRECTORS: ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] RAsmithbTlections\26828 Election\Reso-Election.DOC - 4 - Exhibit A PROJECT SUMMARY CITY OF TEMECULA TRACT MAP NO. 26828-1,-2 and Final INITIAL LEVY REPORT Service Levels B, C and D Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) Commencing Fiscal Year 2005-2006 INTENT MEETING: July 13, 2004 PUBLIC HEARING: September 14, 2004 INTRODUCTION: A. The TCSD Since December 1, 1989, the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD") has provided residential street lighting, perimeters landscaping and slope maintenance, refuse and recycling collection and other services to properties within its jurisdiction. The boundary of the TCSD is coterminous with the boundary of the City of Temecula ("Cit:�'). To fund its services and maintain improvements within its boundaries, the TCSD collects rates and charges ("Charges"). The TCSD was formed, and Charges are set and established, pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Title 6, Division 3 of the California Government Code. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting (Service Level B), perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance (Service Level C), refuse/recycling collection (Service Level D), and road improvement and maintenance (Service Level R) services furnished by the TCSD, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. As required by these sections of the Government Code, the TCSD Board approves an Annual Levy Report each year describing the proposed rates and charges for that year. B. This Report This Initial Levy Report ("Report") is prepared and presented to the Board pursuant to Section 61621.2 of the Government Code to prescribe Rates and Charges beginning in FY 2005-2006 for the parcels and territory identified as Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final. The territory identified and described in this Report includes all parcels within the Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final, a future residential subdivision that consists of 35.5 gross acres of vacant property located to the north of Nicolas Road and west of Seraphina Road, with 130 planned residential units. The owner of record (sole property owner) has requested that the TCSD establish the parcel charges necessary to provide ongoing revenue for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and refuse/recycling collection services within this future residential subdivision. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS F41 N Period Covered By Report This Report describes rates and charges to be imposed for Fiscal Year 2005-2006. The expectation of the TCSD is that these rates and charges will continue to be imposed on an annual basis thereafter in connection with the TCSD's annual rate and charge levy proceedings. Parcels Affected By This Report The rates and charges set forth in this Report shall affect all parcels included on Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final, recorded as follows: 26828-1 Book 318 Pages 97-100 Document # 2002-247817 26828-2 Book 319 Pages 1-4 Document # 2002-247842 26828 Book 319 Pages 5-9 Document #2002-247844 Description of Service Levels The proposed services to be provided to parcels within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final include: residential street lighting; perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance; and refuse/recycling collection. Service Level B, Residential Street Lighting — includes all developed single family residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD provides on -goring servicing, operation, and maintenance of local street lighting improvements. The rate and charge for Service Level B for Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final for Service Level B is 25.68 per year which will generate annual revenue of $3,338.40. Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance — includes all developed single family residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD provides on -going servicing, operation, and maintenance of perimeter landscaped areas and slopes within the public right-of-ways and dedicated easements adjacent to and associated with each development. The landscaped areas associated with this particular development include, but are not limited to, perimeter slope and landscaping, as follows: Within Tract 26828-1, the area behind the rear walls of the residential lots 18 through 35 to and including the Seraphina Road and Rita Way right of way. Within Tract 26828-2 the area behind residential lots 1 and 2 rear wall to the project boundary at Joseph Road. Also within Tract Map No. 26828-2 the area behind the rear walls on the east side of lots 24 and 25 to and including Seraphina Road right of way. Within Tract 26828, the area behind the rear walls on the east side of lots 20, 21, 32, 33, 44 and 45 to and including the Seraphina Road right of way. The cost of providing these services for these areas of slopes and landscaping is estimated to be $9,100.00 per year. Service Level D, Refuse and Recycling Services — provides for the operation and administration of the refuse/recycling collection program including street sweeping services for all single-family residential homes within the TCSD. The current cost: of providing these services to single family residential homes for Fiscal Year 2004-200:5 is $180.70 per year. This rate will be adjusted on an annual basis as per a contractual agreement between the City and CR&R, Inc the City of Temecula's franchised hauler. As per this agreement change to the rate are based on the previous year's CPI and Riverside County Waste Management's tipping fee rate at the County landfills. Thus, the cost of providing this service to the 130 parcels that will be identified as developed with a residential home within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final, based on FY 2004-2005 rate would be $23,491.00 per year. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The cost to provide services within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final will be fairly distributed among each assessable property by the same methods and formulas applied to all parcels within the various Service Levels of the TCSD. The following is the formula used to calculate each property's TCSD charges and is applied to Service Level B (Residential Street Lighting); Service Level C (Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance); and Service Level D (Refuse/Recycling Collection): Total Balance to Levy/Total Parcels (in Service Level) = Parcel Charge The following table reflects the levy calculation for each Service Level. TABLE Proposed Service Level Charges For Tract Map No. 26828-1, -2 and Final Estimated Budget and Char¢es for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 SERVICE LEVEL Total Levy Planned Charge Per Budget Levy Units Levy Unit Service Level B: Residential Street Lighting $3,338.40 130 $25.68 Service Level C: Local Landscaping and Slopes $9,100.00 130 $70.00 Rate Level #5 (C-5) Service Level D: $23,491.00 130 $180.70* Refuse/recycling Collection *Based of FY 2004-2005 rate. The following tables (Table II through IV) show the methodology used to compute the levy for each parcel affected by this Report. TABLE II Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level B Property Type Parcel Charge Multiplier Single family residential $25.68 Per Parcel Single family vacant $25.68 Per Parcel A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open space areas, easements and non -buildable parcels are not charged. TABLE III Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level C Property Type Parcel Charge Multiplier Single family residential $70.00 Per Parcel Single family vacant $70.00 Per Parcel A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open space areas, easements and non -buildable parcels are not charged. TABLE IV Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level D Property Type Parcel Charge Multiplier Single family residential $180.70 Per Parcel This charge is imposed only on developed single-family residential parcels (with a residential home). This rate is for FY 2004-2005 and will change for FY 2005-2006. APPENDIX A — PARCEL LISTING (FY 2005-2006) The actual parcels subject to rates and charges for Service Level B, Service Level C .and Service Level D beginning Fiscal Year 2005-2006 shall be those parcels within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final identified on the Riverside County Secured Roll at the time all TCSD rates and charges are submitted to the County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the tax roll for that fiscal year. The rates and method of apportionment outlined in this Report are consistent with the rates and methods previously approved by the TCSD Board of Directors for each applicable Service Level contained herein. However, all rates and methods described in this Report are subject to revision and modification within the prescribed parameters: of the law. The actual rates and charges applied on the tax roll each fiscal year shall be apportioned and submitted according to the rates and method described in the final TCSD Annual Levy Report presented and approved by the Board of Directors at an annual Public Hearing. The following pages encompass a complete listing of all parcels within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final subject to the TCSD Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D rates and charges beginning Fiscal Year 2005-2006. This listing shows the rate and charge that will be charged to each parcel based on development with a single family residential unit. The rates and charges applied to each newly subdivided residential parcel will reflect the services provided and the development of each respective parcel at the time the rates and charges are applied. Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Rates and Charges Tract 26828-1 Lot No. Svc Level B Svc Level C Svc Level D Total 1 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 2 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 3 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 4 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 5 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 6 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 7 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 8 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 9 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 10 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 11 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 12 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 13 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 14 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 15 1 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 16 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 17 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 18 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 19 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 20 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 21 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 22 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 23 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 24 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 25 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 26 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 27 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 28 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 29 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 30 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 31 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 32 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 33 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 34 $25.68 1 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 35 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 Tract Total $898.80 $2,450.00 $6,324.50 $9,673.30 Tract26828-2 Lot No. Svc Level B Svc Level C Svc Level D Total 1 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 2 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 3 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 4 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 5 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 6 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 7 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 8 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 9 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 10 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 11 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 12 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 13 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 14 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 15 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 16 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 17 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 18 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 19 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 20 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 21 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 22 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 23 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 24 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 25 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 26 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 27 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 28 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 29 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 30 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 31 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 32 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 33 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 34 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 35 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 36 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 37 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 38 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 39 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 40 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 41 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 42 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 43 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 44 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 45 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 Tract Total $1,155.60 $3,150.00 $8,131.50 $12,437.10 Tract 26828 Lot No. Svc Level B Svc Level C Svc Level D Total 1 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 2 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 3 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 4 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 5 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 6 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 7 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 8 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 9 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 10 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 11 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 12 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 13 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 14 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 15 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 16 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 17 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 18 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 19 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 20 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 21 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 22 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 23 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 24 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 25 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 26 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 27 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 28 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 29 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 30 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 31 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 32 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 33 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 34 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 35 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 36 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 37 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 38 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 39 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 40 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 41 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 42 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 43 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 44 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 45 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 See next page 46 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 47 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 48 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 49 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 50 $25.68 $70.00 $180.70 $276.38 Tract Total $1,284.00 $3,500.00 $9,035.00 $13,819.00 Development Total $3,338.40 $9,100.00 $23,491.00 $35,929.40 All lot numbers are by reference to: Tract Map No. 26828-1 as recorded by the Riverside County Office Recorder No. 2002- 247817 recorded on May 10, 2002. Tract Map No. 26828-2 as recorded by Riverside County Office Recorder No. 2002- 247842 recorded on May 10, 2002. Tract Map No. 26828 as recorded by Riverside County Office Recorder No. 2002-247844 recorded on May 10, 2002. "Rates for Service Level D for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 may be increased by further action of the City Council. EXHIBIT B (1 OF 2) NOTICE OF ELECTION PROPOSED SERVICE LEVELS B AND C RATESAND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAI? NOS. 26828-1, 26828-2 AND 26828 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006. Pursuant to the request of the residents, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has initiated proceedings to assume maintenance of perimeter landscaping and slope areas within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final beginning with the Fiscal Year 2005-2006. Pursuant to this request, and pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, the TCSD caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and filed with the Secretary of the TCSD, which contains a description of each parcel of property to be charged for this maintenance and the proposed amount of the maintenance charge for each parcel for Fiscal Year 2005-2006. The proposed Service Level B rate and charge against each of the above -mentioned parcels within Tract Map Nos. 26828-1, -2 and Final beginning Fiscal Year 2005-2006 is $25.68. The proposed levy rate of $25.68 per parcel provides revenue for residential street lighting services within this subdivision. The proposed Service Level C rate and charge against each of the parcels beginning Fiscal Year 2005-2006 is $70.00. The proposed levy rate of $70.00 per parcel provides revenue for the maintenance of perimeter landscaping and slope areas within this subdivision. This amount was calculated by dividing the total estimated maintenance cost upon build -out of the development $9,100.00 by the total number of single-family residential parcels within the subdivision. On September 14, 2004 the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing on the Report and the proposed Service Levels B and C rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of Directors heard and considered all objections or protests to the Report and to the proposed rates and charges. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board determined that written protests against the proposed fees were presented by less than a majority of owners of the parcels on which the proposed fees were to be imposed, and levied the rates and charges subject to approval by the property owners subject to the proposed rates and charges. The Board of Directors encourages you to return the enclosed ballot indicating whether you support or oppose the proposed Service Levels B or C rates and charges. Ballots may be mailed to the City Clerk/District Secretary at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, or otherwise delivered to the City Clerk/District Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590 no later than 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004. The proposed Service Levels B and C rates and charges will be abandoned if the ballot is not returned in favor of the proposed rates and charges. In the event the proposed charges are abandoned, the property owners will continue to assume responsibility for perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance services within their property boundaries. Enclosed is your ballot and the District's Procedures for the completion, return and tabulation of Ballots. Please consult these Procedures for details regarding the ballot process. You may also contact the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office at (909) 694-6444; by mail, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033; or in person, at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590, for further information regarding this matter. RAsmithb\E1ections\26828 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 09/03/2004 EXHIBIT B (2 OF 2) OFFICIAL BALLOT TRACT NO. 26828-1, -2 and Final TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING SERVICES AND PERIMETER AND SLOPE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PROPERTY: ❑ YES, I approve of the proposed All parcels within Tract Map 26828-1, -2 annual levy of $25.68 for Service and Final recorded in the Office of the Level B and $70.00 for Service County Recorder of Riverside County Level C against each parcel identified on this ballot. OWNER: ❑ NO, I do not approve of the Ms. Lisa Gordon - President proposed annual levy of $25.68 for Service Level B and $70.00 for Richmond American Homes of California, Service Level C against each parcel Inc. identified on this ballot. 100 East San Marcos Blvd., Suite 100 San Marcos, CA 92069 I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury that I am the record owner, or the authorized representative of the record owner, of the parcels identified above. Signature Print Name Date CHECK ONLY ONE BOX. BALLOTS MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK AND RETURNED TO THE CITY CLERK/DISTRICT SECRETARY AT THE CITY OF TEMECULA, P.O. BOX 9033/43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, 92589-9033 PRIOR TO 1:30 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 2004. RdsmithbMections\26828 Elwion\Ballot Fom1.DOC 09/03/2004 ATTACHMENT 2 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PROCEDURES FOR THE COMPLETION, RETURN, AND TABULATION OF BALLOTS I. Completion of Ballots * Who may complete a ballot A ballot may be completed by the owner of the parcel to be charged. As used in these Procedures, the term "owner" includes the owner's authorized representative. If the owner of the parcel is a partnership, joint tenancy, or tenancy in common, a ballot may be completed by any of the general partners, joint tenants, or tenants in common. Only one ballot may be completed for each parcel. * Duplicate ballots If a ballot is lost, destroyed or never received, the City Clerk/District Secretary will provide a duplicate ballot to the owner upon receipt of a request in writing to the City Clerk, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, or otherwise delivered to the City Clerk/District Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. The duplicate ballot will be marked to show the date on which the ballot was provided and to identify it as a duplicate ballot. * Marking and signing the ballot To complete a ballot, the owner of the parcel must (1) mark the appropriate box supporting; or opposing the proposed rate and charge, and (2) sign, under penalty of perjury, the statement on the ballot that the person completing the ballot is the owner of the parcel or the owner's authorized representative. Only one box may be marked on each ballot. Ballots must be completed in ink. * Only ballots provided by the District will be accepted The District will only accept ballots mailed or otherwise provided to owners by the District. Photocopies, faxes, and other forms of the ballot will not be accepted. II. Return of Ballots * Who may return ballots A ballot may be returned by the owner of the parcel or by anyone authorized by the owner to return the ballot. R:\sm1thb\E1ecUOnst26828 Election\8allot NoUce and Prooedures.doc 09/03/2004 * Where to return ballots Ballots may be mailed to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, (the District has provided a return postage -paid envelope). Ballots may also be delivered in person to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Ballots may not be returned by fax. * When to return ballots All returned ballots must be received by the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office prior to 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004. The City Clerk/District Secretary will stamp on the ballot the date of its receipt. * Withdrawal of ballots After returning a ballot to the District, the person who signed the ballot may withdraw the ballot by submitting a written request in person to the City Clerk/District Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Such request must be received by the City Clerk/District Secretary prior to 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004. If any ballot has been withdrawn, the person withdrawing the ballot may request a duplicate ballot. The City Clerk/District Secretary will retain all withdrawn ballots and will indicate on the face of such ballots that they have been withdrawn. III. Tabulation of Ballots * Which ballots will be counted Only ballots which are completed and returned in compliance with these procedures will be counted. Ballots received by the City Clerk/District Secretary after 1:30 p.m. on November 3, 2004 will not be counted. Ballots which are not signed by the owner will not be counted. Ballots with no boxes marked, or with more than one box marked, will not be counted. Ballots withdrawn in accordance with these procedures will not be counted. The City Clerk/District Secretary will keep a record of each duplicate ballot provided to an owner and will verify, prior to counting any duplicate ballot, that only one ballot has been returned for the parcel. If a non -duplicate ballot has been returned, the District will count the non -duplicate ballot and disregard all duplicate ballots. If only duplicate ballots have been returned, the District will count the earliest provided duplicate ballot and disregard the later provided duplicate ballots. R:\smithb\Elections\26828 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 09/03/2004 » How ballots will be tabulated Ballots may be counted by hand, by computer or by any other tabulating device. * Who will tabulate ballots Ballots will be tabulated by the City Clerk/District Secretary. * When and where will the ballots be tabulated Ballots will be opened and tabulated on Monday, November 3, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. in the Main Conference Room at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590. This process is open to the general public. * Results of tabulation The results of the tabulation will be announced following the completion of the tabulation and entered in the minutes of the next Board of Directors meeting November 9, 2004. IV. Resolution of Disuutes In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is the owner of the parcel to which the ballot applies, the District will make such determination from the last equalized assessment roll and any evidence of ownership submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary. The District will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to ownership of property and the District's determination of ownership will be final and conclusive. In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is an authorized representative of the owner of the parcel, the District may rely on the statement on the ballot, signed under penalty of perjury, that the person completing the ballot is the owner's authorized representative and any evidence submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary. The District will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to whether the signer of the ballot is an authorized representative of the owner and the District's determination will be final and conclusive. V. General Information For further information, contact the City Clerk/District Secretary at (909) 694-6444; by mail, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033; or in person, at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. R:\smithb\E1ections\26828 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 09/03/2004 MURRIETA ATTACHMENT 3 T G�N�Pp,L SPANN 1 ITY OF TEMECULA DUUNUAN T SERAPHINA ROAD PROJECT SITE RITA WAY JOSEPH ROAD . FINBROOK ROAD CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY NORTH TRACT NO, 26828-1, 26828-2 AND 26828 VTrTNTTY MAP REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUGUST 24, 2004 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:46 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, and Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Roberts, Stone, Washington, and Comerchero None Also present were Assistant Executive Director O'Grady, Assistant City Attorney Curley, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.2 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Roberts and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No additional comment. No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. RAMinutes.rda\082404 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:46 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 14, 2004 in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R: Minutes.rda1082404 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR _ CITY MANAGER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 PREPARED BY: Jason Simpson, Assistant Finance Director Pascale Brown. Senior Accountant RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members: 1. Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year June 30, 2004. 2. Approve an increase of $622,000 for Property Tax increment in the Debt Service Fund. 3. Approve an appropriation of $325,550 for Pass -through agreements in the Debt Service Fund. 4. Approve an appropriation of $55,200 for Debt Service Interest in the Debt Service Fund. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Redevelopment Agency for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004. Please seethe attached financial statements for an analytical review of financial activity. The additional budget request for Property Tax increment and Pass -through agreements is based upon final reconciliation by the County, Temecula's Property Tax increment ended higher due to an increase in property values from the development growth over the past year. As Tax Increment rises, so does our obligation to forward Pass -through funds to other agencies that the Redevelopment Agency has agreements with. The budget request for Debt Service Interest is a result of accrued interest from the 6ch Street Promissory Note which was reclassed to this fund at the end of last fiscal year. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated revenues and appropriation for Debt service Fund has no net impact. ATTACHMENTS: Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2004 And the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department Temecula Redevelopment Agency Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 2004 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Land held for resale Total assets Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Deferred revenue Totalliabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Undesignated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Please note that these balances are unaudited Low/Mod CIP Fund Pond Debt Service Total $ 8,209,567 $ 8,356,615 $ 2,724,429 $ 19,290,611 932,672 340,659 56,896 1,330,227 98,484 98,494 $ 9,142,239 $ 8,795,758 $ 2,781,325 $ 20,719,322 $ 132,413 $ 37,674 $ 1,512,203 $ 1,682,290 481,125 157,059 638,194 613,538 194,733 1,512,203 2,320,474 8,528,701 8,601,025 17,129,726 1,269,122 1,269,122 8,529,701 8,601,025 1,269,122 18,398,848 $ 9,142,239 $ 8,795,758 $ 2,781,325 $ 20,719,322 I City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency Low/Moderate Income Housing For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Revenues: Total Percent Encumbr. Activity of Budget Property tax increment $ 2,223,971 $ 2,379,316 $ 2,379,316 107% (1) Investment interest 186,000 128,040 128,040 69% (2) Rental income 30,000 30,000 30,000 100% Forgivable Loan RepaymenuMisc 201,000 287,117 287,117 143%(3) Reimbursment- Old Town Cottages 48,236 48,236 Total Revenues 2,640,871 2,872,709 2,872,709 109% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 246,685 244,449 244,449 99% Operating and administrative expenditures 389,716 274,437 $ 28,362 302,799 78% Homebuyer programs 300,000 23,922 23,922 8% (4) Residential rehabilitation programs 269,325 96,889 41,439 138,328 51%(5) Housing development & acquisition 6,099,036 2,395,741 2,395 741 39% (6) Affordable housing / future obligation 305,000 305,000 305,000 100% Total Expenditures 7,609,762 3,340,438 69,801 3,410,239 45% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (4,968,891) (467,729) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 9,996,430 8,996,430 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 4,027,539 $ 9,528,701 Notes: 1) Property tax increment were higher than expected during this fiscal year due to an increase in development. 2) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates. 3) The variance is due to several residential rehab program loan pay offs received during this fiscal year. 4) The variance in homebuyer programs is due to housing in this area is too expensive and most of the applicants do not meet the requirements to participate in the program. 5) The variance in Residential Rehab is due to a reduction in the number applicants qualifying for this program during this fiscal year. 6) The variance in Housing development is due to the Campus project that is not yet completed. 4 City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency-CIP For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Revenues: Investment interest Rental income Loan interest Gain on Assets Reimbursements Operating transfers in Total Revenues Capital projects: First Street bridge Old Town Building Fagades Gateway Landscape OT Erle Stanley Gardner Operating Expenditures: Salaries and wages Operating and administrative expenditures Owner participation agreements ERAF Old Town plan implementation Banner program Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YID Total percent Budget Activity Encund r. Activity of Budget $ 200,000 $ 127,716 $ 127,716 64% (1) 180,000 122,636 122,636 68% (2) 12,000 12,032 12,032 100% 95,431 95,431 10,000 69,630 69,630 696% (=) 1,021,700 1,021,700 1,021,700 100% 1,423,700 1,449,145 1,449,145 102% 280-807 92,566 92,562 92,562 100% 280-813 85,428 79,295 79,295 93% 280-833 193,349 10,865 $ 4,170 15,035 8% (4) 280-834 37,680 2,500 3,660 6,160 16% (5) 102,650 102,646 102,646 100% 340,580 315,609 5,800 321,409 94% 300,000 291,528 291,528 97% 446,000 445,334 445,334 100% 132,270 110,400 100 110,500 84% 2,080 2,075 2,075 100% 8,908,952 2,693,165 2,693,165 30% (6) 10,641,455 4,135,979 13,730 4,149,709 39% (9,217,755) (2,686,834) 11,287, 859 11,287,859 $ 2,070,104 $ 8,601,025 Notes: 1) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates. 2) The variance in rental income is due to the sale of the Noun Reeves Jefferson Street property in May of this fiscal year. 3) The variance is due to a reduction of funding of RDA Tabs in the amount $67,621 for the Children s Museum project. 4) The Gateway Landscape project was not started this fiscal year due to State approval of Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation(EEM) grant funding. 5) The Erle Stanley Gardner project is currently in plan check and constmetions is scheduled to begin next fiscal year. 6) The variance is due to Community Theater project which was started in Much 3, 2004 but not yet completed. 3 City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency - Debt Service For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Property tax increment $ 8,995,485 $ 9,517,262 107% (1) Investment interest 55,000 23,987 44% (2) Advances from other funds 65,000 Total Revenues 9,015,485 9,541,249 106% Expenditures: , Passthrough agreements 6,154,000 6,479,524 105% (3) Debt service - principal 95,000 95,000 100% Debt service - interest 1,385,795 1,440,940 104% (4) Trustees admin fees 5,500 4,600 84% Property Tax admin Fees 130,000 130,000 100°% Operating transfers out 1,000,000 1,000,000 100% Total Expenditures 9,770,295 9,150,064 104% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 245,190 391,185 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2003 977,937 877,937 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 2004 $ 1,123,127 $ 1,269,122 Notes: 1) Property tax increment were higher than expected during this fiscal year due to an increase in development. 2) Investment Interest was lower than expected during this fiscal year due to a decline in interest rates. 3) Passthrough agreements paid to the county were much higher than expected this fiscal year due to increase tax increment revenue. 4) The variance is due to 6th Street loan interest payment not included in the budget 4 ITEM 3 APPROVAL,, CITY ATTORNEY _ DIRECTOR OF FINAFFU= CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Executive Director/Agency Board FROM: John Meyer, Redevelopment Direct DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Temecula Education Center RECOMMENDATION: That the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04 - A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND AGK GROUP, LLC, EXTENDING THE INSPECTION DEADLINE FOR THE TEMECULA EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX BACKGROUND: On March 16, 2004 the Agency entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the AGK Group, LLC to develop the Temecula Education Complex. Section 3.12 of the DDA established a sixth month due diligence period to allow the developer to inspect the condition of the subject property. The investigation would typically include but not be limited to soils conditions, storm drainage utilities and archeological testing. This Section has an inspection deadline of September 16, 2004. Mr. Kading has requested a 90 day extension to December 16, 2004 in order to finalize his investigations. Preliminary results from these investigations suggest a second amendment to the DDA will likely be necessary. Archeological findings have decreased the usable area of the project site and soil conditions have forced Mr. Kading to consider alternative foundation designs for all the buildings. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no fiscal impacts associated with this amendment. Attachments: Resolutions First Amendment RAEduwtioncanpleztDDA First Amendment Staff RepW.doc RESOLUTION NO. RDA NO. 04-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND AGK GROUP, LLC, EXTENDING THE INSPECTION DEADLINE FOR THE TEMECULA EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. The approval of this First Amendment by the Agency constitutes an action by the Agency to extend the inspection deadline for the Temecula Educational Complex. Section 3.12 of the DDA established a sixth month due diligence period to allow the developer to inspect the condition of the property. The investigation would typically include but not be limited to soils conditions, storm drainage utilities and archeological testing. This Section has an inspection deadline of September 16, 2004. The developer has requested a 90 day extension to December 16, 2004 in order to finalize his investigation. Section 2. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "First Amendment to DDA and Promissory Note" between the Agency and AGK Group, LLC, with such changes in each document as may be mutually agreed upon by the Developer and the Executive Director as are in substantial conformance with the form of such Agreement which on file in the Office of the Agency Secretary. The Chairperson of the Agency is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement, including related exhibits and attachments on behalf of the Agency. A copy of the final Agreement when executed by the Agency Chairperson shall be placed on file in the Office of the Secretary of the Agency. Section 3. The Executive Director of the Agency (or his designee), is hereby authorized, on behalf of the Agency, to take all actions necessary and appropriate to carry out and implement the Agreement and to administer the Agency's obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed under the Agreement and related documents, including but not limited to the Promissory Note, Deed of Trust, Regulatory Agreement, acceptances, escrow instructions, certificates of completion and such other implementing agreements and documents as contemplated or described in the Agreement. Section 4. The Secretary of the Agency shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. R:\Educationcomplex\firstamendddaeducarda.DOC PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board ofDirectors of the Redevel- opment Agency of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 2004. Jeff Comerchero, Chairperson ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:\Educationcomplex\ftrstamendddaeducarda.DOC STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. RDA No. 04- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 10 day of September, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BOARDMEMBERS: NOES: BOARDMEMBERS: ABSENT: BOARDMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: BOARDMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary R:\Educationcomplex\fvstamendddaeducarda.DOC FIRST AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND AGK GROUP, LLC, EXTENDING THE INSPECTION DEADLINE FOR THE TEMECULA EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR PROPOSED EDUCATION FACILITY THIS 1stAMENDMENT is made and entered into as of September 14, 2003 by and between the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency, a municipal corporation "Agency" and AGK Group LLC, ("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 March 16, 2004 the Agency and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "Disposition and Development Agreement for the Temecula Education Center" (Agreement). B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 3.12. of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: Preliminary Soil Testing and Physical Condition Inspections. It is understood and agreed upon and between the parties hereto that Developer's acquisition of each subphase is subject to and conditioned upon its inspection of the Property, including, without limitation, soils conditions and the absence from the Property of Hazardous Substance. Promptly after the execution of this Agreement, Agency will deliver to Developer copies of material documents, reports, and correspondence in the Agency's possession that relate to the physical condition of the Properly. Until December 16, 2004, (the "Inspection Deadline"), Developer and its agents may enter upon the Property upon twenty-four (24) hour prior written notice sent to the Agency in order to investigate the physical condition of the entire Property; provided, however, that Agency's agent may request to be present during such inspections, and Developer shall reasonably accommodate Agency in arranging a mutually convenient inspection time so that Agency or Agency's agents may be present. It is understood and agreed that the right of Developer and Developer's agents to enter onto the Property is being given solely to Developer, and Developer shall be solely responsible for its agents and that such inspections and actions are being done to determine the condition of the Property and not with the intent to affect the Property's value. Such inspections shall include, but not be limited to, the condition of soils, storm drainage, utility hookups and archaeological testing. Developer shall indemnify, defend and hold Agency harmless from and against any claims whether by Developer, Developer's agents and employees, or by third parties resulting from Developer's entry upon or the conduction of any tests of the Property. If this Agreement is terminated or if escrow fails to close for any reason, Developer shall promptly restore the applicable Subphases not yet acquired by Developer to the same condition as existed prior to Developer's undertaking of any testing thereon. All studies and reports prepared in connection with Developer's inspection of the Property are to be done at the expense of Developer; provided, that Developer shall provide Agency with a copy of all of the reports without cost promptly upon receipt by Developer. Developer's obligations and duties hereunder shall survive and remain upon the completion of the closing or upon the termination of this Agreement for any reason. Developer, in its sole discretion, may elect to terminate this Agreement and cancel Escrow in the event any physical conditions are not reasonably acceptable to R:\Amendments\lsteducationamendment.doc Developer by giving written notice of such termination to Agency on or before the Inspection Deadline (as defined above), in which event Agency shall return the then-unapplied portion of the Deposit to Developer. 4. Except forthe changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:\Amendments\lsteducationamendment.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY M- Jeff Comerchero, Chairperson ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC, Agency Clerk Approved As to Form: L"V Peter M. Thorson, Agency Counsel CONSULTANT AGK Group, LLC 35411 Paseo Viento Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 Attn: Mr. Kading BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: R:\Amendments\lsteducationamendment.doc TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) R:\Amendments\lsteducationamendment.doc ITEM 10 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF A CITY MANAGER/ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council ,il, �� FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: An Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit & Development Plan), a proposal to develop a 24,287 square foot church facility on a 4.72 acre lot. PREPARED BY: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council ADOPT a Negative Declaration. 2. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON A 4.72 ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-050-017. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 1 BACKGROUND: On May 19, 2004, the Planning Commission concurred with the staff recommendation and passed a motion to approve a proposed 24,287 square foot Latter Day Saints Church facility and associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. A total of six individuals spoke in favor of the project and a total of fifteen individuals spoke in opposition. Issues raised by the opponents included traffic impacts, elimination of views, architectural style incompatibility, excessive building size and mass, noise impacts, quality of life impacts and some area residents understanding that the subject property was to be developed with residential uses. Subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing, staff has received additional correspondence both in support and opposition of the project. (See Attachment No. 7) APPEAL: On June 2, 2004, the Homeowners of Temecula, a group comprised of area residents, filed a formal appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (see Attachment 3). Five specific issues were cited, including improvements to an existing drainage ditch along the eastern property line, installation of driveway gates and hours of Closure, architectural style and building size incompatibility with surrounding area, hours of operation for youth dances and adequacy of screening along the eastern property line. Issue 1. Adjacent property owners question how the existing drainage ditch along the eastern property line will be improved? Analysis A six to eight foot grade difference currently exists between the subject property and the existing residences to the east. Moreover, a drainage easement and brow ditch exist at the toe of the slope along the eastern property line. At the public hearing, church representatives agreed to construct an 8' high CMU retaining wall between the church and the adjacent residences to the east. The retaining wall will enable the rear yards of the residences to be leveled off thereby creating a larger useable area. The Public Works Department has indicated that necessary drainage modifications/improvements associated with the proposed retaining wall have not yet been provided by the applicant's engineer. Condition of Approval No. 27 requires the developer to submit a drainage study which will address both onsite and offshe drainage concerns. The drainage study will be submitted and reviewed concurrently with the grading permit and will recommend how the existing flows along the west side of Lots 20 through 26 of Tract 22916- 1 will be picked up and conveyed to an appropriate outlet. Issue 2: The church has proposed to gate off the eastern property line during the overnight hours. Area residents are requesting that the western property line also be gated. Analysis Subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing, staff spoke with Mr. Rocky Snider, LDS Church project manager. Mr. Snider indicated that the church would have no objection to also constructing a gate at the western driveway and closing both gates from 10:00 p.m. thru 6:00 a.m. seven days a week. Issue 3: Area residents believe the size of the facility is too large for the neighborhood and that the colonial architectural style is incompatible with surrounding buildings in the area. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 2 Analysis After reviewing the staff report and project plans and after considering all public testimony, the Planning Commission determined that both the size of the facility and architectural style of the building are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood as conditioned. Issue 4: Area residents are requesting that proposed youth dance activities cease by 10:00 p.m. rather than 11:00 p.m. as approved by the Commission. Analysis After reviewing the staff report and considering all public testimony, the Planning Commission subsequently required the applicant to draft and conform to Youth Dance Operational Guidelines. In addition, the Commission required the church to have a reliable phone contact available seven days a week that area residents can contact should problems arise. Based on these requirements, the Commission determined that the operation of youth dances until 11:00 p.m. would be appropriate and compatible with the surrounding residences. Issue 5. Adjacent property owners to the east are requesting that larger trees be planted along the eastern property line so as to provide more immediate screening. Analysis Upon reviewing the conceptual landscape plan and the staff report, which listed the maturity rates for the proposed trees, the Commission determined that the trees were adequate to provide long term screening. Since the hearing, staff has worked with the City's landscape architect consultant to determine what modifications could be made to achieve more immediate screening. Should the Council wish to require more immediate screening, the consultant recommends that 24" box pepper trees be planted 15 feet on center along the entire length of the eastern property line along with groupings of 24" box Arizona Cypress. The pepper trees are faster growing than the cypress. Moreover, to achieve further screening, the consultant recommends that the size of all trees proposed along the east side of the church building be enlarged to 36" box to achieve quicker growth rates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning staff recommends that the City Council consider the whole administrative record before it, including all prior oral, written and graphic testimony and the testimony presented at the public hearing conducted on September 14, 2004 and, based upon their conclusions reached by the City Council after deliberations, adopt one of the two resolutions presented for its consideration, subject to any revisions which the City Council deems necessary or desirable." FINDINGS: The findings that staff anticipates the City Council will make arise from the existing administrative record. The existing evidence in the record would support the City Council acting either in support of the Planning Commission's decision or in support of the issues raised by the parties who have filed the appeal of the Planning Commission's action. This ability to assess the facts in different manners depends upon the City Council's analysis of the evidence that has been presented and the application of the General Plan's goals and policies, the evidence in the RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Sit Report.doc 3 administrative record and the further evidence obtained by and through the City Council's September 14, 2004 public hearing process. These resolutions should be revised to include Fny differences in the proffered findings that the City Council may deem necessary or desirable after its deliberations upon the entire record in this matter." ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution Denying the Appeal and Upholding the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve PA03-0027 — Blue Page 6 2. Draft Resolution Approving the Appeal and Overturning the Planning Commission Decision to Approve PA03-0027 — Blue Page 7 3. Appeal of Planning Application No. PA03-0027 — Blue Page 8 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-024 (Conditional Use Permit) — Blue Page 9 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-025 (Development Plan) — Blue Page 10 Approved Minutes from the May 19, 2004 Planning Commission — Blue Page 11 May 19, 2004 Planning Commission Staff Report — Blue Page 12 Additional Public Correspondence — Blue Page 13 RAC U Pt2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintslCC Appl Stf Report.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 5 RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON A 4.72 ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 955-050-017. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. Cornwall Associates Architects, filed Planning Application No. 03-0027, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan, for the property generally located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 955-050-017 ("Project"). B. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. C. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 2004-24 & 2004-25 approving a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Project. D. On September 14th, 2004, 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. E. On September 14`h, 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula denied an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan when it adopted Resolution No. 2004- Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in Sections 17.04.010.E and 17.05.010. F of the Temecula Municipal Code: Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.04.010.E.) A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC 1 The proposed Latter Day Saints Church facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan including Goal 1 which encourages "A complete and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses. The proposed multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms meet the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the Development Code. The church and associated facilities are conditionally permitted uses in the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zoning district and the development meets or exceed all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the General Plan. Traffic generated from the project will not decrease the level of service on adjacent roadways. Access locations are located away from property lines. Noise impacts will not exceed maximum thresholds. Public service demands will not be significantly impacted. The site has been designed to reduce impacts on adjacent residences with significant building setbacks and landscape buffers. The visual appearance of the facility and site is compatible with adjacent buildings and structures in terms of architectural design, height and scale. The facility has been reviewed by affected public service agencies and complies with applicable requirements. The proposed uses will be a complimentary addition to the area. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The project has been reviewed against the Very Low Density Residential (1/L) development standards identified in the Development Code. Church facilities are in conditionally permitted use in the VL zone and the development meets or exceeds all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. Additional yard widths and buffer areas have been incorporated into the project which integrates the use with existing uses in the neighborhood. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The proposed church facility will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Circulation and drive aisle widths will be adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. Moreover, the building will be constructed in conformance with all applicable fire and life safety code requirements. R:\C U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC 2 E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the City Council at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the City Council renders their decision. F. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan, and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential (VL) Zoning District located in the Development Code including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed church complex. G. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that thle development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Development Plan (17.05.010.F) A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential Zoning District located in the Development Code. The development meets or exceeds all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. Additional yards and buffer areas have been incorporated into the project which serves to integrate the use with surrounding uses. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed church complex. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Section 3. The City Council of The City Of Temecula hereby denies the appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve Planning Application No. PA03-0027, a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to establish and operate a 24,287 square foot Latter Day Saints Church Facility. The subject property is located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa; also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 955-050-017. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14`n day of September, 2004 Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 04-— was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: R:\C U M2003103-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC ATTACHMENT NO. 2 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPEAL AND OVERTURNING THE PLANNING DECISION TO APPROVE PA03-0027 R:\C U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 6 RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON A 4.72 ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 955-050-017. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. Cornwall Associates Architects as agent for the property owner, filed Planning Application No. 03-0027, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan, for the property generally located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 955-050-017 ("Project"). B. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. C. Following consideration of the entire record of information, both oral and written, received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 2004-24 & 2004-25 approving a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Project. D. On September 14th, 2004, 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 in writing, orally or both on these matters. E. On September 141h, 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan when it adopted its Resolution No. 2004- Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in Sections 17.03.090.1, 17.04.010.E and 17.05.010. F of the Temecula Municipal Code: Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.04.010.E.) A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CUP.DOC The proposed Latter Day Saints Church facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan including Goal 1 which encourages "A complete and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses. The proposed multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms meet the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the Development Code. The church and associated facilities are conditionally permitted uses in the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zoning district and the development meets or exceed all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The whole of the record, including but not limited to, the site plan, architectural renderings and view analysis describes and depicts a structure that is too large in relation to the existing physical development already established in the surrounding neighborhoods. This City Council finds that the operational characteristics which both the applicant, real party -in -interest, and the City, (pursuant to its environmental analysis) have identified will not create detrimental or deleterious impacts in or upon the surrounding development, the City in general and City infrastructure. This operational compatibility does not outweigh the deleterious and substantial size of the mass, bulk, height and building envelop that the proposed structure presents in contrast to the existing adjacent development. The average square footage of residential units in the area adjacent to the proposed project is 2,037 square feet and the average height is approximately 20 feet. This is in contrast to the proposed single structure which is 24,287 square feet in area and fifty feet in height to the top of spire. The design of the structure results in a physical building that is substantially larger and taller than the surrounding construction. This disproportionate scale of the proposed structure is hereby found to present an incompatible intensity of land use that would be detrimental to the community. While the City encourages diversity of land use (See Temecula General Plan Goal 1 "A complete and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses'), such integration of mixed uses must necessarily be beneficial to the community and not cause unreasonable or unnecessary negative impact upon the surrounding land uses. Temecula General Plan Policy 1.1 "Review all proposed development plans for consistency with the community goals, policies and implementation programs of this General Plan;" Temecula General Plan Policy 1.4 "Consider the impacts on surrounding land uses and infrastructure when reviewing proposals for new development" and Temecula General Plan Goal 3 "A land use pattern that will protect and enhance residential neighborhoods" and its related Policy 3.1 "Consider the compatibility of proposed projects on surrounding uses in terms of the size and configuration of buildings, use of materials and landscaping, preservation of existing vegetation and landform, the location of access routes, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and other environmental conditions." The structure, as proposed, creates visual disruption of the established community, negatively interferes with the views available from adjacent parcels and presents an incompatible relationship based upon scale, with the surrounding uses. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CUP.DOC The foregoing General Plan goals and policies are not satisfied by the size of the proposed structure. A smaller structure, with less mass and integrated square footage of development would provide the same area but in a configuration that would satisfy the adopted goals and policies of the City of Temecula General Plan. This City Council finds that the structure, as proposed, fails to satisfy the standards established in the City of Temecula General Plan and accordingly cannot find that the proposed use satisfies this mandatory element (as required by Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.04.010E.) which is necessary for this City Council to issue the approval for this proposed development. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The project has been reviewed against the Very Low Density Residential ('JL) development standards identified in the Development Code. Church facilities are in conditionally permitted use in the VL zone and the development meets or exceeds all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. Additional yard widths and buffer areas have been incorporated into the project which integrates the use with existing uses in the neighborhood. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The nature of the proposed use is detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community because of inconsistencies of the scale of uses as is set forth in finding a above. E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the City Council at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the City Council renders their decision. F. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan, and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential (VL) Zoning District located in the Development Code including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. R:\C U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CUP.DOC G. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Development Plan (17.05.010.F) A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential Zoning District located in the Development Code. The development meets or exceeds all applicable development standards including, but not limited to building height, setbacks, landscaping, parking and floor area ratio. However, the bulk and scale of the church facility is not compatible with the surrounding residences. Therefore, the project cannot be found compatible with these findings. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The overall development of the land, as proposed, is not designed for the protection, of the public health, safety and welfare. The whole of the record, including but not limited to, the site plan, architectural renderings and view analysis describes and depicts a structure that is too large in relation to the existing physical development already established in the surrounding neighborhoods. This City Council finds that the operational characteristics which both the applicant, real party -in -interest, and the City, (pursuant to its environmental analysis) have identified will not create detrimental or deleterious impacts in or upon the surrounding development, the City in general and City infrastructure. This operational compatibility does not outweigh the deleterious and substantial size of the mass, bulk, height and building envelop that the propo:'ed structure presents in contrast to the existing adjacent development. The average square footage of residential units in the area adjacent to the proposed project is Z037 square feet and the average height is approximately 20 feet. This is in contrast to the proposed single structure which is 24,287 square feet in area and i`ifty feet in height to the top of the spire. The design of the structure results in a physical building that is substantially larger and taller than the surrounding construction. This disproportionate scale of the proposed structure is hereby found to present an incompatible intensity of land use that would be detrimental to the community. While the City encourages diversity of land use (See Temecula General Plan Goal 1 "A complete and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses'), such integration of mixed uses must necessarily be beneficial to the community and not cause unreasonable or unnecessary negative impact upon the RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CURDOC surrounding land uses. Temecula General Plan Policy 1.1 "Review all proposed development plans for consistency with the community goals, policies and implementation programs of this General Plan;" Temecula General Plan Policy 1.4 "Consider the impacts on surrounding land uses and infrastructure when reviewing proposals for new development" and Temecula General Plan Goal 3 "A land use pattern that will protect and enhance residential neighborhoods" and its related Policy 3.1 "Consider the compatibility of proposed projects on surrounding uses in terms of the size and configuration of buildings, use of materials and landscaping, preservation of existing vegetation and landform, the location of access routes, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and other environmental conditions." The structure, as proposed, creates visual disruption of the established community, negatively interferes with the views available from adjacent parcels and presents an incompatible relationship based upon scale, with the surrounding uses. The foregoing General Plan goals and policies are not satisfied by the size of the proposed structure. A smaller structure, with less mass and integrated square footage of development would provide the same area but in a configuration that would satisfy the adopted goals and policies of the City of Temecula General Plan. This City Council finds that the structure, as proposed, fails to satisfy the standards established in the City, of Temecula General Plan and accordingly cannot find that the proposed use satisfies this mandatory element (as required by Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.04.010E.) which is necessary for this City Council to issue the approval for this proposed development. Section 3. The City Council of The City Of Temecula hereby approves the appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve Planning Application No. PA03-0027, a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to establish and operate a 24,287 square foot Latter Day Saints Church Facility. The subject property is located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa; also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 955-050-017. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 141h day of September, 2004 Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: R:\C U P\200303-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CUP.DOC Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 04- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Uphold Appeal & Deny CUP.DOC 0 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report. doc 7 City of Temecula(, Community Development Department 43200 Business Park Drive • Temecula • CA • 92590 P.O. Box 9033, Temecula • CA • 92589-9033 (909) 694-6400 9 FAX (909) 694-6477 Original Case Number(s) A Y'�C JUN 0 2 2004 t' n Qy.I�Oftd �"_ :Ai C NO"C 1 0. b3'00a The purpose of the appeal procedure is to provide a method of recourse for persons aggrieved by or dissatisfied with an action taker► by an administrative agency of the City in the administration or enforcement of any provisions of the Development Code. L-MUIRRIOR3Ci ll::lul ►Y `� 1. Development Application. 2. Appeal Form. 3. Filing Fee. ♦ �JY � ' ' ' : Ylul IuIY A notice of an appeal by any individual who is aggrieved by or dissatisfied with a decision made by him or in his behalf, or with any action, order, requirement, decision or determination shall not be acted upon unless filed within fifteen (15) calendar days after service of written notice of the decision. .��r •ur.l U UMI Appealing the decision (Specify Specify exactly what is being appealed: Ccrr►r- i) S-t l041 . M o-%-, n . 2 f Planning or Planning Co(um fission AND Action Date) R:VAG•tRtN1lYP12C\1 .1 7/16/97 k1E 1 Reason or justification to support the appeal. Appellant must submit with this appeal each issue: which the appellant alleges was wrongly determined together with every agreement and a copy of every item of evidence. (Attach separate shut of paper if necessary). Desired action to be taken: In the event any Notice of Appeal applicant fails to answer any information set forth above, then the request will be returned to the appellant, with a statement of the deficiencies. The appellant shall be allowed five (5) calendar days in which to refile the notice of anneal. R:VAGAMA UC\A .A 7/16/97 k LDS Project Homeowners of Temecula Corte Villosa Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 294-7881— Stephen Longo June 1, 2004 City of Temecula Community Development Department 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: APPEAL TO PLANNING APPLICATION NO.03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,287 SQ. FT. CHURCH FACILITY) Dear Councilmembers: We respectfully submit this appeal to the above referenced project based on the following: 1. A workaround solution to the drainage ditch that is located behind the properties adjacent to the proposed project site, was not completely addressed to the property owners satisfaction at the Planning Commission hearing on May 19, 2004, nor is one identified in the Final Conditions of Approval. The property owners want to know specifically how the proposed retaining wall and backfill will affect the v-ditch located at the rear of the properties. ➢ Attached is a copy of Tract Map No. 22916-1. Note that the dedication of the drainage easement shown thereon was NOT accepted, dated Sept. 20, 1990 and certified by the City Clerk of Temecula. However, it was constructed. Desired Action: The residents want the developer to absorb the cost to construct the retaining wall and backfill the properties to include the fencing between the residences to the point where it connects to the existing fencing at the top of the slopes. This would then become the new grade level, leveling off the property. This in turn would reduce the noise levels of the parking lot during hours of operation. The workaround desired is to have the v-ditch connected to a manhole and rerouted to tie into the storm drain system on the church property. 2. According to the Final Conditions of Approval, a gate to be constructed at the easterly driveway on Pauba Road will restrict vehicular access between 1000 pm and 0700 am Sunday thou Thursday. It was discussed and agreed to by the architect/developer at the hearing of May 19, 2004, that a gate will be installed at the westerly driveway to the property. Furthermore, the hours agreed to, applied to every evening, not just pertaining to Sunday thm Thursday. This is not reflected in the Final Conditions of Approval. Desired Action: To install a gate at both driveways and maintain that the gates shall be closed between the hours of 1000 pm and 0700 am every day of the week. LDS Project 3. The size and the colonial design of the structure are neither consistent nor compatible with: the Southwestern/Mediterranean architectural design of the surrounding and adjacent neighborhood. ➢ This location is unique in comparison to the two other churches located in Temecula, in that this property is right up against residential housing. The other two locations, have a buffer between the church property and adjacent properties. Desired Action: Revise the size of the structure to 18,000 sq. ft. and redesign the exterior to reflect the surrounding neighborhood. 4. The hours of operation changed substantially from the initial Draft Conditional Use Permit to the final Draft presented at the hearing on May 19, 2004. The final draft was not available to the public as it was submitted after the Friday prior to the meeting when the residents picked up a copy of the staff report. No attempt was made to bring it to the attention of the residents. ➢ The staff report recommends the youth dances be required to end at 1000 pm consistent with the City's curfew hours which is 1000 pm. The Commission approved the end time to 1100 pm, against the curfew hours. Desired Action: To approve the hours of operation submitted on the ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED DRAFT Conditions of Approval. 5. The years required to mature for the trees identified in the landscaping plan were never confirmed during the hearing. For example, after conducting our own research, it was identified that it would take 7-11 years for the Arizona Cypress to reach 75% maturity. The actual maturity rate for the trees proposed was never confirmed at the hearing. Desired Action: Plant trees that are mature and would provide better coverage in a shorter period of time. q. n 5. NNoparochial school operations shall be conducted onsite in association with the church ly. 6. No overnight adivitieatevents shall be conducted onsite in association with the church facility. 7. No overnight parking of recreational vehicles or campers shall occur onsite. S. No facilities shall be commercially rented to the public. 9. No food cooking shall be conducted onsite and no *soup kitchen' activities shall occur. 10. Parking krt lights shall be turned -off at 10:15 PM seven. days a week. On evenings when activitles conclude at 11:00 PM, eastern parking lot lights shall be turned off at 10:00 Pat with the remaining parking lot lights onsite turned -off at 11:15 PM. 11. All youth dances shall be operated in full compliance with the/attached "Youth Dancer Operational Guidelines.' 12. In the event that operational issues are experienced by surrounding residents, the resident., shall have the ability to contact a reliable church representative via a listed phone number that Is regulady monitored sayan MAyy@Qk,__------. ' 13. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:00 PM on Mondays. 14. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:30 PM Tuesday thru Thursday. �lN 15. The fadlity, shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and Y' 10.00 PM on Fridays. 16. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 8:00 AM and 10:00 PM on Saturdays. 17. The facility shall not operate primary acivites except between the hours of 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM on Sundays. 18. Twelve (12) primary activities per year may be conducted until 11:00 PM. 19. The color of rooting materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to Issuance of a building permit RAC U P\2003\03-M7 Church of Jesus Christ of Wer Day $aluts4bal CUP Reso.doc 7 0 5. No parochial school operations shall be conducted onsite in association with the church facility. Onsite classrooms shall be used for Sunday school purposes only. 6 No overnight activities/events shall be conducted onsite in association with the church facility. 7• No outdoor activities shall be conducted onsite. 8. No overnight parking of recreational vehicles or campers shall occur onsite. 9• No facilities shall be commercially rented to the public. 10. No food cooking or preparation shall be conducted onsite and no "soup kitchen" activities shall occur. 11. Parking lot lights shall be turned -off at 10:00 PM seven days a week. 12. The facility shall operate from 9:00 AM thru 9:00 PM on Sundays for services, Sunday school and evening activities. Gy 13. The facility shall operate from 6:30 AM Kthru 8:00 AM Monday thru Friday for youth group and 6:30 PM thru 9:30 PM for youth recreational activities, scouting and other �t.organizational meetings. g group, IT N $.., . The facilityshall operate on Saturdays from 8:OO AM to 7:00 sports activities. PM for cultural, recreational and 15. The facility shall operate from 7:00 PM thru 9:30 PM on Friday and Saturday evenings for dinner socials. 16, The facility shall operate from 8:00 PM thru 10:00 PM one Saturday evening per month for Youth dances. 111.m f7 Otherspecial events not listed above including the bi-annual stake Conference shall require the acquisition of a Temporary Use Permit prior to the event. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the Property ined in With these conditions of approval and that any changes I my wish oallemaketto the Projectconformance shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Date Applicant Printed Name &IC U P'2003103-027 Church of Jesus Chest of tatter Dey 92i,,,�CijP Reso.doc 7 9' W N � } 8 Y r 4NJfS W WJ�WO [fp �J ``11 f.�� OLx60i its pp we'ss a q WUFq q � �y Wr 'm�ioW� � W�>J7m6i o � � V TFb�mr�r LLiLLs Z OrWN• w K� �UJ<¢ W ii ) V>�i 2rG5 e� N o� 5 r�p�< W H9 ` N a w= LL o0-rmLLr q e N s4i Wow �mr S y�$RUy I g • �_J ww§ � 4' p ° m`6We.z..s' 8 i or`.7uz5M- 'x 3a�gmg�� ���:W W e ® W� u9$�-2. 55 xc of Wi i p d2uwi2 s Z g�3 RE m�WW ; MITI - ii�ow<- bi wm<W w i � g�3 F�r�•dx." � �? � � �&���a 9d s s^ �'d rmm8 Y � '<�`Z'g�o'o <° zi - t..e -yr m mn8 LL W y°m iF qq ¢Oq .L oo <e gaj,ga �pq<`7� RN a m G Rwq »� 25A, iiw =4y gg 3 wp8 $rJ3gg b 2 6 6K� m 6K m0WE<w' w W <Or. KKS'F gQVQ ¢ 8rLL niWa ti 2Fm 4� �WC��Om2� �� •=i 2 -o LL0 Z D�q w�ZS `i K'1 'm YOy LO°� .Ox O.• m K mA- WN.,.`mr- <ow - ic8u�8W•a•Y <�yq� R r Em<m e:"ui Limo rzm>•s L1ZB< E CCam LL z8° NN w �o °razx��W m «Pn:mLo ���aEa€ " xg w a m§o o LLi o imam^. WqW< O .aii5>�j� J S WI lW�L .U..I 41! J ` �a O7TOr-p�- rqi� i4'Ti.im� �9'e_'w oa3a of i W <rz= m w <mz r � y8 m�Wioytx� i iu: �J e I � |2 '| } |k a1� . J±! § waif �a ■ \ � \ \ ATTACHMENT NO.3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-024 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 8 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.955-310-050 & 017. WHEREAS, Cornwall Associates Architects, filed Planning Application No. PA03-0027, Conditional Use Permit ("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 May 19, 2004, 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 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 OFTEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section of the Temecula Municipal Code: Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.04.010.E.) A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed Later Day Saints Church facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the general plan. The proposed multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms meet the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code. The church and associated facilities are conditionally permitted uses in the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zoning district. RAC U M003W-M7 Church of Jesus Chris[ of latter Day SaintsTinal CUP Reso.doc 1 B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the general plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility against the adjacent land uses and has determined that the proposed uses will be a complimentary addition to the area. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the Very Low Density Residential (VL) development standards identified in the Development Code and has found that the project meets or exceeds all of the requirements. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility and found that it in no way will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Fire Prevention has reviewed circulation and drive aisle widths and has determined that the site will be adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matterbefore the Planning Commission renders their decision. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a Latter Day Saints church complex totaling 24,287 square feet 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. RAC U P12003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of tatter Day Saints\Final CUP Reso.doc 2 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this I gth day of May 2004. John elesio, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie -Ubnoske, ecret [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certifythat PC Resolution No. 2004-024 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of May 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso Telesio NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None �����_ Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAC U PV003M-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsWinal CUP Reso.doc 3 EXHIBIT A FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAC U N2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTival CUP Reso.doc 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA03-0027 Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to establish and operate a Latter Day Saints church complex consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms totaling 24,287 square feet on a 4.72-acre site. Development Impact Fee Category: Exempt Assessor's Parcel No.: 965-050-017 Approval Date: May 19, 2004 Expiration Date: May 19, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 2. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 4. No day care operations shall be conducted onsite in association with church facility. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTinal CUP Reso.doc 5 5. No parochial school operations shall be conducted onsite in association with the church facility. 6 No overnight activities/events shall be conducted onsite in association with the church facility. 7 No overnight parking of recreational vehicles or campers shall occur onsite. 8. No facilities shall be commercially rented to the public. 9. No food cooking shall be conducted onsite and no "soup kitchen" activities shall occur. 10. Parking lot lights shall be turned -off at 10:15 PM seven days a week. On evenings when activities conclude at 11:00 PM, eastern parking lot lights shall be turned off at 10:00 PM with the remaining parking lot lights onsite turned -off at 11:15 PM. 11. All youth dances shall be operated in full compliance with the attached "Youth Dance Operational Guidelines" 12. In the event that operational issues are experienced by surrounding residents, the residents shall have the ability to contact a reliable church representative via a listed phone number that is regularly monitored seven days a week. 13. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:00 PM on Mondays. 14. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:30 PM Tuesday thru Thursday. 15. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM on Fridays. 16. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 8:00 AM and 10:00 PM on Saturdays. 17. The facility shall not operate primary activities except between the hours of 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM on Sundays. 18. Twelve (12) primary activities per year may be conducted until 11:00 PM. 19. The color of roofing materials shall be reviewed and approved bydhe Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. 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 Applicant's Printed Name Date RAC U PV003\03-=7 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\Final CUP Reso.doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-024 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 8 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.955-310-050 & 017. WHEREAS, Cornwall Associates Architects, filed Planning Application No. PA03-0027, Conditional Use Permit ("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 May 19, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff end 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 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. The above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section of the Temecula Municipal Code: Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.04.010.E.) A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed Later Day Saints Church facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the general plan. The proposed multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms meet the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code. The church and associated facilities are conditionally permitted uses in the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zoning district. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Lauer Day SaiotsWinal CUP Reso.doc 1 B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the general plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility against the adjacent land uses and has determined that the proposed uses will be a complimentary addition to the area. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buff erareas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the Very Low Density Residential (1/L) development standards identified in the Development Code and has found that the project meets or exceeds all of the requirements. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility and found that it in no way will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Fire Prevention has reviewed circulation and drive aisle widths and has determined that the site will be adequatelyserved by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the Planning Commission renders their decision. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a Latter Day Saints church complex totaling 24,287 square feet 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. R.\C U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of I,tter Day Saints\final CUP Reso.doc 2 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19'h day of May 2004. John Neiesio, Chairperson ATTEST: ;Deb ie U noske, Secretary `.-. 114 STATE=OF.CACfFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-024 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19'h day of May 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso Telesio Chiniaeff None None m/60 _ Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAC U PI2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal CUP Reso.doc 3 EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of lattef Day Saints\CUP Reso.doc 5 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to establish .and operate a Latter Day Saints church complex consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms totaling 24,287 square feet on a 4.72-acre site. Development Impact Fee Category: Exempt Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-050-017 Approval Date: May 19, 2004 Expiration Date: May 19, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 2. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 4. No day care operations shall be conducted onsite in association with church facility. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\CUP Reso.doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISISON RESOLUTION NO. 2004-025 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Reporcdoc 9 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, A CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI- PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA, ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 955-050-017. WHEREAS, Cornwall Associates Architects, filed Planning Application No. PA03-0027, 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 May 19, 2004, 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 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 OFTEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.01 OF of the Temecula Municipal Code: Development Plan (Section 17.05.01OF) A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential (VL) Zoning District located in the Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed church complex. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of ratter Day Saints\final DP Reso.doc The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a 24,287 square foot church facility consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, class rooms and meeting rooms 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 b t Cit oernecula Planning Commission this 19th day of May 2004. John Tplesio, Chairperson ATTEST: 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. 2004-025 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of May 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson,Olhasso Telesio NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAC U Pt2003W3.0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SalntsTinal DP Reso.doc 2 EXHIBIT A FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc 3 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 03-0027 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a Latter Day Saints church facility consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, classrooms and meeting rooms totaling 24,287 square feet on 4.72-acre site. Development Impact Fee Category: Exempt Assessor's Parcel No.: 966-050-017 Approval Date: May 19, 2004 Expiration Date: May 19, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty -Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One -Thousand Three - Hundred and Fourteen Dollars ($1,314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Negative Declaration 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/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval -For the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the i City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc 4 3. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 4. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 5. 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. 6. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Site Plan, Grading Plan, Building Elevations, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, and the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department. 7. The applicant/developer shall fully comply with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. 8. 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 or any successors in interest. 9. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 10. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Board, contained on file with the Planning Department. a. Roofing: Fiberglass Composition Shingle — "Ebony Wood" b. Siding, rim, Sash and Soffits: Aluminum —"Bone White" C. Columns and Features —'Bone White" d. Steeple and Cupola — Aluminum —"Bone White" e. Exterior Walls: Brick — "Monterey Blend" 11. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 12. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 13. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X:10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved colored architectural elevations to the Community Development RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 5 Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. 14. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 15. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 16. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Conceptual Landscaping Plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The following items shall accompany the plans: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. C. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Walter Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). 17. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. ( The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. Prior to Occupancy 18. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS General Requirements 19. A Grading Permit for a precise grading, including all on -site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained street right-of-way. 20. 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. 21. All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. 22. The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City ,f Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 6 Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. 14. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 15. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 16. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Conceptual Landscaping Plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The following items shall accompany the plans: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. C. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). 17. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. Prior to Occupancy 18. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS General Requirements 19. A Grading Permit for a precise grading, including all on -site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained street right-of-way. 20. 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. 21. All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. { } 22. The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc 6 a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street lights, signing and striping, storm drain facilities and sewer and domestic water systems Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 23. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private properly. 24. 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. 25. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 26. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department C. Department of Public Works d. Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau 30. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 31. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the ( 1 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 RAC U Pi2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinA DP Reso.doc 7 the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 32. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable Cibi of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. C. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard No. 400. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. 33. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half -width street right-of-way, installation of half -width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. All utilities 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. C. All existing and proposed power poles and electric lines except lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 34. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. 35. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along Pauba Road pursuant to the new location of the driveway. 36. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 8 37 A Signing and Striping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Pauba Road; and ensure a left turn pocket for accessing the site. 38. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 39. 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. 40. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 41. 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 ( 42. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 43. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 44. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 45. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2125 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a total fire flow of 2525 GPM with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow maybe 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 III -A) 46. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-III-13-1. A minimum of 2 hydrants, in a combination of on -site and off - site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and RAC U P\2003\03-M7 Church of Jesus Christ of ratter Day SaiutsTinal DP Reso.doc 9 adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a 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 III-B) 47. 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) 48. 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) 49. 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) 50. 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) ? 51. 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) 52. Prior to building construction, dead end road ways 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) 53. 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) 54. 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 241-4.1) 55. 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) 56. 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 RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of ratter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc l0 contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi -family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi -family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and /or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 57. 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) 58. 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) 59. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 60. 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) i 61. 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. 62. 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 63. 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. 64. 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) 65. 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 i ) additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix H-E) RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 11 POLICE DEPARTMENT 66. All exterior doors shall have vandal resistant fixtures and shall be commercial or institutional grade. 67. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the building shall be removed or painted over within 24- hours of being discovered. Notify the Temecula Police Department immediately so a report can be taken. 68. Upon completion of construction, the building shall be equipped with a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24 hours a day by a designated private alarm company. 69. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 70. All perimeter landscaping, on site lighting and fencing within this development, shall be maintained by the property owner or a private maintenance association. 71. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 72. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of i construction debris. Only the City s franchisee may haul construction debris. 73. A Class II Bikeway along the Pauba Road will be identified on the street improvement plans and completed in concurrence with the street improvements and General Plan standards. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 75. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. 76. Priorto the first building permit or installation of additional street lighting, the developershali complete the TCSD application process, submit an approved Edison Streetlight Plan and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. BUILDING AND SAFETY 77. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 78. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on March 31, 2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building ( } permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 12 79. 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 street -lights and otheroutdoor 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. 80. 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. 81. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 82. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 83. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1,199-8) 84. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 85. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 86. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 87. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 88. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 89. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 90. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 91. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 92. A pre -construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 93. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 94. Show all building setbacks. 95. 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. 94-21, i specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one - quarter mile of an occupied residence. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Chris[ of latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 13 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 OUTSIDE AGENCIES 96. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the attached Rancho California Water District letter dated January 27, 2003. 97. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the attached Riverside County Flood Control dated May 3, 2004. 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 Applicant's Printed Name Date RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTinal DP ResoAoc 14 January 27,2003 Rolfe Preisendanz, Case Planner City of Temecula Board of Directors Planning Department Jeffrey Minkler Presidentt 43200 Business Park Drive John B. Hoagland Post Office Box 9033 Sr. vice Preafdent Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Stephen J. Corona Ralph H. Daily SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY Ben R. Drake PARCEL NO.3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 9019 Use D. Herman APN 955-050-017 Csaba F. Ka CASE NO. PA03-027 jj JAN 3 0 2003 ID Office.: John F. Hennigar Dear Mr. Preisendanz: General Manager Phillip L-Forbes Please be advised that the above -referenced property is located within the Director of Finance- Tre^e°m boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service:, "V93ob"Lemans therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between )car, of Engineering Kenneth C. Deny RCWD and the property owner. Dimon of operations Perry R.Lauch If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and co.Wl.r requirements. Unda M. Pregoso District Secretary/Administrative Services Manager Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an C. Michael Cowell Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Beal Beat & Krieger LLP General Counsel TF nnu. s ie 1,tav F Vnee,4-- Qer- a epr sPnfa i'I . you have any yu ° on , p ass c ,. tan �no...__--.-b ce R_,..e t_ - at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 03\SB:rnc007\012-T6\FCF Rancho California Water District 42135Winncuter Roed • Post OM.Bar9017 • T.rn ula.C.I&rnie925B9-9017 . (909)2%-6900. PA%19091296-666f1 WARREN D. WILLIAMS a�eos T rl"ee meml Manager-Cbief Engineer 0 �eJE1Y/TI RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 AttentiorrAW*ew HGfT l S Ladies and Gentlemen: 117 Re 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 51180.1 for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated use rases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or tments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood sd a logical component or extension of a master plan system, ligation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such Issue: V This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. Se E em ow This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional In nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted, l Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership o s act i ies on wn en requea of the City Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will brequireforDistrict acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project is located within the Drainage Plan for which drainage check or money order only to the whichever comes first. Fees to be permit. This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this protect involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require tfte applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approvat of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. is Impacted by this may be required from the local California Regional Water Quali. permit. An enermchrrtent Fermi+ r. -Wi be ob+aine d -For an con s-4ruci i on rclaicd actiuiPlGS acr,X'I wrbi,ln plsirtct rf o; rod or i)i+ieS. xisii iaci1; : c: TerneculcL Vailtt�4�f P406- Rood S 'kn+ �0.in1 (CMS the City should require the applicant to Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act i correspondence from these agencies 3 Section 401 Water Quality Certification bard prior to issuance of the Corps 404 Very truly yours, ARL/AT�l1RO D IAZ Senior Civil Engineer Date: ATTACHMENT NO. 6 APPROVED MINUTES FROM THE MAY 19, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl St' Report.doc 10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 19, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:02 P.M., on Wednesday, May 19, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Telesio thanked Eve Craig for the prelude music. ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Mathewson led the audience in the Flag salute. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, and Chairman Telesio. Absent: None. Chairman Telesio announced that per the Fire Department Code, there is a legal capacity for only one seat per person and that if necessary there is overflow seating in the Main Conference Room. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Carol Marsden, 30955 de Portola Road, expressed concern with an esthetically unpleasing Happy Mover van at the residence of 31580 Pio Pico; and stated that it is offensive to the neighborhood and would request that Code Enforcement explore the removal of the Happy Mover van. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Agenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 19, 2004. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: RAMinutesPCW51904 1 2.1 Approve the Minutes of April 7, 2004. Chairman Telesio requested to move Item No. 6 before Item No. 5 MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the Consent Calendar and to move Item No. 6 before Item No. 5. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. COMMISSION BUSINESS Continued from April21, 2004 3 Associate Planner Long presented a brief staff report (of record), noting the following: That staff has reviewed the revised plans and determined that while some of the concerns of the Planning Commission have been addressed, the following issues identified by staff and the Commission have not been addressed: o Conditions Nos. 12, 15, 19, and 20 have not been implemented; that these conditions deal with arched focal points, variation in the roof plans, and the use of additional materials such as brick for the Spanish or Monterey styles; o Massing on Plan Two (2) has not been addressed; o Window spacing and windows with single shutters have not been addressed; o Entry doors have not been expanded in width (optional doors are proposed, however, they do not vary in shape or width and glass was not proposed); o That the applicant has re -plotted the plans along Brush Creek Drive, however there is no net loss or gain of any single plan; That the elimination of the second -story portion of Plan Two (2) be added to the Conditions of Approval. That staff has prepared conditions of approval to include the remaining Planning Commission's recommendation and that staff is recommending approval as conditioned. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Bill Davidson, 1302 Camino Del Monte, of Davidson Communities relayed that the applicant does not concur with staff in regard to pulling the fence and pilaster back and would request to leave as conditioned, and is of the opinion that the proposed project is in conformance and is requesting approval of the plans as submitted. RAMinutesPC\051904 2 Ms. Linda Beaudon, 22380 Alameda Del Monte, expressed concern with the lack of single -story homes along the ridgeline and stated that she was of the opinion that there would be more single -story residences in the proposed project. For clarification purposes, Mr. Long noted that the direction from the Planning Commission to the City Council was to require single -story products throughout the single family residential areas; that the City Council modified the language to state "as determined by the market" and that staff would be of the opinion that the proposed project has sufficient single -story elements and meets the intent of the design guidelines in the Specific Plan (SP). Mr. Long also noted that a single -story element would be a portion of the residence that is not two -stories high. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that it would be his opinion that the applicant has complied with many of the requests but does not agree with Condition of Approval No. 21, (fencing on corner lots shall be pulled back towards the rear on exterior corner lots to open up the exposed elevation to the street as determined acceptable by the Planning Director). Commissioner Guerriero echoed Commissioner Chiniaeff's comments and is in agreeance with staff's Conditions of Approval except for Condition of Approval No. 21. Commissioner Olhasso also echoed the previous two comments and expressed appreciation with the work that Davidson's Communities has done with the proposed project; and requested that staff notify the Planning Commissioners when the City Council makes substantial changes to their recommendations. Commissioner Mathewson concurs with the above mentioned comments but noted his concern with the two-story massing on Plan 2 and is of the opinion that the number of Plan twos (2) and threes (3) adjacent to one another has not been addressed and would request that staff explore the issue. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson move staff's recommendation as presented as well as the deletion of Condition of Approval No. 21 as presented above. Commissioner Chiniaeff expressed concern with the removal of the second -story element on Plan Two (2). At this time, the Public Hearing was reopened. Mr. Davidson relayed that it would be his opinion the proposed project is in conformance of the Specific Plan. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Chinfaeff and Commissioner Olhasso who voted No. RAMinutesPC\051904 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-022 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0725 A PRODUCT REVIEW FOR 99 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED SOUTH OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD, KNOWN AS TRACT MAP 29661-2 n Associate Planner Long presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That staff reviewed the revised plans and it was determined that while the revised plans have addressed some of the concerns of the Planning Commission, a number of outstanding issues have not been addressed; • That staff has added some additional recommendations which have been included in the Conditions of Approval; • That the recommended enhancements are a result of comments from the Planning Commission hearing; • That a Resolution of Approval has been attached for your consideration; • That in reviewing the revised elevations staff has noted the following enhancements: o That the front elevation of each architectural style of Plan Two (2) has been revised to break up the wall plane above the garage; o That the left elevation of Plan Two has been revised to include one additional window on the second floor and the right elevation has been revised to include two (2) windows on the second floor; o That the left elevation of Plan Three (3) has been revised to include one additional window on the first floor and one additional window on the second floor; and that three additional windows have been proposed on the second floor of the right elevation; o That the left elevation of Plan Four (4) has been revised to include one additional window on the second floor and one additional window on the second floor of the rear elevation; • That the intent of adding additional windows would be to break up the large expanses of wall; That staff is recommending as a Condition of Approval, that the applicant provide only the enhanced elevations; that the standard elevation should not be used due to the language in the Specific Plan (SP), which states "articulation shall be provided on all RAMinutesPC\051904 4 sides of the homes ("four-sided architecture")'; that staff is of the opinion that the standard elevations do not meet the articulation or the four-sided architecture standards; That the following issues identified by staff and the Planning Commission of items of concern, have not been addressed: o Additional variation of the garage placement and garage door style for each plan has not been proposed; o The appearance of two front elevations has not been proposed and; o The roof design/silhouette does not offer a significant level of variation within each plan. • That staff has added the Conditions of Approval to ensure these changes are made, which would bring each product into conformance with the intent of the Design Guidelines and that staff is recommending the Planning Commission approve the project with the attached Conditions of Approval. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. M. J. Knitter, representing the applicant relayed the following: • That since the last Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2004, the applicant has taken the comments of the Planning Commission and have enhanced a number of the areas on the sides and rears, revised the second -elevation on the second floor, moved the egress window (which was on the front of the window) and moved it to the side; and that smaller design element windows were added to the front; • That on all corner conditions, there will be a one-story plan; and that a gable could be added for enhancement purposes if it is the will of the Commission; • That six (6) garage door variations will be provided for the home buyer; • That the landscaping and fencing will be taken care of by the landscape architect; • That windows to sides were added to Plan Two (2), Plan Three (3), and Plan Four (4); • That in regard to the four-sided architecture, the applicant is of the opinion that the front elevations of all plans comply with the intent of the Architectural Guidelines; • That there will be enhanced elevations on the rear of every residence along the ridgeline, every residence that abuts the street, and on all corners; • That on Plan One (1) the applicant would request to stay with the ridge running front to back; • That on Plan Two (2) there will be a hip roof condition which will be on all three of the elevations; RAMinutesPC\051904 5 • That on Plan Three (3) there will be a hip roof on the front; that on the side of the elevation the rear is a gable roof and that if it were the will of the Commission a hip could be added to the back 3b which would match the front of the b; • That on Plan 4, there will be a hip roof on all three elevations; • That on the Spanish Revival, the applicant would propose to use a lace finish on stucco versus a 20/30 sand finish noting that a 20/30 sand finish is difficult to use, extremely expensive and that the applicant would like to avoid the call back that the 20/30 sand finish will entail; • That the applicant would request to use an "S" the concrete tile roof on the Spanish Revival versus a barrel tile clay roof; • That if it were the will of the Commission, the applicant could add a hip on the profile of the roofs on 3b. Director of Planning Ubnoske clarified that the Design Guidelines for Spanish Revival call out: for a Barrel Tile clay roof. Mr. George Zeeber, representing Meeker Companies noted that he needed clarification for the following Conditions of Approval: • Item No. 30 relating to paseos: For Mr. Zeeber, Mr. Hazen relayed that Item No. 30 is based on the terms of the development agreement and the Conditions of Approval of the Specific Plan. Mr. Long further clarified that the master developer has some responsibility to implement the paseos and landscaping in various areas prior to the individual merchant builders being able to pull building permits. • Item No. 32, 45, and 47. Ms. Ubnoske clarified that Item No. 32, 45, and 47 would not be for private lots. Mr. M. J. Knitter relayed that he will work with staff to enhance the sides on corner lots to give the appearance of a second front elevation. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Olhasso expressed disappointment with the proposed project and suggested that the applicant work with staff to improve the outdated appearance of the residences. MOTION: Commissioner Olhasso moved to continue this item to an indefinite period of time:. This motion died for a lack of a second. RAMinutesPM051904 Commissioner Guerriero also expressed disappointment with the proposed project stating that a lot of time and effort has gone into the implementation of the Design Guidelines and the Specific Plan (SP) and queried why the Design Guidelines and Specific Plan are not being followed. Director of Planning Ubnoske stated that staff is satisfied with the project as conditioned; that if the Planning Commission were to approve the proposed project with the conditions that staff has placed on it, it would then be consistent with the Specific Plan (SP); and that the other option would be to continue this item off calendar to have the applicant continue to work with staff. Commissioner Olhasso apologized to staff, the Commission, and to the developer, but noted that she would not be able to approve the project as proposed. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve staff's recommendation. Commissioner Chiniaeff seconded the motion subject to the proposed conditions stated by staff, that the land developer construct the paseos as it is required in the existing Specific Plan, and that the applicant upgrade for an architectural elevation for all side lots on corners where they occur on all plans. Commissioner Mathewson amended his motion to include Commissioner Chiniaeff's requests voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Olhasso and Commissioner Guerriero who voted No. PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-023 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0634 A PRODUCT REVIEW FOR 113 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN PLANNING AREA 4B OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED SOUGHT OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD, KNOWN AS TRACT MAP 29661-5 New Items 5 955-050-017) This item will be addressed after Item No. 6 per the request of the Commission. N (APN: 940-310-027) Associate Planner Long presented a staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: That the proposed project is for a three-story office building; and that it is located on the site interior loop portion of Ridge Park Drive that wraps around the site; RAMinutesPC\051904 7 • That there are two existing transformers located on each side of the driveway entrance; that due to slop restraints it would not be feasible to relocate the driveway; and that the applicant has proposed plantings around the transformers to soften their appearance; • That the first floor of the building includes underground parking which provides direct access into the building via elevator and stairs; • That there will be vehicular access to the first floor parking structure on the east and west sides of the building which creates two-way circulation throughout the project site; • That the project requires 57 parking spaces which are being proposed by the applicant; • That the applicant is proposing to exceed the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard which is .40; and that the applicant is proposing .45 FAR; • That staff is of the opinion that the proposed project includes exceptional materials, design, and landscaping that would qualify the project for an increase in FAR; • That the elevations that are included in the Commission packet are for a blue reflective glass and that the applicant has revised it to a green color (at this time a sample was distributed to the Commission); • That the proposed project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and that staff would be recommending approval. For the Commission, Fire Marshal McBride relayed that the proposed project meets the fire code requirements under section 903 of the fire code as well as meeting the practicality of the requirements; that the Fire Department will have access to both sides of the building as well as the front of the building for aerial apparatus; and that the Fire Department is of the opinion that they could adequately protect both the occupants and building. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-026 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0534M A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 29,622 SQUARE FOOT THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON 1.01 ACRES, LOCATED ON RIDGE PARK DRIVE, SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, KNOWN AS APN: 940-310-027 New Item RAMinutesPC\051904 8 Assistant City Attorney Curly relayed that the applicant posted photo simulations of what is perceived to be the after affect. At this time the Commission took a 15 minute break. Assistant City Attorney clarified what a Public Hearing is stating that the Planning Commission will be making decisions based on the City's laws, State Planning and Zoning Laws, and Federal Laws; and also explained Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske clarified what correspondence the Commission should have. Associate Planner Harris presented a staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: • That the applicant is proposing a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development Plan to construct, establish, and operate a 24,287 square foot church facility including a sanctuary, multi -purpose room, classrooms, meeting rooms; and that the subject property is located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa; • That the proposed project is 4.72 acres in size and that currently the site is vacant; • That there are existing single-family residences to the east that back up to the proposed property line; • That the north and west side of the proposed project is vacant and to the south there are existing single-family residential residences, part of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan (SP); • That the facility has been sited in the center of the property so as to reduce impacts on adjacent properties; that approximately 170-foot wide setback has been achieved between the building and the eastern property lines; that setbacks of 108 feet and 170 feet have been achieved from the north and west property lines; and that these setbacks far exceed the minimum 10-foot wide setback that is required by the Development Code and that staff is of the opinion that the setbacks serve as ample buffers between adjacent residences and the proposed facility; • That there will be a 20 foot landscape buffer proposed along the eastern property line; • That there will be a 10' to 20' wide landscape buffer on both the north and the west sides of the property; • That in addition, the applicant is proposing 18' tall parking lot poles with cut-off fixtures that would force the light downward into the parking lot area and to the landscaped area to the east; R:\MinutesPC\051904 9 • That landscaping being proposed will be adjacent to each side of the two driveways that would serve to screen the parking lot from Pauba Road; • That a colonial architectural style is being proposed for the church facility; that a cupola is being proposed out towards the front of the structure that will serve to breakup the roofline; and with the cupola incorporated into the structure it would be 50 feet tall, which complies with the building height requirements in the very low zoning district; • That the height and scale of the proposed church facility will be different from the surrounding residences; however, with the large building setbacks and landscaped buffers being proposed, staff is of the opinion that the facility will be compatible with the surrounding single-family residences; • That the building will be covered in brick to give the appearance of a colonial architectural element; that it will be a cross cable building style with the gable ends treated with decorative columns and siding, and decorative window treatment to bring out the architectural style; • That the proposed church facility will be constructed as a stake center; that the a Stake center accommodates three church wards; and that a ward consists of approximately 100 families or 500 to 600 people; • That a sanctuary area, offices, a multipurpose area with a stage, a basketball court area, a variety of Sunday school classrooms, and meeting rooms are being proposed; • That based on calculations provided by the architect, there will be 287 fixed seats proposed within the sanctuary area; and that the Development Code requires 96 on site parking spaces (overflow parking has been factored in); that in terms of parking, the applicant complies with the Development Code; • That non -fixed seating will be provided for overflow potential in the multipurpose room when necessary; • That staff determined that the project complies with all other applicable Development standards such as building height, lot coverage, and landscaping; • That there was an initial study performed for the project site resulting in three; (3) impacts identified that had potential to be significant, Air quality, Cultural Resources, and Transportation/Traffic; however, mitigation measures have been applied to them which have subsequently reduced them from being significant; • However, there have been mitigation measures specified in the traffic study, the first of which is a half -width improvement of Pauba Road along the entire width of the project site; the second mitigation measure would be a locked gate across the eastern property line to prohibit vehicles from entering during the evening hours„ and that the last item would be the payment of both TUMPF and signal mitigation fees; R:\MinutesPC\051904 10 That the applicant provided a new operational statement (see staff report) which further clarifies how many people will be associated with the various activities on the property; and that based on the new operational statement provided, staff has drafted an additional Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Conditions of Approval (see staff report). For Commissioner Olhasso, Mr. Harris relayed that it is his opinion that the surrounding residences have received an operations matrix. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske clarified that as a result of the new statement of operations and the changes to the Conditions of Approval, a temporary use permits is not required for any of the uses, and that staff reviewed the detailed revised statement of operations and concurred that the activities and events could be accommodated in the proposed building. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that the applicant would not require the use of a temporary use permit for the bi-annual Stake Conference. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Principal Engineer Moghadam relayed that at ultimate build -out. Pauba Road would be able to carry 31,000 vehicles a day; that if there are any delays of traffic due to the proposed project, it will be at the driveways of the proposed project, noting that there will be full movement from both driveways. Mr. Moghadam also relayed that a Level of Service (LOS) D would condition a project for signalization; and that the CIP has a design underway for Rancho Vista and Meadows Parkway which will be going to bid in the near future. Deputy Director Parks clarified that the widening of Pauba Road in front of Linfield School is a condition on its project; and that the Temecula Valley High School expansion project will be conditioned to widen Pauba for their whole frontage. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Moghadam relayed that the Level of Service (LOS) on Pauba Road with the improvements of Temecula Valley High School factored in, would be A or B. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Kent Cornwall, of Cornwall Associates Architects, provided the following history and thoroughness of the process up until the Public Hearing: • That the church acquired the property in 1997 with the intent of building this type of facility on the property; That Cornwall Architects was contacted by the applicant in early 2002 when it was ready to move forward with the project; and a pre -application was started to inquire what the City's procedures would be as far as building plans, appearance, and statement of operations; • That the applicant received comments from staff requesting not typically required items such as an acoustical study, a lighting study, and a traffic analysis; and at that time., the concerns of staff were ingress and egress of the property, and the comparison of the RAMinutesPC\051904 11 zone use (which is very low density residential) and the proposed use being for a church; and that staff requested other standard requests; That at that time, Cornwall Architects recommended that the applicant meet with the surrounding neighbors (particularly the neighbors adjacent to the east) early on to discuss the proposed project; • That Cornwall Architect has been working with these type of facilities (churches) for over 30 years and understand the process, concerns, and sensitivities of the neighborhoods they enter into; That on August 4, a meeting was scheduled with the residences of Corte Villosa who would be most affected by the proposed project; that representatives of the church and construction people were present to discuss the proposed project; that renderings, floor plans, and a video showing examples of the quality of construction and maintenance that will be involved was shown; and that at that time, the church representatives took four (4) pages of notes of concerns expressed by residences; and that as a plans developed, the church attempted to incorporate mitigating measures to the neighbors concerns into the project; • That after a result of much discussion with the neighbors, the landscape buffer that was on the east property line was increased; that the landscape fingers that are on the last row of parking was doubled; and that the applicant worked with staff to install the west driveway; • That the applicant went through the process with the design review committee and the City, in the fall of 2002; and that during that time period, the applicant developed those standard requirements, preliminary grading plans, landscape plans, material boards, detailed floor plans, elevations, building sections, soil reports, and the requested acoustic and photometric studies, and traffic analysis; • That a Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held in February of 2003; and that at that time, staff recommended a neighborhood meeting (one that would be noticed) so that the applicant could receive public input early on in the process; • That the first public meeting announced by the City was held in March of 2003; that: the major impacts of concern that came out of that meeting was security, evening and morning noise, lighting, future development of the property to the north of the proposed property (which belongs to the church), screening, height of the steeple, inadequate landscape buffer, home depreciation, traffic concerns, and the concern that the church would use other uses outside the statement of operation; That as a result of the March 2003 meeting, further adjustments were made to the design such as parking lot light poles that were on the east property line were moved at the end of the landscape finger so that it would be 40 feet away from the property lime of the adjacent homes; that the steeple was lowered by two -stories (20 feet); that a traffic study was initiated; that the church committed to sell the excess property so that there would be no concern that there would be some expansion of the proposed facility, but that until the church has a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), would the church be able to RAMinutesPM051904 12 commit to sell the remaining property; that a gate was added to the east driveway; and that a primary building entrance was proposed for the west entry; • That the revised documents were accomplished and resubmitted to the City in June; That per the request of staff, a second community meeting was held with the neighbors on September 11, 2003 to show the neighbors how their concerns were addressed; that the applicant listened to similar concerns of neighboring homeowners; that traffic was the most common expressed concern; that the applicant's traffic engineer was available to answer questions; and that new concerns arouse such as depreciating homes and the use of the property north of the proposed property; • That the applicant provided staff with a Phase 1 Cultural Resource Assessment Initial Study (which concerns archeological issues); • That a palentological study was provided; • That in January 2004, all documents had been provided and staff was satisfied; and that the process was set to go through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff, City Attorney, and the CUP hearing; • That the following are concerns that have been adjusted and what is currently in the project to mitigate and address existing concerns: o Site suitability; o Traffic; o Privacy; o Noise; o Parking lot lights; and o Property values. At this time, Mr. Cornwall addressed a letter that was referred to as May 12, 2004, from the homeowners of Temecula, Corte Villosa, noting the following: 1. Retaining wall: that the applicant will be engineering and installing a retaining wall, and if desired by the homeowners, that the applicant would also be willing to install a six. -foot wrought iron fence on top of the wall so that when the condition of the properties being back filled against it, it would not have an 8 foot or 6 foot drop-off, down from the applicant's wall; and that the Church has offered to install the retaining wall at its expense. 2. Back -filling back yards: that the applicant would be willing to make back -fill material available from its site development at the time of the development; that they would allow access and encourage their graders to be used by the homeowners to install the back - fill. 3. Landscape and irrigation for reclaimed land: that the applicant would be willing to offer the homeowners landscaping and irrigation at a reduced rate. 4. Greenbelt: that the residences concurred that 20 feet between properties would be adequate; that most of the trees requested by the adjacent homeowners are huge and dense; and that the applicant would be willing to work with staff to come up with proper and acceptable landscaping for the proposed property. RAMinutesPC\051904 13 5. Roofing material: that the applicant is willing to change the color of the roof. 6. Lighting: that the applicant is willing to work with staff in regards to parking lot lighting. Mr. Cornwall relayed that the applicant has appreciated the communication between the applicant, staff and neighbors. For Commissioner Olhasso, Mr. Harris noted that the results of the analysis that was performed by the landscape architect would be in staff's report. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Cornwall relayed that the gate on the east boundary would be closed at all times. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Cornwall stated that the Church would be willing to be responsible for the wall, the fence and the landscaping; and that the drainage swale, existing wrought iron fence and the slope is not the church's property and would be the responsibility of the homeowners. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Cornwall relayed the following: noted that the proposed retaining wall would extend to the 7" property line; and that if the homeowners were interested in the back fill, they could have it at no cost to them; and the applicant is willing to change the color of the roof, but that they would not be changing the materials; and that the applicant is open to any combination of light fixtures in the parking lot to address the concerns of lighting, For Chairman Telesio, Mr. Cornwall noted that the traffic survey was performed before the neighboring schools let out; and that if there is a concern in regard to entering the proposed area through the westerly gate during the evening times, the applicant would be willing to close the westerly gate in the evening. Mr. Rocky Snider, project manager for the LDS Church, relayed the following: • That staff delete Condition of Approval No. 13; • That on the evenings when activities conclude at 11:00 p.m., that the lights around the building remain on until the last person leaves 11:15 or 11:30; and that the eastern parking lot lights shall be turned off at 10:00 p.m. seven days a week; • That because a dance is considered a primary activity, the applicant would request that the Condition of Approval in regard to dances be modified to allow for more than one day per month and would also request that it open to other nights of the week other than Saturday night; • That in regard to Stake Conferences, the applicant would request that Condition of Approval No. 20 be deleted that it is covered under Condition of Approval No. 19. • That as soon as the applicant receives its Conditional Use Permit (CUP), the real estate department of the church would start the process of selling the property. Mr. Kevin Osborne, 32750 Pine Circle, Stake President, relayed the following: That a commitment has been made to sell the excess property; that as soon as the applicant receives its Conditional Use Permit (CUP), the real estate department of the church would start the process of selling the property; • That five (5) percent of the residents of Temecula are members of the LDS church; R:\MinutesPC\051904 14 • That there is usually a 50 to 60 percent attendance of services every Sunday; • That the proposed building is designed for the members of the church but that the community is welcome to participate in the use of the building; and that there are many different events that are community oriented; • That the applicant are proponents of the Boy Scouts of America; and that there are seven (7) different troops located within the Temecula Stake and non-members are welcome to the scouting program; • That the proposed facility would also be used for a Blood Drive, where the whole community is welcome to participate; • That the proposed facility would also be useable for the community. The following individuals spoke in favor of the proposed project: Mr. Benjamin Graff Temecula Mr. Heber J. Hurd Temecula Mr. Brad Start Temecula Mr. Stewart Morris Temecula Ms. Larry Slussor Temecula Ms. Melanie Moore Temecula The above mentioned individuals spoke in favor of the proposed project for the following reason: • That the Church would be advocating honesty, integrity, and will teach citizens how to be responsible members of society; • That the Church would strengthen families and increase the quality of life for families in the neighborhoods; • That the proposed Church would help to build a better community; • That the dances at the Church would have 16 to 20 adult chaperone per day supervised in the dance and the parking lots; that there would be 100 to 150 youth per dance ages 14 through 18; that most of the individuals do not drive; that the dances will take place inside three sets of doors which will diminish the sound to the exterior; and that the youth attending dances would not be able to exit the building without parental consent; • That LDS Churches are built in residential areas and that it does not engage in money generating endeavors that may classify it as a business; • That the youth program teaches young people to become honest well adjusted adults; • That the Church of LDS will be a beautiful Church; and that they are always well maintained inside and outside and would be an asset to any community; The following individual spoke in opposition of the proposed project: Ms. Jenny Elliott Temecula Mr. Don McLaughlin Temecula Mr. Jim Johnson Temecula Ms. Beth Ceja Temecula Ms. Bobbi Corn Temecula RAMinutesPC\051904 15 Mr. Stephen Longo Temecula Ms. Rebecca Longo Temecula Mr. Tony Hardy Temecula Mr. Kenneth Ray Temecula Mr. David Kimbass Temecula Mr. John Wilshire Temecula Ms. Marjorie Gregory Temecula Mr. William Agnew Temecula Ms. Kristen Boano Temecula Mr. Chris Sorensen Temecula The above mentioned individuals spoke in opposition of the proposed project for the following reasons: • That the proposed LDS Church does not blend in with the surrounding neighborhood; • That since the proposal of the LDS Church, five (5) residents have relocated; • That the residents would prefer to have single-family units rather than a 24, 287 square foot church; • That their currently are 12 public institutions within a mile of the proposed area; • That the properties adjacent to the proposed building would be faced with hundreds of people coming and going and looking into the yards; • That there will be excess noise created by the cars and people coming from the proposed building; • The quality of life will be compromised by the proposed building; • That a 24, 287 square foot, 31 foot tall building will create a massing affect; • That the residents did not receive the operations matrix or the new draft of the Conditions of Approval (CUP); • That the drainage issue is a concern for adjacent residents; • That the proposed facility will block the view of many of the surrounding residents; • That the residents are concerned that the traffic analysis has not been adequately addressed; • That residents were of the opinion that the proposed property was zoned for custom ranch style homes; Director of Planning Ubnoske clarified that per the Development Code, there are a number of uses that are conditionally permitted in very low density zones such as mobile home parks, daycare centers, museums etc. • That the proposed facility deviates from the intent and the character of rural ranch development; • That no other areas of Temecula have the density of schools and churches concentrated as much as the proposed area has; • That air pollution is a concern; • That if the proposed facility is approved that it be dramatically scaled down; For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Cornwall relayed that the applicant would be willing to work with staff in adding more landscaping in front of the church; and that the applicant will be responsible for maintaining the retaining wall. RAMinutesPC\051904 16 At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. At this time, Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Chiniaeff expressed concern of staff's ability to meet the second criteria of the Conditional Use Permit (compatibility with the surrounding area); and stated that he would be of the opinion that the proposed facility and/or any other type of public facility would not be compatible with the surrounding single-family residences. Commissioner Mathewson stated for the audience that he has been taking notes and takes every comment seriously. Commissioner Mathewson expressed some concern with the traffic that the proposed facility would be bringing but that overall was pleased with the proposed architecture; and noted his appreciation for the applicant's willingness to address many of the concerns of the community. Commissioner Guerriero echoed Commissioner Mathewson's comments advising that he would be in favor of the proposed project. Commissioner Olhasso commended the speaker's willingness to meet and invest their time; stating that she also appreciates the work that the applicant and staff have put into the proposed project. Chairman Telesio echoed the above mentioned comments. For Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director Parks relayed that currently the capacity of the road is 8200 and that at built out it would be 31,000 trips a day. Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that he also appreciates the applicant's willingness to accommodate the surrounding community; but that he has concerns with the overall massing affect that the proposed project would bring to the surrounding area and also expressed concern with the fact that it would only be used twice a year for large assembly. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve staff's recommendation, modifying the Conditions of Approval with respect to the operating hours by deletion of Condition of Approval No. 13, modifying Condition of Approval No. 18 to reflect that the proposed facility may operate 12 primary activities per year until 11:00 p.m., deletion of Condition of Approval No. 20, and that the modification of the roof color be worked out between staff and the applicant. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Chiniaeff who voted No. RAMinutesPC\051904 17 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI -PURPOSE ROOM, SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-310-050 & 017. PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, A CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI- PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA, ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 955-050-017. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS No reports at this time, PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT No report at this time, ADJOURNMENT At 11:30 p.m., Chairman Telesio formally adjourned this meeting to the next regular meetin�c to be held on Wednesday. June 2, 2004 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. John Telesio Chairman Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning RAMinutesM051904 18 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 MAY 19, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Sit Report.doc 11 ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION OD Date of Meeting: May 19, 2004 Ply _ Prepared by: Matthew Harris Title: Associate Planner File Number PA03-0027 Application Type: CUP/DP _ Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to construct, establish and operate a 24,287 square foot church facility including at sanctuary, multi -purpose room, classrooms and meeting rooms. The subject property is located on the north side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa. Recommendation: (Check One) CEQA: (Check One) ® Approve with Conditions ❑ Deny ❑ Continue for Redesign ❑ Continue to: ❑ Recommend Approval with Conditions ❑ Recommend Denial ❑ Categorically Exempt ❑ Negative Declaration (Class) ® Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan ❑ EIR RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 1 PROJ11 D'A?A SJIN I Applicant: -; , , �--Cor.matI GeneraWlan Designation:, '1 Associates Architects Low Residential Zoning Designation: Very Low Density Residential (VL) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant North: South: East: West: vacant Lot Area: Total Floor Area/Ratio Landscape Area/Coverage 4.72 24,287/.12 Ft./ 30% Parking Required/Provided 96 Spaces/286 Spaces BACKGROUND SUMMARY: ® 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. (or) ❑ 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, however, the following issues have not been resolved to the satisfaction to staff. ® 2. The attached "Project Review Worksheet " (Attachment A) has been completed and staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, City- wide Design Guidelines, and the Development Code. (or) ❑ 2. The attached "Project Review Worksheet" (Attachment A) has been completed and indicates that staff cannot make all the findings of consistency required for approval. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on the attached operational statement provided by the applicant, staff provides the following summary: A church stake boundary consists of three to five wards. The proposed church facility has been constructed as a Stake Center. The Center is designed to accommodate three church wards. A ward consists of approximately 100 families or 500 to 600 people. The following activities, events operating times and estimated attendance are proposed: • Sundays — Three wards will have individual services and instruction classes. Each ward will be onsite for three hour periods. The first ward will arrive onsite at 9:00 AM. The second Ward at 11:00 AM and the third at 1:00 PM. (150-250 persons per ward) • Sunday Evenings — Special guest speakers or small worship activities will occur between 6:00 PM and 9:00 PM. (25-200 persons) • Friday Evenings — Social, cultural and recreational activities will occur between 7:30 PM and 9:30 PM. (150-250 persons) • Saturdays — Social, cultural and recreational activities will occur between 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM. (100 persons) • Saturday Evenings — Plays and dinner socials will occur between 7:00 PM and 9:30 PM. (150-250 persons) • One Saturday Evening Per Month — Youth dance, ages 14-18 years will occur between 8:00 PM and 11:00 PM. (150-200 persons) • Monday -Friday Mornings — Up to four youth classes will occur between 6:30 AM and 8:00 AM. (12-16 persons per class) • Monday -Thursday Evenings — Youth groups, scouting meetings, woman's groups and recreational activities will occur between 6:30 PM and 9:30 PM. (250-300 persons) • Bi-annual Stake Conference — One day conference for all members of the stake. Two sessions lasting two hours in duration. First session starts at 10:00 AM. If necessary, a second starts at 1:OOPM. (850-950 persons per session) RAC U P\2003%03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORTAoc 3 ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit The 4.72 acre subject property is zoned Very Low Density Residential (VL). Section 17.06.040 of the Development Code requires a minimum net lot area of 2.5 acres thereby allowing for the development of one single-family residence on the property. Section 17.06.030 allows for religious institutions in the VL zone as a conditionally permitted use. Churches are allowed as either a permitted or conditionally permitted use in all zoning districts within the City. Based on the operational statement provided by the applicant, staff is recommending several specific operational conditions of approval in association with the Conditional Use Permit pertaining to hours of operation and the prohibition of certain activities onsite. Special events not addressed in the conditions of approval will require the approval of a Temporary Use Permit. Development Plan Staff has determined that overall, the project is consistent with the General Plan and conforms with the City -Wide Design Guidelines and development standards specified in Sections 17.06.040 and 17.06.050.N. of the Development Code. The project meets or exceeds all applicable development standards associated with the VL zoning district including parking, landscaping, lot coverage and setback requirements. Development Code Section 17.24.040 requires one parking space per each three fixed seats. The church sanctuary will accommodate 287 fixed seats. Therefore, 96 onsite parking spaces are required. A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed onsite. The excess spaces can be utilized for special events that have been pre -approved by the City. Moreover, the project conforms with all special standards for religious institutions including the provision that the building and parking be located so as to minimize impacts on adjacent residences. The facility has been sited in the center of the property with significant setbacks from property lines that far exceed minimum requirements including approximately 170 feet along the east and rear property lines and 108 feet on the west property line. In addition, significant landscaped setbacks are provided between the onsite parking area and adjacent property lines including a 20-foot wide landscape strip along the east property line and a 10' to 20 ' wide strip along the other property lines. A colonial architectural style is proposed for the church facility. The peak of the cross gable roof is 31-feet tall. Development Code Section 17.06.040 specifies a maximum building height of 35- feet. A 19-foot tall steeple is proposed toward the front of the building. Section 17.06.050.G allows for this architectural element to exceed the maximum building height within the VL zone by 15 feet, resulting in a 50-foot tall overall structure. Staff believes the height and scale of the proposed church facility is different than surrounding residences. However, with the large building setbacks and landscaped buffers proposed, staff feels the facility is compatible with surrounding single-family residences. COMMUNITY MEETINGS Staff conducted two community meetings with area residents on March 17, 2003 and September 11, 2003 respectively. In addition, staff has received numerous written correspondence from area residents which has been attached to this report. Based on both the comments received at the community meetings and written comments, the following are concerns: RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 4 TRAFFIC According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads Inc., August 2003, the proposed church facility will generate approximately 213 more trips per day than the permitted residential density during the weekdays. Seventeen additional trips will be generated during the AM peak and 15 additional trips will , result in the PM peak hours of a weekday. During weekends, the traffic analysis indicates that the project will generate approximately 887 more trips per day than the permitted residential density with 232 more trips during the mid -day peak hour. The highest traffic generated by the proposed project occurs on mid -day weekends. During the AM and PM weekday peak hours on adjacent streets, the trips will be only slightly higher than those generated by the permitted residential density. When these trips are added to existing and cumulative traffic volumes, the traffic analysis concludes that all surrounding roadways and intersections will operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS "D" or better). The cumulative projects include Golf College, Linfield School Expansion, Meadows Village, Crown Hill Residential Development and other miscellaneous residential developments. In addition to these Cumulative projects, the study included a five percent growth factor for two years to account for other unknown developments in the area. The intersections that were analyzed in the study include Pauba Road at Meadows Parkway, Pauba Road at Green Tree Road, Pauba Road at Calle Cedral, Pauba Road at Corte Villosa, Rancho Vista Road at Camino Romo, Rancho Vista Road at Meadows Parkway, Camino Romo at Corte Villosa and the two site access driveways on Pauba Road. Currently, the traffic volume on Pauba Road is approximately 8,200 vehicles per day. Pauba Road is designated as a Secondary Four -Lane Arterial on the Circulation Element of the General Plan. At its ultimate width, Pauba Road has the capacity of carrying 31,000 vehicles per day. The forecasted built -out volume on Pauba Road is far less than its ultimate capacity. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to cause significant impacts to the existing roadway system within the City of Temecula. Moreover, the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the project traffic analysis and has determined that the project's traffic impacts warrant no further study with the following mitigation measures: 1. Improve entire frontage of Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards— 88' R/W) to include dedication of half -width street right-of-way, installation of half width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signage and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 2. A gate shall be constructed at the easterly driveway on Pauba Road so as to restrict vehicular access between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM Sunday tlnru Thursday. 3. Payment of Western Riverside' County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Free (TUMF). 4. Payment of signal mitigation fee. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latta Day Saints\STAFF REPORTAw 5 LIGHTING Adjacent residents to the east of the subject property are concerned about the glare and/or direct illumination from parking lot lights reaching into the rear of their properties. Section 17.24.050.F. of the Development Code requires a minimum of one footcandle of illumination be achieved throughout the parking lot. This Section also requires that the lighting be both designed and maintained in a manner that prevents glare or direct illumination from intruding into any adjacent residential zone. In order to achieve a minimum of one footcandle within the eastern portion of the parking lot, the applicant is proposing to erect four eighteen foot tall light poles. The poles will be setback approximately 36-feet from the eastern property line. Low sodium cutoff light fixtures will be utilized to ensure that illumination is forced downward rather than flaring out to the sides. Moreover, the parking lot lights will be turned off via a timer at 10:OOPM seven nights a week. The grade of the subject property is six to eight feet lower than the adjacent residences. Four different species of tree will be planted along the eastern property line. The following estimated heights and widths of the trees over time is provided: Sizes are estimated height x width at the size/year indicated: Camphor (multi -trunk) 36° box at time of planting 9'-10' x 6'-7' 1 year 10'-11' x 7'-8' 5 years 13'-15' x 8'-10' Maturity 50' x 60' Arizona Cypress 15 gallon at time of planting 4'-5' x 2' 1 year 6'-8' x 3'-4' 5 years 14'-16' x 7'-8' Maturity 40' x 20' Cork Oak 15 gallon at time of planting 7'-8' x 2'-3' 1 year 8'-9' x 3'-4' 5 years 11'-13' x 6'-7' Maturity 30'-60' x 30'-60' RAC U M003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORTAx 6 Pink Trumpet Tree 24" box at time of planting 9'-11' x 4'-5' 1 year 10'-12' x 5'-6' 5 years 13'-15' x 7'-9' Maturity 25-50' x 25'-50' Given the cut-off light fixtures, elevation difference, proposed landscaping and the fact that the lights will be turned off during the overnight hours, staff believes that onsite parking lot lighting will not create a significant impact on adjacent residences. NOISE Area residents are concerned about potential noise generation associated with the operation of the church facility. The Noise Element of the General Plan indicates that a background noise level of 60 dBA CNEL is compatible (Normally Acceptable) for residential land uses. An acoustical report was prepared for the church facility by Lewitz and Associates Inc dated July 2002. The report concludes that the noise generated from the church facility will not exceed the 60 dBA CNEL threshold. Therefore, noise impacts on surrounding residences will not reach significant levels. CHURCH OPERATIONS Based on the operational statement provided by the applicant listed above, staff recommends the following hours of operation be required as a condition of approval: Sundays: 9:00 AM thru 9:00 PM — Sunday services and Sunday school sessions. Monday -Friday Mornings: 6:30 AM thru 8:00 AM — Youth group. Monday -Thursday Evenings: 6:30 PM thru 9:30 PM — Youth group, recreation, scouting, organizational meetings. Saturdays: 9:00 AM thru 6:00 PM - Cultural, recreational and sports activities. Friday Evenings 7:30 PM thru 9:30 PM — Social, cultural and recreational activities. Saturday Evenings: RAC U M2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 7 7:00 PM thru 9:30 PM — Plays and dinner socials. One Saturday Evening Per Month: 8:00 PM thru 10:00 PM — Youth dance. Staff recommends that all other special events not listed above including the bi-annual Stake Conference meetings shall require acquisition of a Temporary Use Permit this has been made a recommended condition of approval. Staff recommends that the youth dance proposed one Saturday evening per month be required to end at 10:00 PM rather than 11:00 PM given that the City curfew hour for youths is 10:00 PM. This has been made a recommended condition of approval. BUFFERS/LANDSCAPING The church building has been sited in the center of the property so as to reduce impacts on adjacent properties. An approximately 170-foot wide setback has been achieved between the building and the eastern property line. Moreover, setbacks of 108 feet and 170 feet have been achieved from the north and west property lines. These setbacks far exceed the minimum 10- foot wide setback that is required by the Development Code and staff believes the setbacks serve as ample buffers between adjacent residences and the facility. In addition, fully landscaped planter strips ranging from 10' to 20' in width will be established between the onsite parking lot and adjacent property lines which exceed the minimum 5 foot wide planters required in the Development Code. At maturity, numerous trees and shrubs will serve to further buffer the building and parking lot from the adjacent residences. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION, ❑ 1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed Project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review. (Class, name, type) (or) ❑ 1. The proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the previously approved (Negative Declaration) (EIR) and is exempt from further Environmental Review (CEQA Section 15162 subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations). (or) ® 1. An initial study has been prepared and indicates that the project will have the following potential significant environmental impacts unless mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval. Based on the iollowing mitigations, staff recommends adoption of the mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. RNC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of fatter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 8 Air Quality Dust Control Measures /Engine Pollutant Control Measures Cultural Resources Certified Paleontologist onsite when grading in bedrock. Salvage operations initiated if significant concentrations of fossils found. Transportation/Traffic Widen and improve Pauba Road frontage. Installation of gate at eastern driveway to restrict overnight access to parking lot. Payment of TUMF and Signal Mitigations Fees. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION: Staff has determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan and conforms with the City -Wide Design Guidelines and Development Code. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed Latter Day Saints church facility subject to the attached conditions of approval. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (Code Section 17.040.010E) The proposed conditional use is consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed Latter Day Saints Church facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed multi -purpose room, Sunday school classrooms and meeting rooms meet the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code. The church and associated facilities are conditionally permitted uses in the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zoning district. 2. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely,affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the general plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility against the adjacent land uses and has determined that the proposed uses will be compatible with adjacent residential uses with conditions of approval. 3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the development code and required by ithe planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the Very Low Density Residential (VL) development standards identified in the Development Code and has found that the project meets or exceeds all of the requirements. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.dw 9 4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Staff has reviewed the proposed church facility and found that it in no way will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Fire Prevention has reviewed circulation and drive aisle widths and has determined that the site will be adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission of a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the Planning Commission renders their decision. Development Plan (Code Section 17.050.01 OF) 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VQ development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential Zoning District located in the Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed church complex. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. RAC U P�2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORTAM 10 ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions/Full Set - Blue Page 12 2. Project Review Worksheet- Blue Page 13 3. Conditional Use Permit PC Resolution No.2004= Blue Page 14 Exhibit A —Conditions of Approval 4. Development Plan PC Resolution No. 2004= Blue Page 15 Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval 5. Initial Study/Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 16 6. Operational Statement — Blue Page 17 7. Public Correspondence - Blue Page 18 8. Traffic Study — Blue Page 19 RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc I ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PLAN REDUCTIONS RAC U P\2003\03.027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 12 G j g Y pBSgl �� p=5 IN M b 6• t � I is A: b Y 0 0 0 if a'k b a $�a p e a IYII gg00 t{t i NEIGH60R LANDSC. PARKING I&LIGHT PARKING CHURCH ENrR2�,, 2°d ADJACENT PROPERTY - 140 ft. From Pauba Rd. Scale- I " = 30 ` � I & _._. _ _ -sash.— GH&0� LAND6C. I PARKING 1S'LIGHT PARKING LANDSCAPING CHURC44 6' RETAINING Be) ' WALL t- ISO' 4" ADJACENT PROPERTY - 250 ft. From Pauba Rd. Scale- l" = 30 ` w_ 21 Rer• AL� - 8' NElGHf5ofi LANDSC. PARKING LIGHT PPRIONG LANDSC REAR 0:CHURC14 6th ADJACENT PROPERTY - 400 ft. From Pauba Rd. Scale - l" = 30 ` SITE SECTIONS LOOKING SOUTH I OF I z a J d W Y w z_ U) X w z_ z a J W a OR o LO ME w J a C7 z H z Q J CL W Q W J Q WE z Q J W } W Y u Flip H PE �J C7 z z Q J IL W F'- Q w J Q D a C W C.7 z_ X w z J, 1 11 10 Lf') W _I Q D G z z Q a_ w m D Q 8 Rs 12 W_ z_ U) X w z Q J } W Y LU Q F 0 LO i W .J Q 0 0 z z Q CL Lu ir D H Q WE G W_ z LO X Lu z Q J CL } W Y 0 z_ z Q J LU Q i OR 0 LO i _W J Q F'- 0 z_ X LU z a J IL L1J Y t PE 0 -01 Lo 1* LLJ J a F— Eal z z Q J W F- Q W J Q z Q J 6 IN z F- z Q J IL W Q 9 o m MEP I 'TT C7 z_ i- z Q J W CC D Q i r 0 LU Z X w z Q J d W Y w H Q 0- 0 L G E ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 13 PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial Planning Application Number: PA03-0027 1. General Plan Designation: Very Low (VL) Consistent? 2. Zoning Designation: Very Low Den. Res. (VL) Consistent? 3. Environmental Documents Referred to in Making Determination: ® General Plan EIR ® Sensitive Biological Habitat Map ® Sensitive Archeological Area Map ® Sensitive Paleontological Area Map ® Fault Hazard Zone Map ® Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazard Map ® 100 Year Flood Map ® Future Roadway Noise Contour Map ❑ Other (Specify) ❑ Previous EIR/N.D. (Specify Project Name & Approval Date): Yes Yes ❑ Submitted Technical Studies (Specify Name, Author & Date): Paleontological Survey of 4.72 Acre Parcel, John Minch & Assoc., Nov. 2003 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads Inc., Aug. 2003 Temecula Stake Center Acoustical Report, Lewitz & Assoc., July 2002 Cultural Resources Assessment Archeological Associates, October 2003 _ ❑ Other: 4. Environmental Determination: ❑ Exempt ® Mitigated Negative Declaration ❑ Negative Declaration ❑ EIR ❑ 10 Day Review 5. General Plan Goals Consistency: Consistent . Inconsistent ® ❑ ® 20 Day Review Land Use Circulation Housing ❑ 30 Day Review RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latta Day Saints\PROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEETAoc I PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial Consistent Inconsistent ® ❑ OS/Conservation ® ❑ Growth Management/Public Facilities ® ❑ Public Safety ® ❑ Noise ® ❑ Air Quality ® ❑ Community Design ® ❑ Economic Development 6. City-wide Design Guideline Consistency: ❑ Site Plannina: A. How does the placement of building(s) consider the surrounding area character? The project site consists of an undeveloped parcel surrounded by abutting existing single-family residences to the east, undeveloped land to the north and west and existing residential to the south across Pauba Road. The church facility building has been sited generally in the center of the property with onsite parking facilities ocurring on the north, east and west sides of the building. A sixty foot wide turf area will be established between the front of the structure and the Pauba Road right-of-way. The building placement serves to achieve a buffer between the church and both the existing and future residents. _ B. How do the structures interface with adjoining properties to avoid creating nuisances and hazards? The rear yards of the existing single-family residences to the east abut the eastern property line of the project site. An approximately 170 foot wide separation has been achieved between the proposed church building and the eastern property line. Moreover, a separation of 165 feet and 108 feet have also been achieved on the north and west sides of the church building. These significant distances serve to reduce the potential for conflicts and nusiances such as obstruction of views and noise generation. In an effort to reduce the potential conflicts between the onsite parkling area and residences to the east, a twenty -foot wide landscape buffer will be established between the parking lot and the eastern property line. A similar 10' to 20' wide landscape buffer is also being established along the north and west property lines so as to reduce impacts on future residences. C. How does the building placement allow buildings rather than parking lots to define the street edge? The building has been sited in the center of the property. An approximately sixty -foot wide turf area is proposed between the church building and the front property line. The portions of the parking lot that are adjacent to streets will be separated from the roadway with landscaped planters and berming to achieve screening. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Chumh of Jesus Christ of Jatttt Day SaintsTROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEET.doc 2 PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial Parking and Circulation: A. How does the parking lot design allow customers and deliveries to reach the site, circulate through the parking lot, and exit the site easily? The parking lot is designed to achieve a circular traffic pattern with two-way drive ailes and two driveways off Pauba Road. This provides motorists t17e option of entering or entering a parking space from two different directions which assures easy accesibilty and manuvering. In addition, the two ingress1bgress points allow for easy access. B. How does the parking lot design provide safe and convenient access to pedestrians and bicyclists? The parking lot is not overly large and pedestians will only have to cross a maximum of four parking lot drive ailes when entering or exiting the church facility. Bicycle racks will be provided adjacent to the rear entrance of the church providing convenient access. C. How are the service facilities within the parking lot screened or buffered from public view? The proposed trash enclosure shall be located within the interior of the project site at the rear of the church facility. The enclosure shall be screened from the adjacent street and properties. _ ❑ Building Architecture: A. How does the building design provide articulation of the building mass? The design of the building acheives articulation of the building mass through the use of a cross gable roof. A decorative church steeple serves to provide additional roof line variation. Multiple decorative gable end projections occur on the side elelvations with decorative columns supporting the structures. Larger decorative gable end projections are achieved at the front and rear building elevations which provide significant depth and shadow. B. How is each building "stylistically" consistent with all buildings in a complex and on all elevations to achieve design harmony and continuity within itself? A colonial architectural style is proposed consisting of full brick facades and siding at all gable ends. Decorative window trim, vents and columns are utilized. Each building elevation acheives design harmony and continuity with like materials and style. Staff believes the architectural style will serve to compliment the property and neighborhood. C. How does the placement of buildings create a more functional or useful open space between the buildings and/or the street? The church facility is sited in the middle of the property with an approximately 60-foot wide tun` area between the front elevation and the front property line This substantial front yard setback and landscapi2L RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\PROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEET.doc 3 PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial serve to create a streetscape compatible with the residential uses that surround the project site. Moreover, the onsite parking area is screened from the street frontage with landscape planters and berming on each side of both driveways. D. How do each of the architectural elements (building base, windows, doors and openings, cornice and parapet, roof line, and finish materials meet the intent of the design guidelines? In accordance with the City -Wide Design Guidelines, a significant brick fagade is being applied to the elevations. Large decorative columns have been incorporated into the front and rear elevations to provide interest and formality. A decorative steeple and cupola breaks up the building rooArte and enhances the building architecture. Window sizes and shapes are repeated for rhythm. The main. building entry is puncuated with wall surface breaks and projects from the main body of the building. The entrys to the building are identfied by decorative doors and glass side panels. Decorative paving provides a connection between the entrys and adjacent parking area. Building materials and colors are harmonius and varied to provide interest. Significant overhangs create a porch effect and ❑ Landscapino: A. Does the plan provide the following ratio of plantings? ® Yes ❑ No, why? Trees 10% 36" Box 30% 24" Box 60% 15 Gallon Groundcover 100% Coverage In One Year Shrubs 100% 5 Gallon B. Does the landscaped area, ratio, spacing, and size conform with the design guidelines? ® Yes ❑ No C. How does the internal site landscaping frame the building(s) and separate them from the surrounding pavements? Ornamental trees such as camphor tree, sycamore and maindenhair have been located around the perimeter of the church building at comers and projections to both soften and break-up building facades.Moreover, a varitey of shrubs have been provided around the perimeter of the building so as to enhance it's base. Landscaping has also been incorporated into the service areas to provide softening and screening. D. How does the patio and streef furniture, fixtures, walls and fences integrate with of the architecture and landscaping? Onsite service facilities such as the storage building, satelite enclosure and RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latta Day Saints\PROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEETAm 4 PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial trash enclosure will all be constructed with materials compatible with the building architecture.. _ 7. Development Code Consistency: A. How does the plan achieve the performance standards specified in Code Section 17.08.070? Circulation: The project site is served by two access points on each side of the church frontage creating a circular traffic pattern throughout. Onsite drive aisles are adequate in width to accomodate two-way traffic throughout. Service facilities are easlv accessible. Architectural Design: Excessive mass and bulk have been avoided through the use of varying roof heights, planes and decorative windows. Building entrances have been offset and pronounced. The body of the building has been broken -up with large porch like overhangs and associated decorative support columns eliminating long unarticulated walls. The associated service facilities have been incorporated into the bulding utlizing matching architectural design features and materials. Site Planning and Design: The building has been sited in the middle of the property with significant setbacks from property lines. These large seperations serve to reduce impacts on adjacent residential properties. A 10'-20' wide landscaped area has been established along the side and rear property lines further reducing offsite impacts. Trees and shrubbery have been provided around all four sides of the building to further soften and break-up the building elevations. Service facilities have been located within the interior of the property and have been screened. _ Compatibility: The church facility has been sited in the center of the subject property resulting in significant setbacks between the building and adjacent residers. These setbacks far exceed minimum requirements. Significant landscape buffers are also provided to further buffer and screen the facility. B. Does the application and submitted plans on file conform with all of the applicable minimum development standards? ® Yes, with conditions ❑ No Net Lot Area: 4.72 Acres RAC U PN2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\PROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEET.doc 5 Total Floor Area: Floor Area Ratio: Lot Coverage: PROJECT REVIEW WORKSHEET Development Plan Commercial 24,287 Square Feet .12 Front 60 Feet Side rFeet 7 108 Feet +/ Side 170 Feet Rear Street 170 Feet +/ Parkin 96 S aces Required 286 Provided ArchJPaleo Fault Zone Flood Noise Traffic Habitat Subs./Ligfctn Stream/Creek Air Quality X Very Low VL VeryLow VL North Vacant East Residential SP-3 Marg. Village Low Medium Res. LM West Vacant Very Low VL Ve Low VL South Residential SP-4 Paloma del Sol Low Medium Res. LM RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\PROJECr REVIEW WORKSHEETAoe 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004_ (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 14 ATTACHMENT NO.4 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 15 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, A CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF SANCTUARY, MULTI- PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS AND MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON 4.72 ACRES. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA, ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 955-050-017. WHEREAS, Cornwall Associates Architects, filed Planning Application No. PA03-0027, 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 May 19, 2004, 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 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 OFTHE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated !by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code: Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F) A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Very Low Density Residential (VL) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Very Low Density Residential (VL) Zoning District locatec'in the Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed church complex. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. . The architecture proposed for the building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and indicated that the project would have no significant effects on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been adopted. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application,. a request to develop a 24,287 square foot church facility consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, class rooms and meeting rooms setforth 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 19"' day of May 2004. John Telesio, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certifythat PC Resolution No. 2004 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19'" day of May 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: (Development Plan) Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a Latter Day Saints church facility consisting of sanctuary, multi -purpose room, classrooms and meeting rooms totaling 24,287 square feet on 4.72-acre site. Development Impact Fee Category: Exempt Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-050-017 Approval Date: May 19, 2004 Expiration Date: May 19, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty -Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One -Thousand Three - Hundred and Fourteen Dollars ($1,314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Negative Declaration 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/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 3. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 4. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 5. 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. 6. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Site Plan, Grading Plan, Building Elevations, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, and the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department. 7. The applicant/developer shall fully comply with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. 8. 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 or any successors in interest. 9. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 10. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Board, contained on file with the Planning Department. a. Roofing: Fiberglass Composition Shingle — "Ebony Wood" b. Siding, rim, Sash and Soffits: Aluminum —"Bone White" C. Columns and Features — "Bone White" d. Steeple and Cupola — Aluminum — "Bone White" e. Exterior Walls: Brick — "Monterey Blend" 11. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 12. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 13. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved colored architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. 14. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 15. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 16. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Conceptual Landscaping Plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The following items shall accompany the plans: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. C. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). 17. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. Prior to Occupancy 18. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS General Requirements 19. A Grading Permit for a precise grading, including all on -site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained street right-of-way. 20. 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. 21. All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. 22. The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. i a. Street improvements, which may, include, but not limited to: curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street lights, signing and striping, b. Storm drain facilities and C. Sewer and domestic water systems 23. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 24. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 25. 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. 26. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 27. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department C. Department of Public Works d. Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau 31. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject properly. 32. 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. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 33. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00%minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard No. 400. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. 34. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half -width street right-of-way, installation of half -width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. All utilities 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. C. All existing and proposed power poles and electric lines except lines rated 331(v or greater, shall be installed underground. 35. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. 36. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along Pauba Road pursuant to the new location of the driveway. 37. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 38. A Signing and Striping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Pauba Road; and ensure a left turn pocket for accessing the site. 39. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 40. 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. 41. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 42. 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 43. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 44. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 45. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 46. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2125 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a total fire flow of 2525 GPM with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automaticfire 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 III -A) ( 1 47. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 2 hydrants, in a combination of on -site and o•ff- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a 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 III-B) 48. 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) 49. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection priior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 50. 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) 51. 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) 52. 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) 53. Prior to building construction, dead end road ways 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) 54. 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) 55. 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) 56. 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) 57. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi -family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi -family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and /or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 58. 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) 59. 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) 60. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 61. 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) 62. 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. 63. 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 64. 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. 65. 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) 66. 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) POLICE DEPARTMENT 67. All exterior doors shall have vandal resistant fixtures and shall be commercial or institutional grade. 68. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the building shall be removed or painted over within 24-hours of being discovered. Notify the Temecula Police Department immediately so a report can be taken. 69. Upon completion of construction, the building shall be equipped with a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24 hours a day by a designated private alarm company. 70. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 71. All perimeter landscaping, on site lighting and fencing within this development, shall be maintained by the property owner or a private maintenance association. 72. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 73. 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. 74. A Class II Bikeway along the Pauba Road will be identified on the street improvement plans and completed in concurrence with the street improvements and General Plan standards. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 75. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the Citys franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. 76. Priorto the first building permit or installation of additional street lighting, the developershall complete the TCSD application process, submit an approved Edison Streetlight Plan and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. BUILDING AND SAFETY 77. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 78. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on March 31, 2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 79. 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 street -lights 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. 80. 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. 81. Obtain all building plans and permit. approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 82. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 83. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1,1998) 84. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 85. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 86. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power forthe operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 87. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 88. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 89. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 90. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 91. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 92. A pre -construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 93. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 94. Show all building setbacks. 95. 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. 94-21, 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 OUTSIDE AGENCIES 96. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the attached Rancho California Water District letter dated January 27, 2003. 97. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the attached Riverside County Flood Control dated May 3, 2004. 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 Applicant's Printed Name Date WARREN D. WILLIAMS `�outrtr r�000 meral Manager -Chief Engineer 0 >r c, a ��rBlrATI v� RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention:Harris Ladies and Gentlemen: The District does not normally cities. The District also does n other flood hazard reports for s to items of specific interest to control and drainage facilities % and District Area Drainage Plai provided. Re: _PA03 -CO 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 51180.1 > for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or iments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood :d a logical component or extension of a master plan system, tigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such issue: This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. SEE eFLOW This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a to ical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership or such aci i es on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project is located within the limits of the Districrs Area Drainage Plan for which drainge fees have been adopted; appp Ica a fees s ou a par y cashier's check or money order only to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of building or gradingg permits whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of ihe.actual permit. GENERAL INFORMATION This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDESI permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval( should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMAI mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require thaj the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR) poor to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMRS prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 160111603 Agreement from the Califomia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the projfectis exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certificationmay be required rom the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. An enermc6nent Permit s1-Wl be Ob}ained -(;br an Con$-i't't..1GW&1 WkkA Very truly yours, ac+tui4je5 txcilf't wtdi,in Usiricl' . C t O� t�tCu� cN' t�r'}1es. ARTURO DIAZ rCIMICCtl�0.110))e% Senior Civil Engineer TSAis}ir�e �acil;Vt : c: u J PW9'ba- d SJ&M Lk4u) Date: MS 11 January 27, 2003 Rolfe Preisendanz, Case Planner City of Temecula Board of Directors Planning Department Jeffrey MMinisterPresidentt 43200 Business Park Drive John E. Hoagland Post Office Box 9033 Sr Vice President Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Stephen J. Carom RalphA.Daily SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY BennR. Drake PARCEL NO.3 OF PARCEL MAP NO.9019 Liao D. Herman APN 955-050-017 C.I. F. He CASE NO. PA03-027 JAN 3 0 2003 Iu Officers: John F. Hennigar Dear Mr. Preisendanz: General Manager PMmorof Finance - Forbes Please be advised that the above -referenced property is located within the Director oinanc Treasurer boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, j� B°h''Rm°°e therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between Director of Ez.giocc ng Kenneth C. Dealy RCWD and the property owner. Director of Operations & Maintenance - Par R. Luaeh If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and controller requirements. Linda M. Frog. District Secretary/Administrative Services Manager Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an C. Michael Cowart Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Beat Beat & Krieger LLP General Counsel TL you have .:y questlons, plesae CCn.,tact a^En..6ni_. ePr_in--g Seryic e enrest-m tN_? at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 03\SB:mc007\012-T6\FCF Rancho California Water District 2135 Winchester Road . Post Offrce B. 9017 . Temecula. Calif —in 925F9 om 7 . renal ooa.aonn . cev ronnwoc°ocn d E E E d N dY m d.LC m cad o U�0 � $ D 0 a) 0 U 0 y a) Q) ed Lr O C a3 C O U (sl pp 01 C a) c a3 Q) c a) O C0 O O c O O F *. O) U cm U D1 C �N W y k4" 08 08 08 U O rn d r -° m a) �°n0co LAN c-0 cco " me A N �>c`� a ° N c a) d C 'a� C° Q l° Co 0 �- E Y N O '- 0 (j en +L+ Z W l4 O �, U a) ' O ... v •O a T o C -0° o o> 3 a3 0� a `o .2 U N 0 Co a�— Q w _ 0 n N U ° m U c> E (7 L aS N C N 'O "O N a) a) a) O O y O N a7 N 2 C _; c N "' a 3 d N p a Co O f6 U +' CO 3 �Nr O' V N O N w 0 C c0 N r C F:yy ) QO)CD a) N> 3m F 4ui —a)>o C N N 0 0°ppnsm a) c 0> N L o 8nN33=��° .O w ==��n 3 ���� p c_ N C -� �� °•J N N o�.N t� a) U 3.0� ° 7 >' E 12 C N- C N ° N ..'c. N N _r_ T fa aC77 ) co0 >' a)(t_ >, c 3 m C o > w0 m Q i °• -a 7 O 8 to C f6 c E U U C N O aqy d ,p jzy =: �.—N-0 E (am 2° 9 C as _° 1—'vvwd 3w E rn Q m•3 m nwn c�.� O a) a 16 0 m > > r d V G c p•ap 0 N m m o ax) 'a0-+ 0 C C C 8.2 �6 ate° d w 0 0 Y Y n- .N�' N d Y N O N O CL _ .�.` U .�' N Uri❑ U) N m7t) m•O c @ C m m O tp m O m U p7 U 2 w N C N 7 = 7 = 0 U � O N N.C= 8.0 U N > C m O w° a c 3 � y N Y Y= m.c N m � m u=i N N Q r 7 m C o$ u) m _ m -p U 1] •U C 'o p m o V o�w N 9 E E w'O m y 0 N O N C E C N= w N E t vi m O N OI" N U .N O m N @ N m N cu E 3 Co N> L C N N N C .LO. N N O N j 0-0 m O E L co m N U L N O d N C m N•m c N U N YO—•2 2 O N O d U 'O m 0 N N N E E 7 •o. E v 3 �' p N — X _ °' m t° d �w C Nw m N rnN 3 �NNL N EC•E pCc •�ac' °U CCN ° OEo N0 NNN -p m Q p >L � ydda�V Umv" pmOd a)° v>v p .T N . aN L=�CoU) "o L aa� Ny 3 t m° :3 a t° U m ff° >> w c p>p _ N O 3_ Y 'L-' p U O m O f`6 U O m E > <V O N N> Y L O N N N .0 O . % y N a0 N O ).0 U O a 7 r O N N N N L N m •G FD V N m Ea :3 N am. ;•• U O m a p U) OV �V pm�0• N N mN U N O __RN Y 3 '�L 4U1 o m d. c CO c NC Ny g SCD S'O N N0 CH N OL fL Y 7 m %O a < ¢ O L m �--• N O Cy a'IT `mac _p v -p > Nam td� CD WQ°Noma o��_�E�E ?3 x d 8 5 om� m Co Hw N ai m amp._ o.0 cu 3 E a 3 ci 3v v o c� (D aci c0(D ca) c(D O O 7 a) � 6) N U) t' as ao N t'' a�6) t, a.0 V a@ t-' am n a .n o. n o. Ucao U�0 Uaa UD 00 4N) (D N a) N '> '> -Dc 2 0 Dc a) O •Dc 12.0 v N v 2 O) z M U D) 6 O) 0) rn2 rn2 m2. rn rn C y 'C C y 'C C y 'C C 'C C 'C C D 0 CCo U pCp D O 0 C a) N C = O` N N 12 3 N a) c �. t m a) 3 a) w a) a) a) c U) 0I ++L. :5 D) C UU)) 'D O O ca ~ N C no r+ ._ La 0 - 0 c0. o CL ra)8cc - `oo ra2 Ca). 8 aa)i -� 7 C 0 C O " N cc � O C C ° 30 0 0 oa = o Eck �M :3 uEc coo �c 'O O Q -D -D C � N O a) O @ cc6 E I Emo a'080)0v�o_ ° aa)Cp CD C n53 �rnO�tn O CD a)0Y =ter 0 3$= 0= A o0. r o L m 3 t m Mecca �rn 0-o'2 O_ a� 0 4N)�0 C) O C U) � ME 0 0 „N, N L V) n. UOd 'CN N7 7 � L C•�M 0 C.:R 0 N � 0 r- N > Q C N C_ C N p• Z C O N a) .O U p �+L E a) C C COw a N O O) O N Qt N a CL 0 af M Q.:s a0 2O3 ��c .D 0 2 C N .D N m N C C N O �. � y a) d Cpp C N 4= p p N a O 0 C ;d 2 O m'E N `a 9 >� O 3 '5) n N U 'D > N U > Q E 00) a) Qw aa)w FL- CL(D� n$ Q-0 ccn6-0 m a) 2 N of O O ` N O a) 0 N _p a) 0 v 0 O 7 C O Vn� a) a) On C E .n E E IL m FL 0- m CL mao d m n a n UC'U U��U�O U U N fC0 7 0 7 0 C C C _C — T L — T L C L .n O •n O O MCL O O n O O V O a a- o a` o a` l6 t 'e c(c 19 33 0 cc o t C - U) C� m 2 o c m .; as Q C L N °: 7 ca 0 C � O N ; ca a o O U r.O c N N ' c O D m p U 3 CD 0)C �' N n �J = N w 7 ; L U Co cEcu �wpEc� w cc U N N N O O m U _ 00 COD dCD a a)w mo U) w v, v w e o_ c 0-3. 88 m � w cw Uoi� d @ > o cm 0 L f�/1 O L c 23F- E LL O) := m c� ctL 22 E c $ °D� o �mg CD a im � co > C�Om N N N C_ N 7 L V% C . > m N O< `.. C O a) m 0 a+ C a)OU (a •0 3C.� N o0. m E >1 *am EC >. Eo m N N a � a.2 c CD4 (Q O CD � 0 i+ U c X l9 O .C. O 0 (0 aN m •c c N U M ATTACHMENT NO.5 INTIAL STUDY/MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 16 City of Temecula Planning Department Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration PROJECT: Planning Application No. 03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit & Development Plan) APPLICANT: Kent Cornwall, Cornwall Associates Architects 234 N. El Molino Avenue, Monrovia, CA 91101 LOCATION: Generally located north side ofPauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa (APN 955- 050-017) DESCRIPTION: To construct, establish and operate a 24,287 square foot church facility including a sanctuary, multi -purpose room and classrooms. The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the Planning Commission intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project. The mitigation measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment are included in the project design and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached to this Notice and will be included as part of the Negative Declaration for this project. The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is April 26, 2004 to May 16, 2004. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033. City Hall is located at 43200 Business Park Drive. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through: X The Local Newspaper. X Posting the Site. X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact Matt Hams, Associate Planner at (909) 694-6400. Prepared by: (Signature) (Name and Title) RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\NOnCE OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION.doc City of Temecula Planning Department Agency Distribution List PROJECT: Planning Application No. PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit & Development Plan) DISTRIBUTION DATE: April 21, 2004 CITY OF TEMECULA: Building & Safety ........................................ (X) Fire Department ........................................... (X) Police Department ....................................... (X) Parks & Recreation (TCSD) ......................... (X) Planning, Advance .......................................... ( ) Public Works ................................................ (X) ................ ( ) STATE: Caltrans........................................................... ( ) Fish & Game ................................................... ( ) Mines & Geology ............................................ ( ) Regional Water Quality Control Board .......... ( ) State Clearinghouse ........................................ ( ) State Clearinghouse (15 Copies) ..................... ( ) Water Resources ............................................. ( ) .............. ( ) FEDERAL: Army Corps of Engineers ............................... ( ) Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... ( ) ................ ( ) ................ ( ) REGIONAL: Air Quality Management District ................. (X) Western Riverside COG ................................. ( ) .............. ( ) CASE PLANNER: Matthew Harris CITY OF MURRIETA: Planning........................................................ RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ............... (X) Airport Land Use Commission ....................... ( ) Engineer....................................................... ( X ) Flood Control ............................................... (X) Health Department ....................................... (X) Parks and Recreation ...................................... ( ) Planning Department ................................... ( X ) t Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA)..... (X) Riverside Transit Agency ............................ ( X ) ............. ( ) UTILITY: Eastern Municipal Water District ................ (X) Inland Valley Cablevision ............................ (X ) Rancho CA Water District, Will Serve........ (X) Southern California Gas .............................. (X) Southern California Edison .......................... (X) Temecula Valley School District ................. (X) Metropolitan Water District ......................... (X) OTHER: Pechanga Indian Reservation ....................... (X) Eastern Information Center .......................... (X) Local Agency Formation Comm ..................... ( ) RCTC........................................................... (X) Homeowners' Associations .......................... (X) R:\C U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\NOTICE OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION.doc 2 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 I Environmental Checklist Project Title Planning Application No. 03-0027 (Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit)— Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints — Temecula Stake Center Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Matthew C. Harris, Associate Planner 909 694-6400 Project Location Generally located North Side of Pauba Road and 140 feet west of Corte Villosa APN 955-050-017 . Project Sponsor's Name and Address Kent Cornwall Cornwall Associates, Architects 234 N. El Molino Avenue, Monrovia CA 91101 General Plan Designation Very Low Density Residential L Zpning Very Low Density Residential VL Description of Project To construct, establish and operate a 24,287 square foot church facility including a sanctuary, multi -purpose room and classrooms. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting North: Very Low Density Residential (Vacant) East: Low Medium Density Residential (Single Family Homes) South: Low Medium Density Residential (Single Family Homes) West: Very Low Density Residential Vacant Other public agencies whose approval None required RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agricultural Resources Population and Housing Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources, Water Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geologic Problems Transportation/Traffic Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service Systems Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning X 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 impact on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. �f �p • 9110 L Matthew C. Harris, Associate Planner Printed name April 14, 2004 Date City of Temecula For R:\C U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 3 I nti VMVA RUAU — I JESUS CHRIST acinledUre T 6 1 (; (MIATINlN.MIMf arm,,�;« Jall �Id�� PROPOSED CHURCH BUILDING enor cl' 11 rnUDA ROAD, JCMKULACA[.lF. SSOaa 2S monagwmeA 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: ( p_; `ks *x� a' a :.. `x x e r e} ` "�` • � � '"�py �( $ � I}'+f ` L•�'%Llift�'{% 'k a,iy�+.t i 'n.. � � I #�"j[N`j}-(I .i, ti' IIbTi u I3 Tr'rri iif� Y "sTrl°.*17•S..laGr.��i&."Y•.v.SY't-rr, tta'-p ___ "�_�...1GsIJaQL. limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic hiahwav? C. I Substantially degrade the existing visual character or d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? C.iu�ZT 11_I i 1.a. No Impact. The existing property has not been identified as a scenic vista in the City of Temecula's General Plan. 1.b. No Impact. No major outcroppings, substantial trees, or historic buildings exist on the project site. Pauba Road is not designated as a scenic resource nor is the site within the view of a state scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the proposed project or future development of the site. 1.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be located adjacent to existing and future single-family units on all four sides. The project site is subject to City Design Guidelines ands Development Code standards. These guidelines and standards serve to regulate building architecture and height, setbacks from property lines and the type and amount of landscape improvements onsite. Based on the City's requirement to conform to these guidelines and standards, the proposed project, as conditioned, has no potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and surroundings. 1.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will produce a new source of light and glare. All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. However, all onsite exterior lighting will be conditioned to comply with the Riverside County Light Pollution Ordinance No. 655 which will result in a less than significant impact. Due to the proximity to residential uses, the project also has a potential to create light and glare impacts on the surrounding area and uses. Parking lot lighting will consist of low sodium cut-off fixtures which direct the light downward rather than out to the sides on adjacent properties. Therefore, the exterior lighting associated with the project, as conditioned, will result in a less than significant impact. 2. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a. IConvert Prime Farmland, of Statewide Importance Unique Farmland, or Farmland (Farmland), as shown on the to the Farmland Mapping and /ZI RAC U P\2003\03.027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 4 Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment, which X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: 2a.-c. No Impact. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past the site has not been used for agricultural purposes. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract: nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no impact related to this issue. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: L ifi- t 'a. U aMEMO= i o a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable a X air quality plan? 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 ozoneprecursors? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X of people? Comments: 3.a - c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not conflict with applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The proposed church facility will not achieve the threshold for potentially significant air quality impacts established by the South Coast Air Quality. Management District as depicted in SCAQMD'S CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Source 3) page 6-10, Table 6.2. As a consequence, no significant air quality impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.d. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. As proposed, the project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrators. The future development of the church facility will create minor pollutants during the grading and construction phase of the project emanating from fugitive dust and small quantities of construction equipment pollutants. These impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant because the project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402. These rules are conditions on the grading permit. The future church facility will not generate significant volumes of pollutants or create substantial pollutant RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc S concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors. Therefore, with the mandatory application of mitigation measures identified below, the impact will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: 1. The City hereby requires contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust beyond the working area boundary, the City Public Works Department will monitor the project site and will require contractors to increase watering to the point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%), and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations. 2. All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities that will not be utilized within three days from placement, will be either covered with: (a) plastic, (b) an alternative cover deemed, equivalent to plastic, or (c) sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer. 3. All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit. Developer shall, prior to commencement of construction; provide City with a copy of the contract containing this provision. 4. Before vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the contractor shall require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to remove dirt that can be tracked onto adjacent roadways. 5._ The streets shall be swept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove soil tracked onto the paved roadway surface. 6. Project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402 requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below. a. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner acceptable to the City. b. All on -site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. C. All material transported off -site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. d. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. All engines shall be properly operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced through the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records to the City- Attention Matt Hams, Associate Planner. 8. All diesel -powered vehicles shall be turned off when not in use for more than 30 consecutive minutes and gasoline - powered equipment shall be turned off when not in use for more than five consecutive minutes. 9. The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible and where economically competitive. Developer shall, prior to commencement of construction; provide City with a copy of contract containing this provision. 3.e. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The project may create objectionable odors such as fugitive dust or small quantities of construction equipment pollutants during the construction phase of the project. These impacts will be short in duration, are mitigated under 5.d, and are not considered significant over the long term. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. I Have a substantial adverse RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\lnidal Study.doc 6 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: .. .. s 8 ..,n t through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, Hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X LConflict Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? Comments: 4.a-e. No Impact. The General Plan does not designate the project site as a potentially sensitive habitat site. The site is outside the habitat area identified for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and does not contain wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act. There is no anticipated biological impact associated with this project. 4.f. No Impact. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: ,gyp 2IN . . 0 �.� � # z,:,���"" � 1 „„„._.�,-.,,.ylssue Bnd�0"Orh: J tiom u e . "" f a� @ ,, i a ncp orated Ica t Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? X b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? X C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological I I X RAC U R2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 7 resource or site or unique geologic feature? rd. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Comments: 5.a. Less Than Significant. After analysis, City staff has determined that the subject site does not meet the criteria of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition, the City of Temecula General Plan and associated EIR does not identify the site as a historical resource area. 5. b.d.Less Than Significant. The City's General Plan does not identify the project site as an area of sensitivity for archeological resources. However, a Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by Archaeological Associates. The assessment determined that no prehistoric or historic cultural resources of any kind were discovered during the course of the investigation. This determination was made based on both a record search and field assessment. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated. 5.0 Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The City's General Plan has identified the project site as a highly sensitive paleontological area. A Paleontological Survey was prepared by John Minch and Associates Inc. The survey determined that the project site may contain paleontological resources from Pleistocene sedimentary units. The rock units exposed on the site are considered to be of high Paleontological sensitivity and are known to contain significant fossils adjacent to the proposed project site. The Survey concludes that the project site can be developed and still have a less than significant impact on paleontological resources with the following mitigation measures: Mitigation Measures: 1. A Certified Paleontologist shall be onsite at all times when grading in bedrock. 2. Salvage operations should be initiated and coordinated with the developer if other significant concentrations of fossils are encountered. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? MmU.S t r p a. _ Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on X the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B X RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 8 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: 6.a.i, ii, iii. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project may have a significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquefaction and subsidence of the land) and expansive soils, and will have a less than significant impact to erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill. The project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potentially significant impacts will be reduced to a less than significant impact and conditioned to conform to Uniform Building Code standards. Further, standard practices will be followed for grading and compaction to reduce these impacts to insignificant levels. After the incorporation of these elements, no significant impacts are anticipated. 6.a.iv, No Impact. The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.b.c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. Potential impacts will be mitigated by conditions of approval to comply with State of California Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone development criteria and construction in accordance with the Uniform Building Code standards. Standard practices for compaction of the soil will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic; ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquefaction), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of proper compaction of the soils and landscaping. 6.d. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide a soil report prior to grading and recommendations contained in this report are complied with during construction. Standard practices for the compaction of the soil will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic: ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. 6.e. No Impact. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project is connected to the existing public sewer system; therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. r. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: RAC U P12003103-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsMnitial Study.doc 0 a ua. a fl oM.. .O rcasa. Create a significant hazard to the public or the 77X environment through the routine transport, use, or dis osal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or, the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or X acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: 7.a. No Impact. The project will result in a less than significant impact in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project because of the consistency with law requirements. 7.b. No Impact. The project will result in a less than significant impact due to risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of accident or upset conditions. The Fire Department reviewed this project according to the information provided by the applicant and found that there should be minimal hazards if designed, built, and used according to the submitted plans. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7.c. No Impact. The project consists of a church facility. The project site is located within one -quarter mile of the Temecula Middle School and the Vintage Hills Elementary School campuses. The operation of construction equipment and machinery during the development of the site may emit hazardous air pollutant emissions and/or handle some hazardous materials such as oils and fuels. However, these emissions and materials should be of limited quantities over a short duration of time. No impacts are, anticipated. RAC U M2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 10 7.d. No Impact. This project site is not, nor is it located near, a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. i.e. No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. No impact upon airport uses will result from this project. 7.f. No Impact. The project site is not located within two miles of a private airstrip. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 7.g. No Impact. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project:. 7.h. No Impact. The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable brush, grass, or trees. The project is a church facility surrounded by single-family residences. The applicant will be eliminating existing potentially flammable brush in association with the development of the site. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area. No impacts are anticipated. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: j a a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? h, Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site? e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, X which would impede or redirect flood flows? RAC U Pt200=3-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources. Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b.f. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project will not have an affect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on- or off -site. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances are required for the project to safety and adequately handle runoff that is created. As designed, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the existing facilities. 8.e. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. The project is not anticipated to create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the development of the subject site. In addition, the project is conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. A less than significant impact is associated with this project. 8.g. No Impact. This project represents a Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a church facility within an area zoned for church uses. No residential housing is being proposed; no impact is associated with this project. 8.h. No Impact. The project will have no impact on people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because the project site is located outside of the 100-year floodway as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Figure 7-3) and the Flood Insurance Rate Map Community -Panel Number 0607420005B. No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.i.j. No Impact. The project site is not subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow, as these events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 12 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: s o i.. ❑o. atao o ao e. a. Physically divide an established community? 7 X b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation Ian? Comments: 9.a. No Impact. The project site is an infill residential parcel surrounded by both developed and vacant single-family parcels. Adjacent land use compatibility issues have been addressed in the site; design. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.b. No Impact. The project, as proposed, is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Very Low Density Residential (VL) and conforms to all applicable provisions of the Development Code. 9.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the fee area for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long -Term Habitat Conservation Plan. All development within this fee area is required to pay a one-time mitigation fee. As a consequence, a less than significant impact is anticipated. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: 10.a.b. No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources or in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has given the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, it has been determined that this area contains no deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in a report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California. Special Report 165, prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Inidal Study.doc 13 ss u esla n9 9 n Wm-o a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in 77 excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X roundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: r) I I.a.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The Noise Element of the Temecula General Plan indicates that a background noise level of 60 dBA CNEL is compatible (Normally Acceptable) for residential land uses. According to the Acoustical Report for the Temecula Stake Center, by Lewitz and Associates( Inc., dated July 30, 2002, certain activities at the church facility may be audible to surrounding, residences, i.e. automobile noise, activities within the building, etc. However, it is not anticipated that the activities will exceed the 60-dBA CNEL threshold. Therefore, the noise impact on surrounding residences from the proposed church facility is not anticipated to be significant 11.b. Less Than Significant Impact. The uses conducted by the project are not activities that would expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Although there will be an increase in ground borne vibration and noise during grading and construction, these will be of a temporary and short duration. Due to the limited nature of this exposure and by maintaining compliance with the City Municipal Code relating to grading and construction noise, there will be a less than significant impact. 11.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, this source of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be considered significant. Furthermore, construction activity will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity. A less than significant impact would be anticipated. 11.e.f. No Impact. This project is not within two miles of a private airstrip, therefore, the users of the site will .not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. Consequently no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 14 1 nw e � a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: 12.a.b.c. No Impact. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project site is a residential in -fill site surrounded by existing or future single-family development. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the project is a proposed church facility. The project will neither displace housing nor people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: jail 1 ,7a€� :., ue. _n. rma - a.. n oea.. - ,. rti•:., a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associates with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: b. Fireprotection? X C. Policeprotection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X Comments: 13.a.b.c.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, nor result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. City Ordinance exempts churches from having to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF). Churches draw from surrounding existing residential areas which have already paid DIF fees for the area. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated. J.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, not, result in a need for new or altered school facilities. Church facilities do not contribute to the demand for schools given that additional students are not generated in association with the facility. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 1 ri 13.f. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. The project will not have a significant impact upon, nor result in a need for new or altered public facilities. The Rancho California Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District and the Riverside Department of Environmental Health have been made aware of this project. A condition of approval has been placed on this project that will require the proponent toi obtain "Will Serve" letters from all of the public utilities agencies. Service is currently provided for the surrounding residential homes, so extending service to this site is probable, which would result in less than significant impacts as a result of the project. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: Ls W:. 0 1. u 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: 14.a.b. No Impact. The project consists of a church facility. A fully enclosed multi -purpose room with some recreation facilities such as a basketball court is proposed that will be used exclusively by church members The anticipated need to increase the neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational\ facilities as a result of this project is unlikely. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: W7. 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 X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Sludy.doc 16 Comments: 15.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. The project site is currently zoned (VL) Very Low Density Residential, which is also the land use assumed in the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan. The City's Development Code allows for the development of church facilities in the VL zone subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads Inc., the proposed church facility will generate approximately 213 more trips per day then the permitted residential density. Seventeen additional trips will be generated during the AM peak and 15 additional trips will result in the PM peak hours of a weekday. During weekends, the traffic analysis indicates that the project will generate approximately 887 more trips per day then the permitted residential density with 232 more trips during the mid -day peak hour. The highest traffic generation count generated by the proposed project occurs on mid -day weekends. During the AM and PM weekday peak hours on adjacent streets, the trips will be only slightly higher than those generated by the permitted residential density. When these trips are added to existing cumulative impact counts, the traffic analysis concludes that all surrounding roadways and intersections will operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS "D" or better). Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to cause significant impacts to the existing road system within the City of Temecula. Moreover, the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the project traffic analysis during the review process and has determined that the project's traffic impacts warrant no further study or mitigations beyond those recommended. The following mitigation measures will be implemented: Mitigation Measures: Improve entire frontage of Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards — 88' RIW) to include dedication of half -width street right-of-way, installation of half width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signage and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 2. A gate shall be constructed at the easterly driveway on Pauba Road so as to restrict vehicular access between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM Sunday thru Thursday. 3. Payment of Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) 4. Payment of signal mitigation fee. 15.c.d.No Impact. The proposed development of this property will not result in a change in air traffic patterns. Moreover, the design of the project will not pose a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the people utilizing the roads in the vicinity of the project. The project site's Pauba Road frontage will be widened and curb, gutter sidewalk and streetlights will be installed to City standards thereby improving both the design safety and traffic flow of the roadway. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.e. No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project, as designed, complies with current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.f. No Impact. The proposed development complies with the City's Development Code parking requirements for church facilities. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.g. No Impact. The project site is located on a road that has access to public transportation. The project ! i as proposed does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 17 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: " X a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the a licable Regional Water QualityControl 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 projects projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the roject's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 16.a.b.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. However, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.c. No Impact. The amount of runoff from the project is not anticipated to be any greater than what was anticipated by construction of the site. Consequently, construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities is not anticipated. 16.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FOR further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)" Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f.g. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any( potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 18 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. E., 9 e Si c In R the project have the potential to degrade the quality EU C n Ee a_:.. X e environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a 7a.Dot;s or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate lant or animal community, reduce the number or trict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal eliminate important examples of the major periods of lifornia history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futureprojects? C. Does the project have environmental effects, which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: 17.a. No Impact. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment on site or in the vicinity of the project. The site lies within an existing residential area and serves as an in -fill project. The project will not substantially reduce the habitat offish or wildlife. No historic resources are anticipated to be impacted. 17.b. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The cumulative effects from the project related to traffic/circulation, air quality and land use are significant but they are being mitigated to less than significant levels with the incorporated mitigation. All cumulative effects for the various land! uses of the subject site as well as the surrounding developments were analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. With the mitigation measures in place, the project will be consistent with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impacts related to the future development will not have a significant impact. 17.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The church facility will be designed and developed consistent with the Development Code, and the General Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. I a. I Earlier analvses used. Identifv earlier analvses and state where thev are available for review. I Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitiaation measures based on the earlier analvsis. RAC U Pt2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 19 C. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. Comments: 18.a. There were no earlier analyses specifically related to this project site. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report and a number of special studies (listed under Sources) were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study 18.b. There were no earlier impacts, which affected this project. 18.c. The mitigation measures are addressed in the Initial Study. RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsUnitial Study.doc 20 SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan, adopted November 9, 1993. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted July 2, 1993. A Cultural Resources Assessment of a 4.72 Acre Parcel, Archaeological Associates, dated October 31, 2003. 4. Paleontological Survey of a 4.72 Acre Parcel, John Minch & Assoc. Inc., dated November 2003. 5. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads Inc., dated August 1, 2003. 6. Temecula Stake Center Acoustical Report, Lewitz & Assoc., dated July 30, 2002. 7. Southern California Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Initial Study.doc 21 p N 0- = N a` = N a Y m Gy q ` m CL m0. CL U>� z �/FI U�0 U�❑ U y 6) 0 N (D N a) ul m "" �� CO U �U �U O)co U m q Q's, =0 c m.4 =O cO mo c mo O)o mU U) C N C N F z C C D U D U O U U x U () _T'O �" m a) O) N C "O "'' O) C O A r0-nUmr m > C `>mm D > a)- U > a a ° N C a) 0 C M 'E =O N- Q ' 2 Co W cca O o mom= ow'yv 'N � a)r �r 3 =,.. a)L 3 c m c 0-0 OF e�yJ CL� 03mci an 0 am C>o E d d O a) rnam m°)=�wC0 C44))cm m— O O °c N m a) ao 3 N'3 a aims •N o a�y1 N N 0 m O U m '7 'O O C Q O N N O N w U O) O O C O L co '0 maa))o M a) �ooma`) N a - > -O a) C U> N 2L3m N N 3 C Q O N 3 C N C C0 __ 7 L Cp a) -O — tN� a •O N 3 a) ».O U L l�-+r C m O = .LO. 3 w E y p) � d = N °' aa)i 'L°)' @ � c o a)v C c� o 0 m E U coo a) a) a) U US m N O a 0 TO 5. m b c v 3 Y —_ O O U. O> 3 m O m 0 Oc O L O T" � OCo (n C OXN C E O OOCD La)te m_0°) m •Uci> o�•9 a) (C)a) 2N O) .0 `> me o. m > a) O U % O) O) O f`6 E L O _— L N co Ern C N w Q°�° cm3 mawa °' z o F O m C Q " C O O Ci a+ >��Co0 7 = F" ca a rw w'N—Nm Co O. O. C o 0 N 0 m m`O ": C ,Z O C 9 ara�COO m Q 2-0 d 2 N U 0 o U U N Q. 3.2 N d toN O O N N C'j ca C j ca N C C Co 0 C 12.2 "O C fp O O) U O) U O) D O) :3 N N O N L L O d U N > C m O �' O O) m � 0 � U c a) Co <Q V 0 m 1.0 C 0, 0 m @ -O •O .0 U C 0 2 U O N E •C O N N O E wv N> O °) 0 0 m E c ate) m a) y E L v @> O) N N co N m E m C O) N0 N N O' E N @ a) 3 a) L> j L@@ .0 a) c 'N mm O a) U -O m w C @U a) N Y O_ 2 O N N U C "O .L. a N m NOEw m U 3a) C a) 0 L @ m-o N O N C a) E `—' o .... C E Q' O .a_ .0 N m_ N _x _ 3 a) N N c m° Q0 O O C N L p c 0)E 3 y o a) N u C C c c 0 (D .N 0 .m O @ N@ O N 7 v O •U G a N >, o N C E U c .O CO U N , a c �? a a) c� O) o�� o m> m y 4) 9 � g T-0 v.o 3 0 -0 co a O N rn0 0� +� NU E 0 r a= aN L L , am � a �. • o� 3 0 0" (D -0 3 a) 0 > V > .3 .0 m 3@-o a 'O w C 7 O a) a) r > N -O U ` tan C > 20 N C N O C6 3 O N Y a o m o mu _= o N E >. N O fn L '0 a) N Z5 w- 'C _o N a) O` L N a 0 N aI EvN-0>>,O U 0- a 7 'o O a) Cl N L (ac� a) m @ N O N O m o) mn N U C a) " 300 w L N o c=c0i a C oc O m E 0 N m C o Nm r.. a) =m. C 3 0 m "O .a�i0 L N 0 p C H O m d«0 C U 3 — a) a — ¢� O 0 L �oai ��a)�a�0 Q� h� N 3 o 0�a N aio0°—E)�o x L 0 j E ��� N I—w N 7 D dW'm O 0 N amOf. oa (d 0 m@ 3 E a m 3 6 m j 3-0 -o o E 06 O) N C 0) N y C 0) C C 0) C C p C p C C C o y C p C y y O O m 'it m't N r a a Y m N V a Y m a= m � a m d m U m U 0 U a o U O U O. a)) a)) a a N N N Co C'j @ . C'j m : U m U m C m O C m O C m O m m O) U 01 U 0) U 0) 0) 0) 01 3 0) a1 0) C y C y C y C C •� C 'C CCp D U D U D U C m N C L '0 = N 12 3 N N C` 7 w CO > o Y 0) -p O C 3 N 2. p N o a 0 f6 � N` Yo-ECa) L 3 m So vN cn� E c a) o � `o .@ N d C O c� ` y U m ay) 0 C C C> L w- o p a) >. o = U o @� a 3 m m pa "c�i a) pia E C O 0) V O E C f0 .«• m C -p O Q -0 -0 C N O a) U m N C E C C.0 - N C Cp �) C 2 a) C w V C N N () C a N C m U d .0. N CD m p ... C m L a) 7 a) j M N N O N 00o mrE� �o3coi >. L--. N NV N> O .? U �. 7 '0 w 61 O N O y V C 7 m n�' a) U 0 )a U C .0 y L .N O` U a) r a) C N m C N a O C O N` 0. .C+ 7 C C :0 n N CD .0 U "O U 0)a) C QC C L m L Co C a) Cl) m > O D. a) m Q U N N L— L Co 3 C L: F V 7 L m m y 3 amid err 2 ate) 3 ��o v o C N .0 m N O C C N a) C.. a�i a)tE Uo) � � 5 a) 3 rn>� n U `o > L)) E (D a8 n-0 a °3a a (Dw 0.00 a-0 a) ai m O T L N O � O N — N m y -0 N .2 O o w C o o m U a 0 a U d k \ k k E E E E ƒ \ a �_\ / _\ »o!«beD. .±_O» \/A eGac o�c0ac § § § §( §[ § k aE kE 2 I IL IL IL E ƒ\)7 ]c § ( �( \ )) b_C/\\ ) \\\/§ \\ §){ t0 [ eep�q ±) 0oEmo /© f = e co 0 =7) �{ J ) U) 4 kkaS 0 ) k y§fD ) &/ 7 f 2 \m= k °-a k/ \ rm � ® � e- 2co to \_\ \ \ 7 ] �) f = = % } \ ) 0 2 e)�\/ §2J=7 ,< ±�« ¥; /% f E c»�> c \§\Q7 /0§ /§ / k ��(n . §2§S{ a) Co ®\}{ °77%: 2\7/§ / (L k ATTACHMENT NO. 6 OPERATIONAL STATEMENT RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 17 Later Day Saints Stake Center Operational Statement LDS Church Unit Organization: A local congregation of church members is called a Ward. Wards are limited in size. Generally a Ward congregation is 100 families or less of which about half are active in Church participation. As a Ward increases in size it is divided and a new independent unit is formed. A collection of several Wards is called a Stake - similar to a diocese. As a Stake population grows it is also divided and a new independent unit is formed. Within a Stake boundary there are usually three to five Ward Meetinghouses" located in the significant population center. One particular meetinghouse in each Stake is the "Stake Center" facility. The subject building is intended to be a Stake Center Facility. Building Utilization: The subject Stake Center building is designed for week to week usage as the typical day to day meetinghouse for two or three Wards serving congregants in the local vicinity. Each Sunday each Ward will hold a general meeting and classes, the times of which are staggered and spaced throughout the day. Each Ward holds its own general meeting and classes. One Ward will start at 9:00 am, a second will start at 11:00 am and if a third is needed it will start a 1:OOpm. The general meeting is in the first hour of each block and that meeting is over by the time the next unit is arriving. The subject building will also serve occasional Stake/multi Ward functions. Twice a year a special "Stake Conference" is convened to which members of all the Wards in the Stake are invited. Twenty to thirty percent of the Stake membership historically attend the conference. As needed to accommodate parking and building occupancies the conference is divided into morning and afternoon sessions with different Wards invited to each so that one group has left the site prior to the other arriving. If, for example there are 6 Wards in the Stake, three will attend the morning session and three in the afternoon with relatively balances sizes for each. The Stake conference typically begins at 10:00 am and lasts 2 hours. If there is a second session it will typically begin at 12:30 or 1:OOpm Sunday Use and Hours of Operation: The subject facility will be primarily used on Sundays for religious services and classes. Sunday Services usually begin around 9:00 a.m. They will include a general congregational meeting in the sanctuary which is attended by all family members . Following the Sacrament Service the congregants divide to the smaller classrooms for two hours of religious instruction. This creates a need of up to 20 various sized teaching rooms for different subdivided groups: 1 or 2 pre-school age classes, 9 or 10 adolescent classes, 6 teenage classes, and 3 or 4 adult classes. The block of Sunday meetings for a Ward is three hours. Services attendance varies, as with any organization, with attendance for smaller Wards at about 150 and the larger Wards at Chapel capacity of about 250. The general congregational meetings last 70 minutes and are spaced 2 hours apart for different Wards. Stake Conference Meetings are held every 6 months and usually begin at 10:00 am and last about 2 hours. When there is a need for a split session the second session usually begins at 1:00 pm well after the first session participants have dispersed. The second session (when needed) also will be two hours and those participants will disperse the site, save a few to clean up, by 3:30 pm. The population of Stake Conference attendees is as can be accommodated in the sanctuary and the overflow and is in the range of 600 - 650. Occasionally there will be Sunday evening meetings for special guest speakers or other small group worship activities. The number of select participant to these "firesides" will vary from a couple of dozen to a couple of hundred - typically smaller than the typical Ward congregational services each Sunday morning. Hours of usage for the special meetings are usually between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm. Weekday Use and Hours of Operation: Weekday usage is in the evenings from the hours of about 6:30 p.m, to 9:30 p.m. for youth groups, scouting, women's organizations and recreational activities. Local High school age members will use the building on school days in an early morning hour before school for 45 minute religious instruction classes. Depending on the number of youth who attend the local high school(s) there will be 3 - 4 classes of 12 - 16 students each. The classes start about one and a half hours before the local high school first period starts. A high school starting time of 8:00 am will correspond with a 6:30 am start time for Seminary. High schools with a 00" period will generally cause the need for one of the classes to start an hour earlier than the rest. Occasional Friday evening and Saturday activities and recreation events will make use of the facilities. 3 - 4 Saturdays per month a few youth and adults will gather in the building to play basketball or have some other social or cultural activity during the day. 4 - 5 times per year the Wards using the building will hold a cultural event such as a play or dinner/social. Attendance of these events will be the typical active population of the Ward at about 150 to 250. A Friday or Saturday evening event will run from about 7:00 pm to 9:00 - 9:30 pm. Once a month the building will be used for a youth dance on a Saturday evening from 8:00 pm to 11:00 pm. All the dance activities are at the interior of the building in the Cultural Center. The dances are only attended by youth with a "dance card" issued by their Bishop who has interviewed them and obtained their commitment to uphold very high standards of conduct. Failure to uphold these standards will cause the dance card to be revoked. The building and parking lot are heavily chaperoned at all times, especially as the youth are leaving. Half of the youth will be picked up by parents. For the most part the building will be quiet and not utilized weekdays during the day nor on Monday. The facilities will not be used for Day Care. The facilities will not be used as an educational institution The facilities will not be used for overnight activities. Commercial, rental or political purposes at not authorized in the facilities. Food cooking or "soup kitchen" uses are not authorized. ATTACHMENT NO.7 PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintASTAFFREPORT.doc 18 32087 Via Bonilla Temecula CA 92592 City of Temecula Matthew C. Harris P O Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Harris, We have received notice that it is the City has approved or will approve the construction of a 24,287 sq ft complex west of Corte Villosa. My wife and I wish to express our Negative Declaration for this proposed construction for the following reasons: 1. The original zoning for the current area was residential. 2. Traffic has steadily increased with the occupants of Paseo del Sol taking occupancy of their homes. 3. Traffic has and will increase when Linfield's golf university is completed. 4. The speed of vehicular traffic on Pauba is not monitored and has personally witnessed speeds in excess of 60 mph regularly. Pauba's traffic resembles a freeway. Please reconsider the construction of yet another facility that will bring high volumes of traffic to this already choked street. We request the City planners should adhere to the original zoning of the area. Respectfully, Gerardo E. Prov cio Barbara A. Provencio MAY I 1 2004 Stephen & Rebecca Longo D U 42365 Corte Villosa Temecula, CA 92592 MAY 1' 0 2004 (909) 506-6557 A.. May 7, 2004 Matthew C. Harris Associate Planner City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATION NO.03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,287 SQ. FT. CHURCH FACILITY) Dear Matt and Planning Commissioners: We are residents of the adjacent property at 42365 Corte Villosa, parcel # 955-091-002-3, also misidentified in the submitted preliminary site plan as property #22, 7t° house from the comer of Pauba and Corte Villosa (there are two properties identified as #22). We have reviewed the site plan dated 26 June 03, Statement of Operations dated 12 April 2000 and viewed the proposed roofing and brick material. The following are our comments and concerns in relation to the approval of this project: We recently purchased this home and the size of the proposed project was greatly minimized by the sellers who are affiliated with the church and held the first meeting. In addition to this, we only recently found out that according to the proposed site plan, the proposed retaining wall that borders our property does not extend completely to the affected homes, only to 6 out of the 7 backyards. We found out after the fact about the last city meeting. 2. We want the retaining wall to extend the full-length of our property line between the church parking lot and our property. That will completely enclose our yard and not leave 1/3 of it exposed to the field with a half iron fence. We want the consideration to enclose the extra distance, which is minimal compared to the overall cost of the project and the detrimental effect it would have on our property value and appearance if left as is. If the retaining wall does not run the full length of the property this will have a tremendous negative impact and adversely affect the appeal of our house when we try to sell it. Please see attached paces with site man and pictures of our property. LDS Project Longo Property 3. The proposed roofmg material that is black composite severely contrasts with the neighborhood character. This is unacceptable. Also see attached copy of letter dated May 7, 2004 addressing the Negative Declaration for this project which states our concerns related to the mitigation measures. 0 �` , Stephen & Rebecca Longo AN Attachments (1) letter dated May 7, 2004 (2) site plan identifying our address (3) pictures of property (4) `a Stephen & Rebecca Longo 42365 Corte Villosa Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 506-6557 May 7, 2004 Matthew C. Harris Associate Planner City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT SUBMITTED AS PLANNING APPLICATION NO.03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,287 SQ. FT. CHURCH FACILITY) Dear Matt, We are residents of the adjacent property at 42365 Corte Villosa, parcel # 955-091-002-3, also misidentified in the submitted preliminary site plan as property #22, 7th house from the comer of Pauba and Corte Villosa (there are two properties identified as #22). We have reviewed the proposed negative declaration and submit the following comments and concerns should this Negative Declaration is adopted: 1. On page 6 of the report, Air Quality mitigation measure #8 allows for diesel -powered vehicles to continue running for up to 30 minutes while not in use. We want the time decreased to 15 minutes. 2. On page 17 of the report, Transportation/Traffic mitigation measure #2, only requires that a gate shall be constructed at the easterlX driveway on Pauba Road so as to restrict access between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am S ft thru Thursday. That requirement is insufficient and does not address the westerly driveway that would enable unrestricted access into the facility. We want a gate required for the westerly driveway as well. The requirement is also incomplete since there are seven days in the week and only Sunday thru Thursday are addressed. The time requirements and access restriction should apply to both driveways. Friday and Saturday shall be the same as the other days of the week as specified in the proposed mitigation measure. 3. On page 17, the Transportation/Traffic Impact Analysis report states that the proposed facility will generate 213 more trips per day than the permitted residential density. During weekends, the report states that the facility will generate 887 more trips per day than the permitted residential density. Our concern is, how can this be allowed if it is exceeding the permitted amount based on the residential density. Respectfully submitted, EIM 1 t.. i.a i:r err p, r N .— O C m i 0 PAUSA ROAD Sf NIA-O , MSLv 3 o. Stephen & Rebecca Longo 42365 Corte Villosa Temecula, CA 92592 (909)506-6557 May 7, 2004 Matthew C. Harris Associate Planner City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ' I u T MAY 10 2004 SUBJECT: PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT SUBMITTED AS PLANNING APPLICATION NO.03-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,287 SQ. FT. CHURCH FACILITY) Dear Matt, We are residents of the adjacent property at 42365 Corte Villosa, parcel # 955-091-002-3, also misidentified in the submitted preliminary site plan as property #22, 7th house from the comer of Pauba and Corte Villosa (there are two properties identified as #22). We have reviewed the proposed negative declaration and submit the following comments and concerns should this Negative Declaration is adopted: 1. On page 6 of the report, Air Quality mitigation measure #8 allows for diesel -powered vehicles to continue running for up to 30 minutes while not in use. We want the time decreased to 15 minutes. 2. On page 17 of the report, Transportation/Traffic mitigation measure #2, only requires that a gate shall be constructed at the easterly driveway on Pauba Road so as to restrict access between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am Sunday thm Thursday. That requirement is insufficient and does not address the westerly driveway that would enable unrestricted access into the facility. We want a gate required for the westerly driveway as well. The requirement is also incomplete since there are seven days in the week and only Sunday thru Thursday are addressed. The time requirements and access restriction should apply to both driveways. Friday and Saturday shall be the same as the other days of the week as specified in the proposed mitigation measure. 3. On page 17, the Transportation/Traffic Impact Analysis report states that the proposed facility will generate 213 more trips per day than the permitted residential density. During weekends, the report states that the facility will generate 887 more trips per day than the permitted residential density. Our concern is, how can this be allowed if it is exceeding the permitted amount based on the residential density. Respectfully submitted, DearMr. 9farris, VAMA Thiankyou for your service to our community. It isa privilege to Ctve in Temecula thanks to the wonderfUsupport and attention to detaiCour leaders provide. I come to you at this time and askyou to please consider my comments on a topic, which affects me as an individuaCin this community. Getting around town these days can be a fargreater time consumer than in .the recent past as Temecula continues to grow. ,lust getting out of my neighborhood and to a major artery in the city is a chalrenge as well As I travel the 1.5 miles, from my driveway to Margarita Wgad on my way to do shopping and errands, I encounter traffic from Temecula diddle School; $ intage -Ififfs Elementary School; 2'aloma Elementary School; LinfiekC Elementary School LinfieCdWiddheSchool; LinfW91lighSchool; and Temecula YfTgh School On evenings and weekends the fields at Temeculaa WiddCe Schoofare considereda community parkandare veryfrequently used by youth sports groups andcreate a tremendous amount of traffic coming andgoing as teams compete on the fields. Another organization is interestedin aging themselves to our already over6urdened neigh6orhood As I understand, the W ormon Church is wanting to 6uilda center on Pau6a WpadroughCy 6etweenWeadows Parkway andThe LinfwfdSchool I am not Wormon, 6ut ourfamdy has dearfriends that are. As I've come to learn, the 911onnon `Church°fatties are more of a "community center"for that congregation with activities occurring throughout the day, seven days a week. Alfof which wid increase the traffic jlaw to andfrom this area. In action there is a large portion of land that is in development on the southeast corner of Pauba 9padandWeadows Parkway on which scores of new homes will be. That alone wiff increase the traffic on Pauda &ada great deal: As you can see, our neighborhood already endures many inconveniences for the good of our community. AT of which are important to a great many people inchugng many of us who live in this area. Tease stop this one from being added to our burden. I encourage you to help the Wormon CFiurch find alternative suitable land on which to 6uild theirfacifity and alTow our neigh6odwod as much relief as you can acquire. Very sincerely yours, Natalie Steffens December 16, 2003 Debbie Ubnoske Matt Hams Re: LDS Church on Pauba Rd. We are writing you in regards to the proposed LDS Church, on Pauba Rd. We are still strongly opposed to this project as we feel that it will be a detriment to our neighborhood. Having said that, we'd like to talk about some concessions for us, just in case the proposed church is approved. We, homeowners along Corte Villosa, adjacent to the prospective building site of the LDS church on Pauba Rd., would like: 1. A retaining wall to.be built at the edge of our property lines so that we can level off our lots. In addition, we'd like the LDS church to pay for the new drainage pipe and the fill dirt required to level off our lots. 2. The whole building site recessed 10-20 feet in the ground, to retain part of our scenic view.. 3. The greenbelt between our properties and the LDS parking lot to be at least 30 feet, allowing for more privacy and noise reduction. 4. Low-lying parking lot light fixtures, like the ones at the New Community Lutheran Church, in lieu of the 8-10 8 ones proposed. 5. All lights erected to be on timers so that they go off by at least 10 pm, earlier if the facility will not be in use that night. 6. Landscaping along the "greenbelt" dividing the parking lot and our homes should consist of hedges at the edge of the parking lot and twenty four inch boxed trees, or larger, planted close enough to offer blockage of our view of the parking lot. We request that the trees planted be fast -¢rowing evergreen trees, i.e.: aleppo pines, stone pines, fern pines, evergreen ash, camphor, chinese evergreen ehn, or cypress. 7. The driveway entrances be gated or chained during hours that the facility is not in use, so that there's not free access into the parking lot. C,tirc- vl�i�5���13 0 R'1'K V I Oct) logcl, (A3a 51 +2397 CR t v )'d.vSa, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS MURRIETA CALIFORNIA STAKE January 12, 2003 Debbie Ubnoske City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92592 Attn: Ms. Ubnoske: 5 II� JAN 2 3 2003 As the presidency of the Murrieta California Stake, representing 3,600 members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who live in the city of Temecula, we want to thank you for giving consideration to our request to build a much needed church in our community. As you may be aware, we currently have only one operating church in the city of Temecula. It is located on the corner of Hwy 79 and La Paz. We are very excited about the much needed building that is now under construction on North General Kearney. As of today the vast majority of members of our Church who live in Temecula travel outside our city to attend their worship services. It is for this reason we are submitting to you an application for a conditional use permit to build a third church on Pauba road. As with many projects submitted to the planning commission, there are a few who would desire that the city reject the proposal. We are aware that our application is no exception. In our conversation with Rolfe Preisendanz, he brought to our attention that there have been some individuals who have expressed opposition to the church and he suggested that we do all in our power to understand their concerns and see what the church could do to help alleviate any issues prior to the public hearing. We have taken Rolfe's counsel seriously and last summer we invited all the residents whose properties were adjacent to the proposed church and held an open house in one of the residents homes on Corte Villosa Street. We had almost 100% attendance. We talked about the purposes and uses of the church. We shared a short video that talked about Latter -Day Saint churches and their interaction with the community. We provided a rendering and elevations of the building and posted a site plan indicating the location of the building on the lot. After the presentation we invited each neighbor to share his or her concerns. We responded and had an open and positive dialogue. For many the concern was the proximity of the building to their homes for others it was the screening of their property from the. parking lot, for others it was lighting, and for a few it was just the loss that comes from the peace and quiet when living next to a vacant lot. With each concern we tried to accommodate their needs to whatever extent possible. We offered and provided a much larger green belt than was originally planned giving trees that will screen their homes from the church. We've completed lighting and acoustical studies and even offered to shift the location of the building on the lot to help accommodate their desires. But for a few, anything short of a vacant lot or a single family home would not be acceptable. We respect their issues and it's our desire to be a good neighbor and a great strength to our community. This church will not only provide worship services on Sunday for our members but it will provide a home for the Boy Scouts of America to hold their troop meetings and will serve as a resource to the Riverside County Red Cross to hold their blood drives. We are sensitive to the traffic issues in Temecula and the concerns that some may have that a church would create added congestion on Pauba or other city streets. I think the traffic study that we have provided will clearly show that our church will have no significant impact on traffic or congestion. In fact, the times of our operation will be when the traffic volume is at its lowest levels. The church's primary hours of operations will be Sundays between 9:00 — 4:00 p.m. staggering the times for the congregations to eliminate any possibility of overcrowding or congestion on the roads. On weekdays prior to school, we hold a religious class that is offered to high school students only. This is done under adult supervision and parental guidance. Our evenings primarily consist of Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday evenings where the scouts would use the building for troop meetings and religious classes could be offered to youth groups. All activities typically end not later than 9:00 p.m. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints have buildings throughout almost every city in California. They are recognized because they are well maintained, esthetically attractive, and professionally landscaped. The church recognizes the important role it plays in the community. The proposed building on Pauba would truly be an asset to our city. If you have driven by the church that is currently under construction on North General Kearney, you'll appreciate the quality and workmanship that goes in to our buildings. The church on Pauba road would be no different. Attached you will find. just a few of the 3,600 members that live in Temecula who've written their name in support of the proposed Pauba street church. We now look to you and ask for your support in granting us authorization to proceed with this project. We sincerely appreciate your commitment and service to our city. Sincerely, The Murrieta California Stake Presidency Roger Wnnors, President 4oert' rd, First Counselor �ram, cond Couns61or Matthew Harris - PA03-027 LDS Church Pa e 1 From: "Joseph Elliott" <m.makeaprilkj®verizon.net> To: <harrism@cityoftemecula.org> Date: Mon, May 12, 2003 4:31 PM Subject: PA03-027 LDS Church To Matt Harris, This is a breakdown of the information we have received from the Mormon Leaders. Please take these figures and times into consideration when you have meetings with the L.D.S. Church. "CHURCH MEETINGHOUSE" The Church of Jesus Christ of Later -Day Saints 1 stake church building ( three wards ) is 24,000 sq.... ft., 31 ft. single story high church with a gymnasium. It will also have classrooms, bishop offices, minister offices, cultural centers, etc. with 276 parking space:, on 4.72 acres. 1. A Stake consist of 3 wards with as many as 100 families per ward. A ward could be as many as 400 members including children. That totals over 1,200 people per Sunday. a. On Sunday the three wards meet one right after another in secession from 8:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. or later we have been told. b. There will be activities every night excluding Mondays. c. Possibly could be basketball practice on Friday and Saturdays. d. Youth activities through out the week including boy scouts of 18 or more and youth groups of 40 or more students meet once a week at night. e. A women's organization (made up of 30 or 40 women) will use the building once a week. f. The Bishop and Elder office's will be used through out the week also. 2. Every morning 60 to 80 ( we have heard from other Mormons over 100 students ) Mormon high school students are dropped off by parents at 6:00 a.m. or earlier for religious study. They are again picked up at 6:45 to go on to high school for regular classes. This is not your regular church schedule of 2 or 3 hr. services on Sunday and possibly 2 services though the week. This church will be used much more. With the name "Meeting House", I understand they have "gatherings" here for the different stake and ward churches also. Thank you for your time. Mary (Jenny) Elliott cc: Chris Sorensen Matthew Harris - PA03-027 LDS Church Pape 2' Kristen Boano H.O.T. Committee Homeowners of Temecula CC: <mcintyk@cityoftemecula.org> 01/10/2803 14:49 9093869844 BLOOD BANK OF EB r'04� oc Blood Bank of San Bernardino amd Riverside Counties January 10, 2003 Temecula Planning Commission C/O Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Dilve PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-0033 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in regards to the new building proposed for the Temecula Church of Latter Day Saints in TaMbCula, CA- The Blood Bank of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties (B@OBRC) has been holding blood drives at the Murrieta Church of Latter Day Saints (M.urriets LDS) since 1991. The use of their facilities has been a kay factor In the success of each blood drive year after year. Murdeta, LDS sehadulbb a minimum of two blood drives per year with the BBSBRC. Each biood•dlive averages over 100 productive units of blood. Due to the increasing rnamberthip and expansion of Murrieta, LDS, an additional building in Temecula, CA would be greatly beneficial to the BBSBRC. It would afford us an additional facility to accommodate blood donors who reside in the Temecula area. If you have any questiotm, please do not hesitate to contact me at 909-386=6920, Sincerely, Rachel Lundeen Area Representative Marketing and Cvmmuelity Development Blood Bank San Bemaraho and Riverside Counties 384 Orange Show Road, P.O. Box 5729, San Bernardino, CA 92412.5729 • Tel: 909.885-6503 • Fax: 909-3B 1.2036 1r man iu uJ 1.12:06P CIEC BSR r- 909 793 0306 P-2 BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA, CALIFORNIA INLAND EMPIRE COUNCIL 1230 Indiana Court • Redlands, California 92374-2696 (909) 793-2463 or 825-8844 WR-4 #45 January 10,2003 Chairperson Temecula City Planning Commission Temecula, California Dear Committee: Please consider this brief note a letter of support for the proposed project on pauba in Temecula. As you may know, the Boy Scouts of America offers its character Street developing program through chartering organizations_ The basic requirements are that the chartering organization is responsible for providing the adult leadership and a safe meeting place for the youth. Without Empire the chartering organization, the California Inland Council, Boy Scouts of America would not be able to offer a quality Scouting Program to over 26,000 youth that we currently serve nor could our communities afford the expense of providing the meeting place and costs associated with the facility_ The Church of the Latter Day Saints has been a chartering organization and partner with the Boy Scouts of America since the program was organized. The relationship exists at the national BSA level as well as our local council. It is my firm belief that the Temecula can only benefit from the proposed project. The new facility will be a new home to the full family of Scouting units, which will serve youth.fom the ages of 8 through I& 11 has been proven that the Boy Scouts of America develops character. If the reports don't say it all, Riverside County Superior Court Judge, Gordon Burkhart, summed it up best when he said, "In my entire 18 years serving as a Juvenile Judge and Superior Court Judge, not one Boy Scout has came before my bench accused of any serious crime." The Boy Scouts of America have provided an alternative to gangs and provided a safe haven for our youth. America is stronger because of Scouting and Temecula is a better place to live because of the positive alternatives it provides for its youth. Temecula and Scouting can only benefit by approving this new project. Scouting, d ownsend EO/Scout Executive A Prugram for Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Explorer, Supported by Sustaining Members, Endowment rwrds, Direct Given, and United Way, Remember Scouting in your will. 0 Matt Harris From: gc666@adelphia.net Int: Monday, September 08, 2003 5:04 PM Matt Harris Subject: PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE (CHURCH) MATT: THANK YOU FOR RETURNING MY CALL TODAY. MY WIFE AND I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING NEXT WEEK, BUT A THURSDAY IS AN UNPREDICTABLE DAY FOR OUR SCHEDULE. LET ME FIRST SAY THAT WE HAVE LIVED IN PALOMA DEL SOL SINCE FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR. WE HAD NO IDEA THAT A CHURCH WAS PLANNING ON ENTERING OUR COMMUNITY UNTIL WE ATTENDED OUR FIRST HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION MEETING IN MARCH. THERE WAS AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA TO DISCUSS THE CHURCH SITE AND ITS IMPACT UPON THE COMMUNITY. OF THE APPROXIMATELY 30 HOMEOWNERS WHO WERE IN ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING, THE NEARLY UNANIMOUS POSITION WAS THAT THE CHURCH WOULD HAVE A FAVORABLE IMPACT UPON OUR COMMUNITY. NEITHER I, NOR MY WIFE, ARE MORMONS. WE DO, HOWEVER, CHERISH THE VALUES THAT FAITH BASED TEACHING PROVIDE TO A COMMUNITY AND SOCIETY. SOMETIMES A COMMUNITY MUST TOLERATE A. DEGREE OF INCONVENIENCE, WHETHER IT IS INCREASED TRAFFIC OR NOISE, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THOSE VALUES THAT KEEP OUR YOUNG AND OLD MARCHING WITH A PROPERLY ORIENTED COMPASS. WE MUST BE REALISTS. AT SOME POINT, PROBABLY SOONER THAN LATER, THIS LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED. WE MUST EXAMINE THE POSSIBILITIES OF DEVELOPMENT AND CHOOSE THAT WHICH IS BEST FOR THIS COMMUNITY. WOULD WE RATHER SEE A FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE THAT BRINGS IN SKATE PARKS, STRIP MALLS, OR APARTMENTS, OR ONE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED FOR A CHURCH. SAVE BEEN PART OF A COMMUNITY IN ORANGE COUNTY THAT OPTED FOR THE MORMON CHURCH. THE .NISHED PRODUCT WAS AESTHETICALLY BEAUTIFUL AND THE CHURCH WAS A GOOD NEIGHBOR. I WOULD AGAIN FEEL PRIVELIGED TO HAVE ANOTHER CHURCH AT THIS LOCATION AS A NEIGHBOR.. I HOPE THAT OTHERS WOULD ALSO. PLEASE ADD OUR NAMES TO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSED LAND -USE CHANGE FOR THE CHURCH. RESPECTFULLY, GORDON AND ROSE CLARIDGE 32030 CALLE MARQUIS TEMECULA i Matt Harris From: Todd Gooch [tsgooch@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 9:29 AM To: Matt Harris Subject: Proposed Mormon Church on Pauba Road Mr. Harris, I will be unable to attend Thursday's meeting because I will be working. Please understand that my wife and I are adarnantly opposed to this proposed project. Any project other than single family residential development would severely diminish the desireability of Vintage Hills. The Mormons cannot provide any accommodations that would make this project acceptable to the majority of the people who live in Vintage Hills. Please listen to the people who actually live in Vintage Hills and do not let this project proceed any further. Please forward this to the other members of the planning commission and/or city council. Todd and Shelly Gooch 31972 Corte Ruiz Temecula, CA 92592 909-699-1867 I 09/10/2003 Matt Harris From: Chuck Reynolds [chuckman@mail.sdccu.net] it: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 8:01 PM Matt Harris Subject: Land Use I'm writing in regards to the property near Pauba & Corte Villosa. My family and I have been residents on Camino Romo, a street that connects with Corte Villosa, for over 9 years now. We've enjoyed the open land behind us and the quietness. We bought our house based on what was around us and have enjoyed it a lot. We were informed that the land behind us was zoned for residential estates and the land in front of us was going to be a school. The school was built as planned and we are very happy with our community. We are opposed to the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints building around the corner from us. Most of the people I've talked to in our neighborhood are against it. A Church should exist as a.positive influence in the community. When a Church comes inand wants to use the land and the residents are opposed to it then the church is failing. We are a church going family and enjoy the freedom of practicing our faith but we are also to respect those people that live around us. There was another church that was proposing to use some land in another residential area. They had a tremendous opportunity with 17 acres of land. The residents opposed the church and eventually the church pulled out and purchased a building over in the industrial area. The Church was able to get into a permanent gilding for much less money and the residents were pleased as 11. I applaud this move. Right now we have 3 churches meeting at the schools less than a mile from us,(Vintage Hills, Temecula Middle, and TVHS) and a church on the corner of Margarita and Rancho Vista. One of the churches holds 3 services on Sunday morning and there is a significant amount of traffic on our street. We do NOT want more traffic in our residential zone. There is plenty of land elsewhere that can be used for a church building without having a negative impact on residents. I urge you to strongly consider supporting the residents of this neighborhood in opposing using the land at Pauba and Corte Villosa for an LDS Church building. More traffic in our residential zones means a loss of the peacefulness of our community. Sincerely, Chuck Reynolds 42269 Camino Romo Temecula, CA 92592 I can be reached in the daytime at chuck@tw.1-3com.com 11 1 Matt Harris From: Rebecca Ciulla [r_ciulla@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 9:59 PM To: Matt Harris Subject: proposed land use change (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) Mr. Harris, I recently purchased a home at 42365 Corte Villosa. I am very concerned about the proposed construction for the following reasons: 1. Has the developer and the church submitted ALL conceptual drawings showing the proposed complete construction of this and future projects for the site? 2. Has a Property Value Impact Assessment Report been submitted indicating how this project would affect local property values? 3. Do the drawings reflect all mechanical components and refuse containers for this and future projects? The concern being harmful fumes blowing into the local residences and hazardous noise levels effecting the local residents? 4. Has a traffic impact report been submitted? My family and I selected this community because it is a quiet, family -oriented neighborhood. I would hate to see my beautiful view turn into an asphalt parking lot and the quiet peacefulness disrupted by people and traffic congestion; and from the noise of mechanical units operating and trash dumpsters. There is enough congestion on this street due to Vintage Hills School and its activities.. Due to the daily easterly winds the vehicle ( exhaust fumes will be directed into our household. We do not need additional congestion and health hazards imposed on the residents. Sincerely, Rebecca Ciulla and Stephen Longo (760) 725-8519 (760) 725-4351 Use custom emotions -- try MSN Messenger 6.0! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_emoticon Page 1 of I Matt Harris From: William C. Bibb [bibb@verizon.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 2:29 PM To: Matt Harris Subject: Proposed Land Use Change (Pauba & Corte Villosa) Dear Matt Hams: I am writing you to express concerns about the proposed land use change for the property located at Pauba and Corte Villosa. As you are aware, there are already five schools within a one -mile radius of the proposed site. A sixth; the Temecula Valley High School, is nearby. School traffic is heavy on Pauba and Meadows Parkway in the morning and afternoon. This is in addition to the everyday volume of cars using these streets. Also, several of the schools have sporting & other events some evenings and most Saturdays. On Sunday, the middle school is home to a popular church. All of these activities bring many people and cars. We were aware of the schools when we moved here in 1998. At that time, however, we were under the impression that the vacant land along Pauba was zoned for homes on acreage, not more schools or churches. While we are reluctant to push back on a place of worship, we also are concerned about the existing, traffic in our area and associated safety issues, and what the future holds — especially due to the already - approved Linfield School expansion project. This letter may sound to you as yet another "not in my backyard." In reality, it is meant to convey, "my backyard is already overcrowded." Thank you for your consideration of my comments. William C. Bibb 32037 Calle Marquis Temecula, CA 92592 302-2222 nqn 1 nno A 1 nr'c 1 vi i Matt Harris From: Jeanine Sommers [Jeanine@hostda.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 10:59 AM To: Matt Harris Subject: keep are community residential I am unable to attend the meeting, but would like to voice my opinion. I strongly feel are neighborhood would be damaged if the building of this church was allowed to go forth. I say NO, I want my neighborhood to remain residential!!!I! It is are neighborhood let us decide! Thank You Jeanine Sommers 09/10/2003 rage l of 1 Matt Harris From: LAWAIBEACHMARCH@aol.com Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:52 PM To: Matt Harris Subject: Proposed Land Use Change We are fairly new to this area (1yr) and we are really enjoying it here. Both my husband are not in favor of the above mentioned change. We definetly don't want any extra traffic invading our neighborhood. We feel that if a church is built on Pauba & Corte Villosa, it would cause quite a bit of extra traffic and it would disrupt the neighborhood. I would love to see the area kept up as it is, with the beauty of the greenery and openess about it. Thank -you, Gil and Gloria 09/12/2003 Matt Harris From: Annette M. Cox (amcrlc@earthlink.netj Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 1:41 PM To: Matt Harris Subject: Meeting -Sept 11, 2003 Land Use (Pauba & Corte Villosa) MATT: TO AFFIRM OUR PHONE MESSAGE, MY HUSBAND & I ARE "STRONGLY OPPOSED" TO THE PROPOSED LAND USE @ PAUBA & CORTE VILLOSA FOR A CHURCH OF LATTER DAY SAINTS. THIS IS A DEFINED RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR HOMES, FIRST AND FOREMOST. SECONDLY, WE BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD CAUSE A MAJOR INFLUX OF TRAFFIC TO OUR AREA THAT WE DO NOT DESIRE NOR NEED. AS HOMEOWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WE DO NOT SEE THE NEED FOR SUCH AN INSTITUITION, NOR DOES OUR AREA NEED IT. I HAVE PERSONALLY SEEN ONE OF THEIR SIMPLE CHURCHES MOVE IN THEN BECOME A "STAKE CENTER" WHICH I DO NOT WANT THE COMOTION OR TRAFFIC IN MY IMMEDIATE COMMUNITY. THE CLOSER TO RESIDENTIAL CO[M9UNITY THEIR "CHURCHES" ARE THE MORE INTRUSIVE THEY TEND TO BE ABOUT THEIR BELIEFS TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND CHILDREN GROUPS. AGAIN, WE AS RESIDENTS AJOINING THE IMMEDIATE AREA ARE "STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THIS PRESENTED USE" . RESPECTFULLY, ANNET & RON COX 1 rage i or i Matt Harris From: Daniel Colvin [dscolvin@interlinkdsl.com] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:51 PM To: Matt Harris Subject: Proposed Land Use Change: Pauba & Corte Villosa To Whom it May Concern This note is to express our opposition (Dan and Jill Colvin) to the proposed planning of the development of the Morman Church off Pauba and Corte Villosa, for we desire to protect our local residential landscape, as well as minimize traffic conditions that are already conjested with several schools (Pauba Elementary, Temecula Valley Middle, Linfield Christian, and NHS). Sincerely; Dan and Jill Colvin 09/22/2003 Page 1 of 1 Debbie Ubnoske - Proposed Church on Pauba Road and Calle Cedral r)j From: "gary raugust" <garyraugust@mindspring.com> To: <rroberts@citycouncil.org>, <jstone@citycouncil.org>, <jcomerchero@citycouncil.org>, <spratt@citycouncil.org>, <mnaggar@citycouncil.org> Date: 04\18\2003 12:12 PM Subject: Proposed Church on Pauba Road and Calle Cedral CC: <ubnoskds@cityoftemecula.org> To the Members of the Temecula City Council and the Temecula Planning Commission Director, I have been in the area since 1984 and have lived on Green Tree Road since 1995.(Our street is one block South of Calle Cedral and runs parallel with Calls Cedral ). One of the most important reasons for buying in this area was the zoning which would deter any major changes to our neighborhood. We now find that an application for a "Conditional Use Permit" has been filed which will profoundly change our neighborhood with an adverse impact and something that is totally incompatible with the surrounding area. You are being asked to disregard zoning regulations that have been In effect for over 30 years regarding lot sizes. You are being asked to approve at least 2 more access entries to the property to Pauba Road. The proposed building will have a 60 foot tall spire which will require another variance. To put this into perspective, the Embassy Suites on Ynez and Rancho California Road is 64 feet tall at its highest point II How would you like to have that in your backyard which is what they are asking of us? In addition, other factors include a heavy increase in traffic. This facility will often operate from early morning to evening to evening six or seven days a week. According to people familiar with their operation, many of their evening events are as well attended as their large Sunday services which brings both traffic and noise pollution to our semi -rural neighborhood. And then there is the loss of our view of the eastern mountains with the snow capped peaks in the winter, replaced by a 60 foot spire. In conclusion, may I respectfully remind you that Section E of the Temecula Conditional Use Permit Code says that It should be consist ant with the general plan and development codes, compatible with adjacent uses and will not adversely effect adjacent uses, buildings or structures. This appears to be like trying to force a square peg into a round hole which will forever change a great neighborhood to something much less desirable. Thank you for your usual careful consideration of this matter. gary raugust garyraugust(&mindspring.com Sincerely, Gary Raugust file:HC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\ubnoskds\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW ) 00001.... 04\23\2003 DS Church Pa e 1 From: "Joseph Elliott" <m.makeaprilki@verizon.net> To: <harrism@cityoftemecula.org> Date: 5/11 /03 10:20PM Subject: Planning Appl. No. PA03-027 LDS Church Dear Matt Harris, My name is Mary Elliott, I live at 42401 Corte Villosa. I'm writing concerning the proposed building of the Church of Latter-day Saints on Pauba Road, just west of Meadows Parkway. Ref # PR03-027. Our property backs up to the parking lot of the proposed building. We selected this lot because it has a small yard for us to maintain since my husband has emphysema. It does have a slope which maintains itself with greenery. We were told when we bought 9 years ago it was zoned for houses on 1 to 2 acres. My information says it is still zoned that way. From our bedroom door to the beginning of the proposed building will only be 70 ft deep counting the slope. That is way to close to expect anyone to have to live. We moved to Temecula for the peace, quiet and our space that was offered us. We homeowners who went to a meeting with 5 of the Mormon officials present were told by them that every school morning between 60 to 80 high school student would be dropped off for religion study at 6:00 a.m. then picked back up at 7:00 a.m. to be taken on to their high school for their regular classes. This is, way too early for us and our neighbors to be disturbed 5 days a week. A lot of these days it will still be dark outside and headlights will shine right into our bedrooms not to mention the noise of car doors, teenagers and cars in and out. We are church going people but at the same time we would not even want our own church built there. There is a place for everything and this is not the place for a church. We have canvassed the area of about 150 homes and have found only about 10 to 15 in favor of a church being build on this sight. Thank you Matt for all your help. Sincerely, Mary Elliott 909 695-0712 Matthew Harris- PA03-027 LDS Church i Page 1 From: "Joseph Elliott" <m.makeaprilkj@verizon.net> To: <harrism@cityoftemecula.org> Date: 5/12/03 4:31 PM Subject: PA03-027 LDS Church To Matt Harris, This is a breakdown of the information we have received from the Mormon Leaders. Please take these figures and times into consideration when you have meetings with the L.D.S. Church. "CHURCH MEETINGHOUSE" The Church of Jesus Christ of Later -Day Saints 1 stake church building ( three wards ) is 24,000 sq.... ft., 31 ft. single story high church with a gymnasium. It will also have classrooms, bishop offices, minister offices, cultural centers, etc. with 276 parking spaces on 4.72 acres. 1. A Stake consist of 3 wards with as many as 100 families per ward. A ward could be as many as 400 members including children. That totals over 1,200 people per Sunday. a. On Sunday the three wards meet one right after another in secession from 8:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. or later we have been told. b. There will be activities every night excluding Mondays. c. Possibly could be basketball practice on Friday and Saturdays. d. Youth activities through out the week including boy scouts of 18 or more and youth groups of 40 or more students meet once a week at night. e. A women's organization (made up of 30 or 40 women) will use the building once a week. f. The Bishop and Elder office's will be used through out the week also. 2. Every morning 60 to 80 ( we have heard from other Mormons over 100 students ) Mormon high school students are dropped off by parents at 6:00 a.m. or earlier for religious study. They are again picked up at 6:45 to go on to high school for regular classes. This is not your regular church schedule of 2 or 3 hr. services on Sunday and possibly 2 services though the week. This church will be used much more. With the name "Meeting House", I understand they have "gatherings" here for the different stake and ward churches also. Thank you for your time. Mary (Jenny) Elliott cc: Chris Sorensen 12 Aatthew Harris - PA03-027 LDS Church Pa e 211 Kristen Boano H.O.T. Committee Homeowners of Temecula CC: <mcintyk@cityoftemecula.org> April 16TH, 2003 Ref #: PR02-0005 Dear Mary Jane Olhasso, I wanted to express my concerns about the quality of life that is being threatened by the proposed church near to my home. After 19 years of living on Calle Cedral just west of the building site and adjusting to many changes throughout the years in the name of growth and progress. This is one consideration I feel is a direct betrayal of our diminishing rural lifestyle. I feel there must be a more appropriate area for this church to build that would not be harmful to the neighboring residence. This area when I purchased our land. in 1983 had one acre minimums. I understand that now the minimums are 2.5 acres. Why was this changed if the intention was not to maintain this rural area? How can we compare the possibility of one or two single family residence on this land with a 24,000 square foot active church? I ask that you please thoroughly consider the impact that this facility would directly have on all the residence of this area. In your review of a conditional use permit I can not see how you could honestly think that this church is in any way compatible with the nature, condition or development of the adjacent uses. All surrounding areas are single family residence that appreciate the rural lifestyle they now have. This project would adversely effect the quality of life for all nearby residence. I plead with you before making this decision to visit the parcel of land. Look at the proximity the church would be to the homes in the area. Visit the homes most directly effected. If you resided in this area I think you also would be greatly opposed. The majority of churches in Temecula have found their homes in less rural areas. More commercial areas of the city. Especially a church of this size and magnitude should also seek a less intrusive location. Please encourage them to do so by denying them a conditional use permit. Sincerely Yours, i Shirley Berry 41837 Ca lle Cedrel Temecula, Ca 92592 E-mail ShirleyB743@aoLcom 909-676-5349 I April 17, 2003 City of Temecula Rolfe Preisendanz P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 Dear Sir: Ref #: PR02-0005 This letter is written in opposition to a church that is planned to be built on Pauba Road. The reasons we are opposed to it are: The proposed conditional use is not consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed conditional use is not compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. While we realize that there is a federal law giving churches the right to build in all zoning categories, we if there might be a conflict in this case. Before making your final decision, we would appreciate if each of you would give the matter your careful consideration. Thank you in advance for the time you will spend on making your decision. Very truly yours, Mr. and Mrs. C. E Johnson 41760 Calle Cedral Temecula, CA 92592 cc: Ron Guerriero David Mathewson ✓ Mary Jane Olhasso Dennis Chiniaeff n Sheila Christensen 37041 Mesa Road Temecula, CA 92592 909-302-1183 March 13, 2003 III MAR 17 2002 ATTN: Temecula City Planning Commission and City Council RE: Planned site for an LDS (Mormon) Church house near Linfield School on Pauba Road. When I first came to Temecula in 1989 as a newspaper reporter, I smiled as I drove past the little white church located just off the 1-15. "Ah, a valley of churches," I thought. "It will be safe to raise my three children here." However, a few weeks after moving to the Temecula Valley, I discovered the awful truth. This is not a valley of churches. Instead, I learned when 1 was assigned to write a story about the lack of church buildings in the valley, this is a place where struggling congregations have been relegated to holding church services in store fronts, industrial buildings or mini -malls. I had hoped that this city would see fit to allow church buildings to be integrated within the intricate fabric of homes as you see in other areas of the country. However, 14 years later there are relatively few beautiful church buildings located as anchor points within this community. What has gone wrong here? America was founded on the principle of freedom of religion, and yet this community appears to be founded on the principle of "developer, make fast, quick, big bucks here." There has not been enough forethought used in planning this city around churches, parks or wise use of this valley's water resources. I do hope that you will allow the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) to build their beautiful chapel on the proposed site on Pauba Road. Mormon churches are always well maintained, and they are a safe haven for everyone around them. Property values tend to go up when Mormons build their chapels or temples in a location. Additionally, the Mormon Church is known for its worldwide humanitarian efforts. Around the globe, the Mormons have opened up their chapels during devastating natural calamities or acts of war so that people from the community can sleep and eat in the facilities, and first aid is rendered there. With war looming, terrorist acts against our country increasing, and the number of devastating natural calamities on the rise, there is even more reason now to allow the Mormons to build another chapel in the valley. Sincerely, Sheila Christensen George & Giorgina Gabriele 41725 Calle Cedral Temecula, CA 92589 909-506-2323 April 15, 2003 Mr. Rolfe Preisendanz City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 Dear Mr. Preisendanz: I am writing to you today in regards to a church that is being proposed to be built on the corner of Calle Cedral and Puaba Rd. I am a resident on Calle Cedral. My wife and I are opposed to a church being built there due to the increased traffic it will bring. All of the homes in this area are approximately one acre parcels. We would like to continue to see additional homes of the sort. Please consider trying to keep the parcel compatible with the surrounding structures. Thank you for your time. Sinc rely, G orge Gbbriei� APR 15 2003 Mr. Ro9e'Preisendanz 43200 Busmess'Park P.O.Box 9033 Temecula, California. 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Preisendanz, Thank you for taking the time to speak with me the other day in regards to the proposed building of the Morman church building on Pauba Road. You asked me to write you a letter listing my concerns. My husband and myself are very concerened about the amount of traffic on Pauba Road. We have Linfield School, Paloma Elementary, the elementary school in Vintage Hills and the middle school in Paloma del Sol, all within three blocks of my house. All use Pauba Road getting to these schools. We also have church services on Sundays using the middle school for services. As you can see we have an unusual amount of traffic going up and down Pauba Road every day of the week. During some times of the day we are almost unable to turn left off of Via Deanda (our entrance to our tract) onto Pauba Road. We have to take a completely opposite way to even get out of our tract during certain hours of the day. When the development of Paseo del Sol finishes building their project of homes on the corner of Meadows Parkway and Pauba and Crown Hill finishes building their project at Butterfield Stage Road and Pauba nth Pauba being the shortest and fastest way to reach the freeway via Ynez Road) you can see that will increase the amount of traffic on Pauba by an exhorbitant amount. Now interject the increased amount of traffic by an additional 1200 families brought by the addition of a church facility in to this mix. They will be using this facility 6 days a week starting at 6:oo am in the morning until late in the evening. Oh, the traffic and noise problems we will then be faced with !!! When we purchased our property (which backs up to Pauba) we were told by the builder that the property across the street was zoned at 21/2 acres rural and that it would never be subdivided any less than that. It was designed to be rural estate pieces of land. We wanted that type of an environment. Our neighbor even went so far as to go to the city planning department of Temecula and asked specific questions regarding the property across the street, before he purchased his house. He was told the same thing. 2 1/2 acres of land to remain rural estates and never to be subdivided any less. What happed to the original zoning? Is the planning comission able to change zoning laws whenever it suits their purpose? We love the city of Temecula but we do not want to live backed up to a road that is totally congested with traffic on a 24/7 day basis. Will you please have a new volumne count done on the traffic on Pauba DURING Sept thm June which will encompass all of the schools traffic? Again thank you for listening to our concerns. 909-302-6841. Don and JoAnn Cotton a20vy ✓ia. �3 0� 3, ll4 `%2,77eece/4, `P.;;t If you have any questions please call me at 0 April 17, 2003 City of Temecula Rolfe Preisendanz P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 Dear Sir: Ref #: This letter is written in opposition to a church that is planned to be built on Pauba Road. The reasons we are opposed to it are: The proposed conditional use is not consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed conditional use is not compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. While we realize that there is a federal law giving churches the right to build in all zoning categories, we if there might be a conflict in this case. Before making your final decision, we would appreciate if each of you would give the matter your careful consideration. Thank you in advance for the time you will spend on making your decision. Very truly yours, 42� /X,. �!. �. Mr. and Mrs. C. E Johnson 41760 Calle Cedral Temecula, CA 92592 cc: Ron Guerriero ✓ David Mathewson Mary Jane Olhasso Dennis Chiniaeff q April 16TH, 2003 Dear Rolfe Preisendanz, I wanted to express my concerns about the quality of life that is being threatened by the proposed church near to my home. After 19 years of living on Calle Cedral just west of the building site and adjusting to many changes throughout the years in the name of growth and progress. This is one consideration I feel is a direct betrayal of our diminishing rural lifestyle. I feel there must be a more appropriate area for this church to build that would not be harmful to the neighboring residence. This area when I purchased our land in 1983 had one acre minimums. I understand that now the minimums are 2.5 acres. Why was this changed if the intention was not to maintain this rural area? How can we compare the possibility of one or two single family residence on this land with a 24,000 square foot active church? I ask that you please thoroughly consider the impact that this facility would directly have on all the residence of this area. In your review of a conditional use permit I can not see how you could honestly think that this church is in any way compatible with the nature, condition or development of the adjacent uses. All surrounding areas are single family residence that appreciate the rural lifestyle they now have. This project would adversely effect the quality of life for all nearby residence. I plead with you before making this decision to visit the parcel of land. Look at the proximity the church would be to the homes in the area. Visit the homes most directly effected. If you resided in this area I think you also would be greatly opposed. The majority of churches in Temecula have found their homes in less rural areas. More commercial areas of the city. Especially a church of this size and magnitude should also seek a less intrusive location. Please encourage them to do so by denying them a conditional use permit. Sincerely Yours, Shirley Berry 41837 Calle Cedral Temecula, Ca 92592 E-mail ShirleyB743@aol.com 909-676-5349 3olfe Preisendanz - Fwd: Church on Paub 4-Vd - Ref #PR02-0005 Pa e 1 From: Debbie Ubnoske To: Hazen, Donald Date: 4/14/03 5:03PM Subject: Fwd: Church on Pauba Road - Ref #PR02-0005 Let's print this out and put it in the file. >>> <Lazykj2@aol.com> 04/14/03 04:27PM >>> Gentlemen: This letter is written concerning a church which is planned to be built on Pauba Road. We are opposed to it mainly because we feel that it is not consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed conditional use is not compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. We ask that you would review this matter carefully, and we thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Mr. and Mrs. C. E. Johnson 0 Page 1 of 1 Rolfe Preisendanz - Church on Pauba Road From: <PFCUNLTD@aoi.com> To: <rroberts@citycouncil.org>, <jstone@citycouncil.org>, <jcomerchero@citycouncil.org>, <spratt@citycouncil.org>, <mnaggar@citycouncil.org> Date: 04/08/2003 1:17 PM Subject: Church on Pauba Road Dear Council Members: I wanted to express my concerns about the quality of life that is being threatened by the proposed church near to my home. After 19 years of living on Calle Cedral just west of the building site and adjusting to many changes throughout the years in the name of growth and progress. This is one consideration I feel is a direct betrayal of our diminishing rural lifestyle. I feel there must be a more appropriate area for this church to build that would not be harmful to the neighboring residence. This area when I purchased our land in 1983 had one acre minimums. 1 understand now that the minimums are now 2.5 acres. Why was that changed if the intention was not to maintain this rural area? How can we compare the possibility of one or two single family residences on this land with a 24,000 square foot active church? I ask that you please thoroughly consider the impact that this facility would directly have on all the residence of this area. Sincerely, Shirley Berry 41837 Calle Cedral Temecula, Ca 92592 909-676-5349 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\PREISER\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW j00003.... 04/08/2003 Planning Commission City of Temecula Temecula, CA Commissioncis: January 10, 2003 My wife and I wholeheartedly support the building of a chapel by the Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints on their Pauba Road property, Over our lifetime, it has been our experience that whenever and wherever churches are built, the neighborhood and the community at large greatly benefits. Churches are a great means of spiritual and emotional support, especially now in this world of chaos and terror. Not only does the proposed use of this property meet the conditional use requirements, but it also fronts a major arterial of the City. Any increase in traffic would be incidental to the worship times of the congregation. From renderings of possible architectural designs and our familiarity with the closest LDS stake center in Murrieta, we know this chapel would greatly enhance the visual appeal of the neighborhood, adding a beautiful inviting non-commercial building that will prove to be a real asset and a source of pride for the residents. Statistics show the benefits of churches in terms of lessening crime in a neighborhood, of offering positive alternatives for youth, of fostering strong families and of providing additional recreational facilities for community members. in fact, in our own area in days not too distant, Rancho Community Church served as an auxiliary site for our school district by hosting baccalaureate exercises and basketball games. A church provides a visual reminder that we live in a free country, in a local community of faithwhere spiritual things are important. , It is Our hope that you will recommend the building of this new chapel. We know it will Prove a needed source of worship, vitality, comfort and peace for the residents of Temecula. Sincerely, JZG�G Stewart M. Morris, Jr. 43938 Carentan Drive Temecula, CA 92592 (909)302-3444 cc: Murrieta Stake Presidency � Patricia C. Morris ATTACHMENT NO. 8 TRAFFIC STUDY RAC U P\2003\03-027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\STAFF REPORT.doc 19 LDS CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for. Mr. Kent Cornwall CORNWALL ASSOCIATES 234 North El Molino, Suite ill0 -Pasadena, CA 91101 Prepared by: URBAN CROSSROADS, INC. 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 John Kain, AICP Scott Sato, P.E. Philip Nitollama, EIT Q9,OFESSlpry i. oTTpsi("No. C rs (�2 9 G� Ex August 1, 2003 JN:00775-04 JK:SS:PN:rd TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ...................................... ......................... 1-1 A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives B. Executive Summary 1 Site Location and Study Area 2. Development Description. 3. Principal Findings a. Required Level of Service b. Existing Levels of Service c. Cumulative (2005) Growth Levels of Service With or Without the Proposed Development 4. Conclusions 5. Recommendations, a. On -Site b. Off -Site c. Traffic Management Actions 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................ :.; ...... .............. 1 2-1 .................... A. Location -B. Land Use and Intensity C. Site Plan D. Phasing and Timing 3.0 AREA CONDITIONS ....................................................................................... 3-1 A. Study Area 1. Area of Significant Traffic Impact B. Study Area Land Use 1. Existing Land Uses 2. Approved Future Development C. Site Accessibility 1. Area Roadway System 2. Traffic Volumes and Conditions 3. Transit Service 4. Existing Relevant Transportation System Management Programs 5. Existing Sunday Services — Vintage Hills Elementary 4.0 PROJECTED TRAFFIC ............................ A. Site Traffic 1. Trip Generation 2. Trip Distribution 3. Modal Split 4. Trip Assignment B. Other Development Traffic 1. Method of Projection 2. Non -Site Traffic for Study Area C. Total Traffic, Cumulative (2005) Growth 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .................................. 5-1 A. Capacity and Level of Service and Improvement Analysis, Cumulative (2005) Growth 1. Level of Service at Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project 2. Level of Service at Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project and Roadway Improvements 3. Summary of Impacts 6.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS................................................................... 6-.1 A. Site Access B. Traffic Impacts C. Need for Improvements Off -Site to Achieve Required Level of Service D. Roadway.lmprovement Recommendations 1. On -Site 2. Off -Site E. Traffic Management Actions APPENDICES TRAFFIC COUNT WORKSHEETS .................. .................... A CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - EXISTING ................... E; TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ............... ..................... ...... ......................... C. CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT ......................... ................. D ,CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT ....... ................................... LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE 1-A LOCATION MAP 2-A SITE PLAN ............ ........................... ...... ........................................... 2-2 3-A EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS ............................. ................................ 3-3 3-13 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT................................................................................ I ........... 1 3-4 3-C CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY GROSS -SECTIONS ............................ .............. ........................ .......... 3%5 3-D RIVERSIDE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT................................................................................ ............. 3-6 3-E RIVERSIDE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY CROSS -SECTIONS ...................... ........................................................ 3-7 3-F EXISTING WEEKDAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) .................. 3-G EXISTING WEEKEND AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ................... 3-9 3-H EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................. 3-18 3-1 EXISTING PM PEAK HOURINTERSECTION VOLUMES ................. 3-16 3-J EXISTING SUNDAY MIDDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES............................................................................................ 3-17 4-A PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION ......................................................... 4-8 4-13 PROJECT WEEKDAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ................. 4-9 4.-C PROJECT WEEKEND AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ............... 4-10 4-D PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................ 4-11 4-E PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ............ 4-12, 4-F PROJECT MIDDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ...... 4-13 4-G CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP ............................. 4-16 4-H GOLF COLLEGE TRIP DISTRIBUTION .............................................. 4-17 4-1 UNFIELD SCHOOL EXPANSION TRIP DISTRIBUTION.. ................................................. 4 18 4-J LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION ............................ 4-19 4-K COMMERCIAL CENTER MEADOWS VILLAGE TRIP DISTRIBUTION......................................................................... ::4-20 4-L CROWN HILL RESIDENTIAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION ......................... 4-21 4-M OTHER DEVELOPMENT WEEKDAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC.... 4-22 4-N OTHER DEVELOPMENT WEEKEND AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC.. .4-23 4-0 OTHER DEVELOPMENT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ..................................... ........... .................................... :........ . 4=24 4-P OTHER DEVELOPMENT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES............................................:...................:......:.....:...........::. 4 25 4-0 OTHER DEVELOPMENT MIDDAY (SUNDAY) PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ...........:..............:..:..:.:......... 4-26 4-R CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT WEEKDAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC................................................................ 4-27 4-S CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT WEEKEND AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT).............................:....................... 4-28 4-T CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT WEEKDAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC(ADT).:.............................,:. 4-29 4-U CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT WEEKEND AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC(ADT).......... .................................... :...:.... 4-30 5-A CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ......................:........... 5-3 5-13 CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ......................:........... 5-4 5-C CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT MIDDAY (SUNDAY) PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ....... 5-5 5-D CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ...................:................ 5-8 5-E CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT 5-F :f.11 PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES .................................::. 5-9 CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT MIDDAY (SUNDAY) PEAK HOUR. INTERSECTION VOLUMES ....... 5-111 . CIRCULATION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................... 6-:3 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE_ 3-1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS ........... 3-13 3-2 VINTAGE HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARKING COUNT SUMMARY.......................................... ............................................... 3-1 ci 4-1. TRIP GENERATION RATES.............................................................. 4-2 4-2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION.......................................................... 4 3 4-3 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION FOR WEEKDAYS... 4-15 5-1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS..................................................... 5-2 572 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS ............:.... 5-6 The purpose of this traffic impact analysis is to evaluate the development of the. LDS Church project from a traffic circulation standpoint. The proposed. development is located within the City of Temecula. Study objectivesinclude(1) documentation of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site for both weekday and weekend `scenarios; (2) evaluation of traffic conditions for the cumulative (2005) growth' Year. 'with and without the proposed` pYoj'ect;.and (3) determination of on -site and off -site improvements and system management actions needed to achieve City of Temecula lev ,rof service requirements. The proposed project will involve the granting of a Conditional.. Use. Permit which is` the standard process for a church project on any site in the City of Temecula.; The subject site is currently zoned .Very Low Density Residential which single family detached residential unit. B. Executive Summary 1. Site Location and Study Area ow 1 The project site is located north of Pauba Road and west of Corte Villosa in the City of Temecula. Exhibit 1-A illustrates the traffic analysis study area. 1-1 -EXHIBIT LOCATION IAP �a s T. . .. .. . . O CAM RCIMO t0,C c •o- � ;- .-.:, � �... ::_, .,. .;PLO ��0• b�Of' ..�. ��G 0 SITE* P 9,P G. Y 9q 0 ,2 i..yC 1 1 CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT'ANALYSIS, Temecula, California - D0775:01 U BAN { 1-2 Meadows Parkway (NS) at: Rancho Vista Rd._(EW) • Pauba Rd. (EW) 2, Development Description The proposed project will involve the granting of a Conditional Use Permit which is the standard process for a church project on any site in the City of: Temecula- The subject site is currently zoned Very Low Density Residential which would allow 1 single family detached residential unit. It is anticipated that the project buildout year will be 2005. 3, Principal Findings i I a Required Level of Service: "D" 1-3 b. ,` Existing LeN)e1s'of Service. Ali of the sfutlylarea'intersections are operating at an acceptable Lever of Service "D"^'or better during the peak hours. C. Cumulative (2005) Growth Levels.of Service With or Without the i Proposed Development For Cumulative (2005) Growth with or without project traffic conditions, 'stu°dy area„ intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service~"D" or better during the peak hours with the installation of traffic signals as listed in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. U 4. Conclusions ' l For existing traffic conditions, a traffic signal appears- to currently be ' warranted at the study area intersections listed below (see Appendix "C"). Meadows Parkway (NS) at • Rancho Vista Road' (EW) • Pauba Road (EW) The difference from the current zoned use and the proposed conditional use is approximately 213 more trip -ends per day with 17 more vehicles per hour during the AM peak hourand 15 more vehicles per hour during the PM Xj peak -hour on weekdays. During the `weekends, the church will generate approximately 887 more trip -ends per day and 232 more vehicles per hour { 1 ,s during the mid -day peak hour (10:00-12 00PM) on Sunday in comparison to one single family residential unit. The proposed project will have access to Pauba Road at two locations. Based on the anticipated traffic generated by the church and on Pauba Road, stop controls should be provided at both driveways. l 1 . 1=5 Traffic signing and; stripigg should' tir= i►nptetriented in conjunction" with detailed "construction plank for the;' ir"ojeet ite. . Li b. Off -Site Traffic signals are currently warranted a"t the intersecfions of: :. Meadows Parkway jK§)' at: • Rancho Vista Road (EW) Pauba • Road (�l) .i, .s... x ,} 4�-,il tD"- 'i f ::t+! rs a r ", ,..es "i'. -•r1. a`. The`'profecf should 'contribute` towards the funding of `these traffic signals by paying the City of Temecula traffic impact fees. C. Traffic Management Actions -.. fr .... .v .«._: , r a° .: t a} ,rv.. t � - to ensure that church traffic and 5 &M advities'fiave minimal •:'ter , - impact to s6rrounding residents, the .following araffic"managenient, r recorhmended actions are Access to the church parking area on the easterly side of, the.project, should be restricted between"10PM and"7AM, Sunday through Thursday, with the use of gates (see Exhibit 6-A) to prevent access to the siie during the'yostricted time periods. . Emergency access this"'location will be provided with vehicle F, the installation of a knox box.: • No organized church function should be scheduled between 1AM and 6AM, Mondaythrough Friday- 1-6 r , 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A. Location . The project site is located north of Pauba Road and west of Corte Vill-osa in, the City of Temecula: B. Land Use and thte6ity The proposed prot�GfiWilkiY�-VINieth;p olvewfhe;granfii��zfga*G°csrid�fiicn1`Use}errm€Which is the standard probe a.ject ons n� site in the Crty of Teti €�la ,Ttie id subject site is curirtl�t zorlecCF/eZov'irrty��sd�njiat whicFi viould allow 1 s single, family det(rd residential,:urnt :Tk baildmu ve�a:;for gthrs- Droiect` is anticipated to be 2d~ C.= Site Plan ll e t EMU 2-A i B i = S,� o v� F r 9 I S CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, Temecula, California - 00775:36 — f 2-2 ] 3 0 AREA CONDITIONS A. -:Stud-Ar,.ea 1. Area of Significant Traffic Impact, F Pursuant to discussions. with City'of Temecula staff, the study area ncludes .:Sar3 x .. . the following intersections: Green Tree Rd. (NS) at: • Pauba Rd (EW) h ` ,F, �.; Calle Cedraf (NS) at: ' , i 4 ' CaFnliiD'Roma`(NS s� Rancho Vista'R (EWE i Corte Villosa (EW) Yj. i F` .Co t"illosa (NS) at:• . Meadows Parkway (NS) at: • Rancho.Vlsta Eid. (EW,) • Pauba Rd. (EW) 13 . Study Area Land Use 1. Existfna Land Uses The site is currently undeveloped and relatively low traffic generation is currently being generated from the project. I 3-1 . Other development and areawide growth calculatf ry6Fe added to L existing volumes in the vicinity of the site for Cumulative (M05) Growth traffic conditions.' {(�k� ; ea".*4 ]'2 A;_ ^O } iii S�_ r C .Slte AccF�ss1ilitsy` s.. 1, Area Roadway System A Exhibit: 3-A. identifies the . existing:.Y,.oadway conditions for study area roadways., The number of. through, ,t�taffic Canes for existing roadways and the existing intersection contfol�,gre identified- The City of Temecula General, .pl"-I,qiodulefi6, Etement is depicted` on 3-B. Exhifarf C, t of Temecula arterial street cross- Exhibit 3 illu ates3ttherC�ty sections. The Riverside County Generatt f?n Girculatioh.Elerrent is depicted on and Exhibit..3}E..'jII, the Riverside County arterial street Exhibit 3-D strgtp's cross -sections. 2: Traff ic VolumeAi d'Conififions2 Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on arterial highways throughout the study area are shown on Exhibit 3-17 and'f3-G. tAkting-'AOT volumes f. are based upon ` the latesttraffic. data collected (2003) by the City of Temecula, or are factored up from peak`hdtii eounts'& riducted for Urban k , Crossroads, Inc using the following formula for each intersection leg: t <rid. PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x:12 = Leg Volume. 3-2 ) x 3-3 ki ` U ' U o a ,.. ver;liriik a t� LEGEND:. hf Via` � w..r �s`r1 � ::�,+� :. '1,+i•.y µo .:([ SY x Sr.nlr n»Mw s E FY zvt at> t "�.. 4.Ia..R iryrww.r r"4 C N, K7.i- h -•m <�Y�... i't 3�Y.`'!s Vi� �'\ w u ; t 4 •� Yy il. � ;., � jam' '�„" lk pv bW x? SOURCE: CITY OF TEMECULA �i Irer FICIMPACT A,NALYSIS,Temecula,California -00 75:3$+ _ - ,✓isi,�x _.. _.... 3-4 PRINCIPAL COLLECTOR HIGHWAY 10PTIONALRUMVILART-f-RIA-LI SOURCE: CITY OF TEMECULA SIDEWALK TO BE USED FOR CURB PARKING, BIKE LANE. OR DISTRESS LANE FOR INTERIM USE IN SEMVRURAL AND LARGE LOT AREAS wrTmiN THE CITY IN mAjoR. SECONDARY, AND COLLECTOR RIGHT-0F•WAYS 3-5 +_r��;: 1^ t �'-Yv.hi 1'� v J %ti EXHIBI IG EXf54 ING=INEEI EN i `'M''i Of DAILY TRAFFIC A 'i •-`� �''e evK Y`_r Y t d. ..5 x � .. `i atr s 1:_/ �F,P J _- t �.•n7tx` may. ..1, ;r 1> h f x s.. , Fit:.`.i_ s o J�01- do 1? 0 J, g �"'MCI � CAMINQ '^ v 0 ` ;: al- `: t;. i •raw` �h�'.-,+ z: ."',:;? yy ' ':t`i� Firi y;s,. ri, i ,tF�Z �tr•a i"K�C�:lrri Yin,, rs't- LEGEND: - - 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) - LDS RCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, Temecula, California 00775:35 k :�Z, �'s}+� �c pS^� •'i +"�� � `},y3. �iy t� uia��c� ,Syg�.Ni #�a''S��S " � .d ��u"p� ' The current technical _guide to the evaluation of traffic' operations is the Transportation Research Board's 2060 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) The HCM defines level of service as a qualitative measure which describes �i operational conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The criteria used to evaluaf&LO8 (t eyel' of Service) conditions vary based on the type of roadway. and whether the. traffic flow is considered interrupted or uninterrupted The definitions of ievel ofservice for: uninterrupted flow (flowunrestranetl 3 by the existence of traffic control devices) are: ir w • " L' "A" represents free flow'* Individual users are virtually ' unaffected by the presence of.others in foie traffic stream. • LOS)''R" is in the rarie of stable flow, but the pre sfe©f other ; users in tali traffic strewbe' to be noticeable.. Freedom to F . select desfr d speeds is rdiat1vely unaffected but there ;is.AsligFti decline in the`'freedom to maneuver. ` • LOS 'V is. in the range of stable flow, but marks the bg46hp9 of the range of flow in whieti ti "roperation.of individu#,usdrs.,becbmes. significantly affected by interactions w ftiothers in.�Apie traffic ste arn. LOS "D" represents high -density but stable i o'w Speed and freedom to maneuver are severdly restricted,, and the driver l experiences a generally poor level of corhfort grid convenience. . LOS "E" represents operating conditions at or near. the capacity. level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform. value Small increases in flow will cause. breakdowns in traffic movement: M R; LOK 'F isused to define=forced:oe-br`eafedawhFflow: 'This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approachingra point exceeds the amount, which can traverse the, point. Queues form behind such n FtT� definrt{ons dfi level of"service for interrupted traffic flow (flaw restrained `�iexfstenGe=riftf{[c sfgnafs.antl:other:iraffis;.control devices) differ sttitly dependrnon the type of traffic control: fN,,1_. a tr. � 1 , y The<tevefof servr rs typically dependent on the-, gRiy of traffic flow at the f eiros along`a Fatiwy` The tCM_rriethodology expresses the level :t - o#servreeatarintersection ^ftrterrirs rof `delay e 74or 'the various intersection approaches The HCM uses different procedures depending 3 "•..1` Y,• h,ti}F .:. ),f ra�'= i�X.A''.�`ZJ4a. C,i 1:'.J3 €t !{ afi �"I..) on the t g of fnter� , tfon control The levels- of service determined in`(his, ( P.. ° �{£.• — w study are determmed using the HCM methodology -it1 44,, S rt i For s' nalized intersections, average, total `-:.i`'�r1 '�ilai delay per vehicle for the overall ' - t''.t'3Eii3' ? intersection is used to determine level of service Levels of serviceat signalized,{astudy area intersections have been evaluated using an HCM re, intersection analysis program 4:4The� study. area intersections which are stop sign controlled with stop control on the minor street only have been analyzed usingr the,. unsignalize'd :.:. intersection methodology of the HCM. For these intersections, the calculation of level of service is dependent on the occurrence of gaps . , _ occurring in the traffic flow of the main street. Using data collected :. descnbing the intersection configuration and traffic volumes at the study , . ;. : , area locations, the level of service has been calculated. The level of service criteria for this type of intersection analysis is based on total delay per vehicle for the worst minor street movement(s) f. 3-11 AVEkA ff-f6tAL" DELAY PER VEHICLE (SECONDS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IQ SERVICEALIZEU I -E ONSIC gNj A 0 to 16.00 0 to 10.00 C 20.01 to 85.00 15.01 to 25.00 14 U 6-9 5- �jj 00 to 5000..'.8661 .e,5 :35Oi andupW01 an up seconds, econds, in accordance. with the City's policy. Signal, timin Aas ropnatl3 $me tot ped hour of green (vphg) for th H6rmed using� 4, ed lost t, time ntbrval,'6f five.. g. optimization uirements.,: raes es. pet o t700've,hicl vehicles per' lane for. left -txisting -peak hour traftic operations have been, evaluated for study area 'intersections: The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 3 along MW theexfMing intersection igura ion and traffic:control devices at each analysis location. Existing` intersection leve[ of service calculations sod ma,h6afm-APM 6hdrhid-:'day (Sunday) peak. alculations are base Urban 'd I hour turning movement' s made for rban rossroa s, nc, in June Canino Rome (NS) at Randle Vista I it 114 ^~~~�~~05~~~r75~~~�31 3-13 ` � 2003 (see Exhibits 3 H, 34-and, 3-j):: Traffic count worksheets are included For existing traffic c6ndltions,'the stiid`g area intersections operate at an l j ° i, ephtbfe kerielf Sen7rce''Qn or bgtt>) during Me peakffiuKs lim R y tispgt c ldulation +orksheets for existing traffic conditions ari _prol�e t f . i t Apo.end X "R,?, ` i , t <ifl 1 yY'1 Y+i.flµ r1 ,tl .: �+ •.. _ t `.� Vim} t er A: n ""w i �~�:` XNec t �--'- fr ', �br{--ex�t'ingtraffic dbtlditidns, traftPc Signals iappear Ito` ct�rremt4���'� ' 4X�� t t" wa a ted at theme s urly area intersectiorts hsted�gelow �� � 0,4 Meadows Parkway (NS) at: Rancho. Vista Road (EW) • Pauba Road (EW) Traffic signal warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix "C". 9 Y P Pp 3. Transit Service The study area is currently not being served by Riverside Transit Agency (RTA).. 4.. Existing Relevant Transportation System Management Programs A trip reduction ordinance has been adopted by the County of HNerside; 5. Existing Sunday Services =Vintage Hills Elementalei ry- Based on community input, concerns have been raised regarding -theM1 amount of parking. utilized by a church use at the Vintage Hills Eleffieritar.y 3-14 imia - 00775;Q5�u�. 3-16 p:.0 4 i SJ La 3'-1 m fi �Iy g0 if O CAMINO N aR x, a ? v wit r school is used to accommodate services for the Oasis Christian Fellowship between 9:30 AM and 11:00 AM on Sundays. This school is located east of Camino Romo and norffi df i` prte Villosa. hal Tht had e 'fldu&e a parking survey during a Sunday n the fours of 9 30 and 11:30 AM to determine the ng at thie to `atibn.,,The "seliool's• parking lot, Corte Mo has been surveyed rring?this timeframe on a Parking lot currently has 49x,6fus 3 handicap spaces) in the front lot 28 spaces available in"fhe lot usbW16r basketball. Approximately 63 MO& ISpac'es along Corte Villosa ard'*. frently available- between` Pbaiod and the t)Qiherly terminus A disfa�ice of, 22 feetshas been y ,{w f, �s used to appfaximate onk-b nstreet:parking space. t;a irro RorrSo currently -has appX01ximately 66`ob-street parking.spaces based on the 22- feet-pe`r,sp ace�jr;1t'tta: Table 3 2 presents a summary of the parking counts at the school `and 'along Corte Villosa anChCarnipo Romo.As indicated -in Table 4 1 :8 peak demand of 22 vehicles was obse'rved_:for.the study areas 10'00 AM." -A peak demand of 14 vehicles was observed..in the,,,school's parking lot between 10,,W AM, and 11:00 AM. Based on the, available number of. parking spaces provided at the school, adequate parking is currently. provided with an excess, of 60 unused non -handicap spaces. 3-1 t3: NUMBER OF OCCUPIED SPACES June 1, 2003 MAXIMUM "i. PARKING LOCATION CAPACITY' 9:60 9:30 10:00 10:30 11:00 11i30 Front School -F- T2 Parking Lot 46+3HC 2 2 2 2 Back School Parking Lot (Basketball) - 265 12 T 12 12 4 . Corte Vllosa north of PauW Road '63 .. 3 '2. - 3 3 3 Camino Romo 66 5 6 4 4 4 MAXIMUM - PARKING DEMAND 15 22 21 21 13 a D' 3-20 4.0 PROJECTED TRAFFIC A. Site Traffic collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Both daily and peak hour trip generation based on ITE rates are shown in Table 4-2. However, the proposed church will consist of three services on Sunday comprising of a maximum of 100 families per service. The services will begin at 9:00 am and are staggered throughout the day. In order to estimate the number of trips that would occur based on the typical operations. of the church, an attendance factor of 80 percent of the maximum. number of families has been assumed. Furthermore, a vehicle occupancy of 2 persons per vehicle. can also be included iri, the, t" generation calculations. Therefore, a total of 40 inbound,and,40 butbouhd trips are expected to occur during a peak hour on the weekend.,,with,.a,tdt6V of 240 daily trips (120 inbound and 120 outbound). The peak lio "r' n'd daily estimates are approximately 34 and 27 peirbenf less thbff th&ITE!!= based values indicated in Table 4-2 for weekend conditions,: respectively', Therefore, the trip generation values presented in table 4-2 can be 4-11 . 71 TABLE +11 TRIP GENERATION LAND USE ITE CODE UNITS2 PEAK HOUR DAILY. AM w rk4i. IN I OUT IN OUT C' 'c Pl"- lou—, ng '65 1 to-W =�o o V6 gm, Higil, lit C� shoppjrfq. Gdhter I Cornmeroal loi TSF 0.98 0.63 3r03 3.29 .6811'166y� gn�,gmjt , yj j�jjogq� jo�f q 2d Golf Driving�Ran ge 432 STALLS 0 Church 660 TSF 4.84- 4.66 --7777777 SinglemFamily Detached Residential 210 DU 0.46 0.40 High School 530 STU 0.01 0.63 025 Shopp ng Center Commercial 820 TSF 1.53 1.59 ,Universi,,IC e e 550, ,5.LLt- , qg6-§ 0.6-5, 3.12 Goff Fhi lit" �WALTSlf 43� 1.25 4-2 CODE" CI'rI1T, PASHXUR, Churc§:;, 560 _ 24.46..:. •. TBF:;. _ 1.1.8, 14.. 896..•'. Stngle Femll}t Detached Residential " 210 .':' ! 1 60 "'' �3U ' 1 fi .f 1JOM " ' N' ..k .. jp D E E , r`.,777 TSB = Thousand square feet DU.=, pwelling Units . 2 NOM'— Nominal - { tJ6b,tIo0775keii6enl00775-o .xtsJ 4-z t! } 4-3 considered conservative and would present a "worst case scenario for analysis purposes. The difference from the current zoning and the proposed zoning of the deve1s5pmi66t`is.'Orojected to generateapproximately 213 more trip ends_ per day with 17 more vehicles per h4u during the AM �3cal� hour and 15 more vehicles per hour' during the PM peak hour. During {' I the'W�ekends, the proposed (*urolizwi�ll gettefate approximetel) m�ore3 r' :: �y , �^ r. n ; s '3.y #"^�`v "•L"�'. y to ends //„�e a and 232 more vehicles�p r Ftour durin the.�y id, d p ?_ t R w_ �^q.. �[-. k r ( n .^i.l`..•�j t Y 0 k`i'N"p �r nu,' nAnrrnn••ninPAAl:n5�'tnrlEetia.�4wfT.ti. �..xl It shoGlrc'einote�4that the trip generation presented above represents'the typical operations of the church on weekdays and ort "a`. jn normal churoh services, fhe fotfowmg acttvit4ds h o`een conf>lnetion ro+ith denti ftit'w�ll o erat autsi a of t s nor al ems' Sri s' 3aM 900 PM, 4:00 PM — 6:00 PM) timeframe: .Morning Class/Seminary: 6:00 AM-6:45AM (Monday to Friday) drop off up to 30 youths Youth Activities: 7:30 PM — 9:00 PM (Tuesday thru Thursday) drop off up to 90 youths Saturday Evening Dance: Ends at 11:00 PM (One Saturday per month) drop to 250 off up youths ; Stake Conference: 10 AM -Noon Sunday (Two Conferences per individuals year) —up to 700 Morning Class/Seminary The morning class/seminary is anticipated to accommodate up tq.30 youths per session during the week. This level of activity. could generate t up to 30 inbound trips and 30 outbound trips just prior to 6:00 AM and;jusf after 6:4.5 AM due to parent drop-off/pick up. However, the actual,., 4-4 f p kp acideoperation oCfc=tsre `noE expected to includa every.singte'pareht involved'during-both•timeframes It is'anticipated that te-youthwo - catch a bris-to,school after1he session is rover. chi * 'i' ...- ... -^ ,- - 'i'.. ... •'t 7: 49suirtvolving.?f0 peak- hour trips (30 . inbound and 30 outbound trips), this level ofs.trippma&ing'�reflecis less than four percent -of the per lane capacity on Pauba Road (3.5%°=60 peak hour trips/1700.'yehicles per hour per lane] .Ther�foro f(iis activity i8 not-, anticipated to generate a traffic condition that is worse than the Sunday RM'period analysis-, n.thisreporG: r >>Yor}th Activities.,;., Tie'dut1 4Ctivities are anticipated to. occur affex the>everring peak hour, ands.coUld%irivelve up,to::90 sinboundaftd 90`'outb6und ttilis prior to 7:30 PIM . t andcafter 9.00 :PM1 Ride sharing:,is< anticipatedli to occur for the youths attending these activities. However;. efs, ming .ttrat - 180 trips (9l7 inbound/90 outbound) trips occurred during a single hour, this represents less than 11 percent of the per lane capacity on .Pouba Road. (10.6% _ 180 peak hour trips/1700 vehicles per hour per lane). Therefore, this activity,1s:mot, anticipated.to_generate a traffic condition.that is`worse than s; the Sunday AM period analysis in this reporti: Saturda FEvenina Dance ' Ttie Saturday Evening :Dance is anticipated to conclude at 11:00 PM with up to.250 youths in attendance. At this time,.up..to.25.0 inbound and outbound trips could occur at the church. Ride sharing is anticipated to occur for She youths attending the dance,,,,However,_ assuming that 500 trips (250,inbound/250 outbound) trips occurred during a.,single hour, this 0 represents -;less than.30 percent of;ahe per;lane capacity. on Pauba Road -P29,4% = 500 peak hour trips/1700 vehicles -per hour,por.Jane); During the Aimeframe when the. dance. concludes (1,1 00PM) ,the. traffic on. Pauba' Road is anticipated to be considerably less than .during the peak hour. Therefore, based on the level of traffic that .could occur from parent's p, P pkingitup (heir hildrenti it snot a[iticipat to have a'signifieant impact to Pauba Road ` .,..� e._.\.. ;f fte ., r'; �ikl. S -: �; �,Stake,C.onference •- The biannual Stake Conferent €t; is .anticrpated to: attract; up to 700 individuals mid day on a Sunday. This conference represents the highest potential traffic generator of the activitiessoutst. e' normal church. services. Up to 280 inbound and 280 outbound peak hour trips could ' occur; based on a;,vehiclo= occupaney i,factm4 of 2s`5 ., 07 ons-per-vehicle The 'analysis,. for this. condition isr presentedJn +Se¢tro . 5 ; of this. report .; Based on thissJanalysis;, the study:' area ,rriterse Bons are, expected to operateaf-acceptable.service levels:; .. ' 2. TripOistnbution. Trip distribution. represents the direaE'ronal'orientation:.of'traffic to and from the project site. Trip distribution'is>heavily�3influencod by=the geographical location of the site, the location of residential, commercial, employment.and recreational opportunities and the proximity• _.th reg or?el freeway system'.. x. The directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing - '+and proposed land; uses and highways within ,the.'community and existing cl A. traffic volumes. The trip distributioh for this : study . has been based' upon near term conditions and -highway --facilities'' that' are eittier' in 'place or will be sa � 4-6 . To assess Cumulative (2005) Growth traffic conditions, project traffic difference is combined with existing traffic, other development and areawide. growth. The study year Cumulative Growth for analysis purposes in this report is 2005. Year 2005 traffic volumes have been calculated based on 6 PROJECT TRIP DISTRr151"r T ' 1p ..-30 Q , 10 8 J`'j •�� 4. z'�y�G6�2ft, ice, � . 9y Q 25 10 4klkWTTO/FPO4 �MO)ECT iIr-t IU BA„N' LDS CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Temecula Califomia-00775A4 4-8 s LEGEND: 10.0 -VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S)_ NOM= NOMINAL, LESS THAN50 VEHICLES PER DAY I� 4.9. k: LOL)URCHTRAF ,nia - 00775:170,:, 4-11 4-12 o ` v ; two o� m w �C?`O CAMINO'^ All ROMth� ct zz 9,p^ `ornia-00775:19 4-1 3 t $I 4 t i5i ,• sr i5@ }yyi i P 3 ¢ru�+¢57•�v :� l 5•d.} p M14''''n ` . 2+4F� b _ 4.4 '� `` ��� 'ti"4h-��`Traffic fbr�StudV�Area ' Table 4-3 lists the proposed land uses for the nearby development (see L( - Exhibit 4=G) for Cumulative (2005) Growth traffic conditions known- by Urban CrossYoa'ds; Inc. at the time this study was. prepared. table 4-3 shows the daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the surrounding development being processed concurrently in the study area. Exhibits 4-H to 4-L contain the Cumulative (2005); Growth directional distribution and assignment of the other development [raffic. Based on the identified :Cumulatve (2005) Growth trip .distributions for the other delopment on arterial highways tloughout the study area, Cumulative (2005)'Gr6wth other development ADT valumes are shown on Exhibit 4 M =and �`rN forr both-- weekday and. weekend tiimeframes, respectively.,', i CI?rk�ulative,,. (2005). Growth. other development "AM; PM and mid day t (Sufi'day) ;pear dour intersecf on turning movement volumes `ateshow.06 . Ex)1IhItS respectively. r ti C TofatTraffic CUM latfve'(2005}Growth Exhibits=4 13 and-4 5 show the. ADT volumes which can be .expected for Cumulative (2005).Growth without project traffic,conditions and Exhibit 4-T and 4- U show the ADT`volurrmes which can be expected for Cumulative (2005) Growth with project traffic conditions.. no For Cumulative (2006), Growth without and with project traffic conditions, additional traffic.:: signals are projected to be warranted at the study area 4 intersections. x TABLE.4-3 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION FOR WEEKDAYS x PEAK HOUR AM PM E dJEC7 :. QUANTITY UNITS' DAILY. IN OUT IN OUT Golf Co11696 z, ` ..' • Golf College 125 STU 100 0 0 0 298 • OnvRig Range 47 STALLS 0 0 25 34 482 = 9-Hdle�Golf Course 9 HOLES: 0 0 11 14 Subtofal .., 100 0 36 48 1,101 [infield Schoo! Ez anion' `1128 STU . 361 158 68 102 2019 LargeLotResidential' 58 DU 11 32 38 21 555 Commercial'Center Meadows Village 98-<' TSF 96: 62 297 822 6.729 . •."Pass-B` Tri s 25,0r'. 24..-'°' A6' -74 -81 1'68 Subtotal 72 46 223 241 5 047 Crown Hill Residential(_ _, !a�27 DU 100 295, 343 190 5;043 TOTAL 644 531= 7O8 602 1376 6 OTHER DE ti PMEN"I TRIP GENERX �M FOR` WEEKENDS (SUN DAY} PROJECT '° QUANTITY :UNITS'..: MID=DAY DAILY' IN' .: OUT Golf College- -Golf College • Driving Range • 9-Hole Golf Course 125 47 9 :STU STALLS HOLES 81 20 20 81 17 20. 390 59 _ 356.. Subtotal . 121 118 865, " Linfield School Expansion 1128 STU- 11 34 282 Large Lot Residential 58 DU 8,9 92. ;• 3,401 Commercial Center Meadows Village • "Pass -By" Trips 25% 98 TSF 150 -38 156 -39 5,747 -1,4V: -Subtotal 112 117 Crown Hill Residential 527 DU 242 211 4,627 .._ TOTAL 575 572. 13 425 ' TSF = Thousand square feet STU = Students DU = Dwelling Units 2 Source: TIA FOR. THE. PROPOSED'PROFESE Linscott, Law & Greenspan on 4/16702 for peak ! U;1UcJobs1007751exce11[00775-01.xls]T 4-3 f_ r ONAL GOLFERS CAREER COLLEGE published by ok - J �7 s X i% LEGEND (D= GOLF,COLLEdilE'. (D = LINrIELD SCHOOL EXPA LARGE LOT RESIDE COMMERCIAL CENTER MEADOWS viLLAGE. 'tRQWW-Allk REM& VV il )S CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, Temecula, Califbmia - 00775:07 4-16 LINFIELO SCHOOL EXPA4 tr '.akCRX �e r.. 4 ®I ST���TRIP }.. Lf■fin' s !p V G CAMINO � r"i QO• QI Vo-Q 3 r 1� SITE 5 5 PVgp� f Q t0 LEGEND: 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT -- - - - 2 LINFIELD SCHOOLEXPANSIONIY 7�CkiyRCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Temecula CMifomia-0077409 - `l 4_18 _ f 4-1-9 xv4v j k CROWN HILL RES�IDI NAL r TRIP DISTRIBwUT[i Off 9� �a sa. F O O� CAMINO ROMO SITE - - f o-o- LEGEND:. 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT - O= CROWN HILL RESIDENTIAL ov IJ�f.�gwJ4N . ,J 12 - •pbzs - tC'S k T��{"sa��`'�, 4-22 Y tXHIBI 14 M '" , ICDT) 9 O . s� 9C F N Q1F.j Z 1l �/ SITE* Z `99 s• LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) . NOM = NOMINAL. LESS THAN SO VEHICLES PER DAY r j NI Al) v h Y {.� LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY(1000'S) NOM = NOMINAL. LESS THAN SO VEHICLES PER DAY 1 4-23 txrtittl1 4-0 OTHER DEMO - R`. INTERSECTION lIOr11 Ilk O 90 O CAMINO'^ _ ROMO - � ��017 oohs za 4-24 ; r ''yr At k' EXHIBIT 4 x' R rSn'; �L7+� c+,{,�'"' '®EVEL �PI�iET P�IV r< t A RiEC'ii i�Lilt ti �O s �o' CAMINO'^ 'a ROMO v O h1 - - f,. ��S oo •., 5�1 QPUBpµO 00 00 i LDS'C IF1kCHTRAFFICIMPACT•ANALWS,Temecula,: California -A077S:2S _ '"t� w i 4-25 LEGIEND:. 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000-S) rnia - 00775:: mm U el 6077kn MAN 4-28, I I � 05 CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALY515 Temecula CAfornia - 66775:34 4-30 EXHIBIT 4 U lTH Y TRAFFIC PRGJCT (APT) O R 90 h m 90 CAMINO '^ Rpm, : .o o 3$ 0 -A i v r 5._- 3. .0 LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) } Al _ M .. 1 i .0 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A ;Capacity and Level of Service and 'lrnprovement Analysis Cumulative '(2005) Growth 1. 'Levetof-Se'rnce at CiJmulatirie (2005)'Grbwth Without"Project <f a Cumurative (2005) Growth.,.intersection levels of service for the existin -. q�, �. roadway network ,without the propp.'sed project are shown in Table , Table 5-1 shows HCM calculations based on the lane, configuiratromUM h sttJdyarea intersections wifFout and with improvements. Cumulative Growth without ' ro ect AM, PM and mid-da P 1 Y (Sunday) peak .hotti ' intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5-A, 5-13 and 5-C, respectively. For Cumulative (2005) Growth without project traffic conditions, all of the following study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of. Service "D" or better during the peak hours, without improvements. For Cumulative (2005) Growth without project traffic conditions, study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or better during the peak hours with the improvements listed in Table 5-1. Cumulative (2005) Growth without project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix "D". 2. Level of Service at Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project and Roadway.. Improvements. Cumulative (2005) Growth intersection levels of -,service for the existing, roadway network with the proposed project are shown in Table 5-2. Table 5-2 shows. HCM calculations based on the lane configuration at the study ; 5-1 . �INTERSECTIQI :::APPROACH L'ANESL - DELAY';. ,. LEVEL OF NORTH- SOU7H-41% EAST-..... WEST- - TRAFFIC BOUND BOUNDBOUND BOUND (SECS) + _,SPRVICE INTERSECTION CONTROL' L T R L T . T R L T R AM PM I MID DAY AM. PM ' MID DAY reen Tree Rd. (NS) at: Pauba Rd (EW). CSS -0 . 0— 0 0 0 ALAS, 0.�� r0,..: 1,,., 01 16.5. ,10.7 9.3 C ,- .. � B A'�`t Ile Cedral.(NS) at :. "... .:... -.:_.. a,', ": - .. ,:. :. ... ._,-: .. :. 3 ., . Pauba Rd- (EYJ). CSS 0 0 O ,. -1 0. 0 0.5 0.5 0; 0 1 1 19.1 10.6 9.3 C , B. A amino Rome (NS) at: - RanchoVistand(EW) CSS 0.5 05 1 �0 0 0 - 0 1 0 05 05 0 10.0 C B e, Corte'lirllosa (�yV}'- ;r•�^OSS '0- 0 0 :ra 0.` tY 05 05•'':0� ,O� 1=s=: i +234_ 8. '!'§.7 1103 v.BfT-. A Villosa INS) at Pauband (EW) .. :.CSS,.- ..P5 OS ;i€ Oa'+a14;7.ji O. B B.- Meadows Pkwy.(NS) at Rancho VtslA%j(EYQ).„ SAWS , , � �! - mr7Aout Improvements 1 2 1 1 2 1 0.5 1.5 0 6.5 1.5 0 13.8 9.S 9.3 B A A ` - with impray.Mentsi TS 1.',. 2 1 a., 2 y., 1�. 05 15 •:0, 05 t&� P, 10.5r._ 89 8.9- B - A A Patiba'Rd IEWj: <' - ..- .�.: ., _. c. - wilhout improvements AWS 1 .. 2 1 1 2, 1 .1 1 1-_ 1 1".- 1 22.7 112 9.9. C B -.A -with impmi%emehnts "::TS 1':-'2 t .:.1. 2' 1 t 1 f' 1 1 '-'1 . 13.2'-" 11.1 i0'.5' B BB . .. .. When a right turn is.designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped.. To function as aright turn lane there must be sufficient - width for right laming vehicles to Havel outside -the through tarles_• L = Left, T = Through; R = Right » =Free Right Tum;> = Rght Ttim Overlap; l = improvements r Delay and level of service calculated using the following analysis software: Trafio+, Version 7.5. R1 (2062). Per the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with traffic traffic sighal,or All way stop contrd., Forrin(ersections vAth cross street,stbpcontrol, the delay.and levetofservice fvnworst Individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) am shown. - - - TS = Traffic Signal CSS = Cross Street Stop - - - .AWS =All Way Stop.. U:1UcJobs1007751exceN00775-OtxB)T5-1 - 5-2 5-3 5-4 CUMULATIVI MIDMD AY (SUNRAY 5-5 )WTH INTRgECTl01i WITHOUT EXHIBIT 5-C. PR VOt1 a s r-: .�F9p d. ' CAMINO ` ��.. SITE*- fFp!!F 1 �29 so. � s 4 c - T ids � � 1• ,�. � h [ ,} < :. ° i H , '{ z �c : - "e F 'k `� 2. �8s, i`T :�� �. N:�S � .��` d '�`'.`av,, �t +q � • � s rn Z O r o z O U U, W O a x F- `3 x F ce W' v J f0 W F H c� G U re, LL r Q 6 " Z 0 U W . ul W F Z c3 aWp as ma+ mZ�. U: LLO W U > wW po Q ¢ to m.. Qa mm. m m J m w U K O rn '' N d y O W p mz O U. WO P O'N d npj ap -O G F1 4 of o OI wi of m C t0 K o o' � o, o -• o 0 3 b,r c .. ' - J OO � OG CG �• O. - O r� Z S Q a 0 ~ C O 1 m K J N N O N W, ,H _M o `c o' c oo o o'" Q Z O = p (a n F- O O O O N N N N m N m a p O O .- O .. 'O Z m ~ U � N y z c�i?2103rn 4awm3?rc eE 2m 3 3 zWaE 2W Ee 4 4 _ Z K m K o> n a o o E K o E c m 5 5 $ _ > �c `3 3 m ci 5_6 w �- 8 � 5 5 $ C 3 el t 9 C > LD:S. A� yLP t' A D:.'VC Cm in )y)y T� b i P i t s m m-N E o c, c J U ale L) O 3 i pp [ L Sf J = t y m O -1 5_6 w �- 8 � 5 5 $ C 3 el t 9 C > LD:S. A� yLP t' A D:.'VC Cm in )y)y T� b i P i t s m m-N E o c, c J U ale L) O 3 i pp [ L Sf J = t y m O -1 ,nulative (2005) Growth with project AM, PM and mid -day (Sunday) peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5-D, 5-E and 5-F, respectively_ For Cumulative .(2005) Growth with project traffic conditions, all of the r following study. area intersections are projected to operate at Level of: Service "D" or better during'the peak.hours,,without improvements. For Cumulative(2005) Growth with project traffic conditions; study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of'S"ervice :"D" or: better during the peak hours with .tje• improvements listed in Table 5-2. Cumulative (2005) Growth with project. HCM calculation worksheets are n Appendix "E". pravided:i. Table.5'2 also contains the service level of calculations for traffic conditions commensurate. with the biahnual. stake conference. The study area intersection: s are anticipated to operate at acceptable levels'(LOS "C" or better) during a peak mid. day on a Sunday. 3. Summary of impacts A list of study intersection improvement measures required' for existing. conditions and at the two project buildout year time frames (without and with project conditions) include the construction of traffic signals at Meadows Parkway/Rancho Vista Road and Meadows Parkway/Pauba Road. It should be noted that these improvements are not required to satisfy the City's Level of Service criteria. They are required based on satisfying traffic signal warrants under existing conditions. EXHIBIT 5 D CUMULATIVE (2005)GROWTH WITH PItQ�EE1' AU PEAW;Hk®.t INTERSE, A IONaV®L�lI LiS . 3 9C kAw 369 CAMI ROM � hP ,V tytl ! SITE+ 13 9� 'liy,9 pAV }� F )S CHURCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, Temecula, California - 00775:30 5-8 IIIT 1 NALYSIS, Temecula, Calgomia-4775:37ii:i 6.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. A. Site Access The proposed project will haye,;two, access. driveway$„to Pauba Road Stop controls on the protect driveways;. will, provide.adequate..intersection„controls at these two locations. B. Traffic Impacts For existing traffic conditions, traffic signals appear to currently be warranted at the study area intersections listed below (see Appendix -.C.). Meadows Parkway (NS) at: • Rancho Vista Road (EW) Pauba Road (EW) The difference from the current zoned use and the proposed conditional use is approximately 213 more ,trip -ends, per day.with 17, more vehicles.. per hour during the AM peak hour and 15 more vehicles per hour during .the PM. peak hour on weekdays. During the weekends, the church will generate approximately 887 more trip -ends per day and 2,32. more vehicles per; hour during. the, mid -day peak hour (10:00-12;OOPM) on Sunday in comparison to, one single, family residential unit. For Cumulative (2005) Growth without or with project traffic conditions, no additional traffic signals are projected to be warranted at the study area intersections. 6-1 C. " , Need for Improvements Off -Site to Achieve Required E6W-W'Service`.` For Cumulative .(2005) Growth with project traffic conditionsi study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or better during the peak houm�with or wdhou the irriprovements listed it Table:5-2 However traffic signals, are Curr&tiy warranted at tt 'e'fbIt6wib6 intee tibhs. Meadows Parkway (NS) at: Rancho Vista Road (EW) • Pauba Road (EW) D. Roadway Improvement Recommendations a m: R1 1. On -Site Site -specific circulation and access `Yecommendations are depicted on Exhibit 6-A. ' Construct "Pauba � Road at its' ultimate half=si4ction `width as .as` Secondary Highway along theproject boundary. i. Sight distances at the protedt'driveways should be reviewed with respect to . standard Caltrans` and City bf Ternecula'sight distance standards` at the r time of preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. Traffic signing and striping "should ' be implemented in -'conjunction -with 1 detailed construction plans for the project site. a i� 6-2 'EXHIBIT 6W CIRCULATION RECOIVl1VIEN®ATWNS _ f UNDEVELOPED UJ y 1 CONSTRUCT PAUBA ROAD AT ITS ULTIMATE ACCESS TO THE CHURCH PARKING AREA ON HALF -SECTION WIDTH AS A SECONDARY THE EASTERLY SIDE OF THE PROJECT SHOULD HIGHWAY ALONG THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. BE RESTRICTED BETWEEN IOPM AND 7AM, SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, WITH THE USE OF GATES (SEE EXHIBIT 7-A) TO PREVENT SITE SIGHT DISTANCES AT THE ACCESS POINTS SHOULD BE REVIEWED ACCESS DURING THE RESTRICTED TIME WITH RESPECT TO STANDARD CALTRANS AND CITY OF TEMECULA PERIODS. EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AT THIS SIGHT DISTANCE STANDARDS AT THE TIME OF PREPARATION OF LOCATION WILL BE PROVIDED WITH THE FINAL GRADING, LANDSCAPE,AND STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS. INSTALLATION OF THE KNOX BOX. TRAFFIC SIGNING AND STRIPING SHOULD BE NO ORGANIZED CHURCH FUNCTION IMPLEMENTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH DETAILED - SHOULD BE SCHEDULED BETWEEN 1AM / CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE PROJECT SITE. AND 6AM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY. I n< rul loru irraFrlr IMPArT nNAI Y56. Temecula. California - 00775:37 _ URBAN 6-3 2 Off -Site Traffic signals are currently warranted at the intersections of: Meadows Parkway-(FISTat, -.- • Rancho I.Vista Road,{E1�/) • Mub6l.16ad (EW) The profec#;should caintnbctte, towards the funding of these traffic signals by the City of Temecrrla:tr<tfiic impact-ti ov. 's ` paying E: Traffic manaaditnt'Actlbhs � 4 To ensure that e)iurch fr"affic and Qasking# acUvrtles k�avminiiial irtipact to surrounding re tents, :the f6(lov3ieg .traffic rnnt JqIictidns are ; - R recommended 'Access to the church parking aria on titp easterly side ;of the project should be resRicted,. l etween`' tOPM and 7 M� Sunl ay through Thursday, with the use cif gates;(see Exhibit6 A� to prevb.nt access to during the tune periods 'Ehtergency vehicle:access at, - the site restricfed this "location will be provided withlFit'jnstaRation of a knox box. .. No organized church function should be scheduled between 1AM-and 6AM; Monday through Friday: 1 • la. 3' 6-4 . APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNT WORKSHEETS Volumes for.Tuesday. June 10, 2003 City: of.Temecilla;;:- - - Project No,"O y0927.003' _ Location; CaminoRomo @d s%'Randio Vista Rd. .;-AM Period.. , NB.;' . SB,- EB � WB - - PM'Penod NB - S&. - EB i2'00 AM-12:45AM 0 0 12oo PM-1215 PM 26 47 1215AM-1230AM 0 0 1215 PM-12:30 PM 50 33 .`A 230 M1-12:45 AM 0 0 1230 PM-12:5PM 16 31- 'AM-01:OD AM 0 0 1245 PM-01:00 PM 70 44' 0 0 _0 162 155 317 01:00 AM-01:15 AM 0 0 o1:00 PM-01:15 PM. 37 18 01:15 AM-01:30 AM 0 0 is 01:15PM-01:30PM a 14' ` 6130 AM-01:45 AM 0 0 01:30 PM-01;45 PM. 8 10` -- 01:45AM.-02:00AM _ 0 0 .01:45 PM-02:O0 PM 9- M .. 0 0., 0 62' 58 118 02;00AM-02:15AM 2 7 02.00PM-0215 PM 12 13 t�t 0215AM-02:30AM -0,, 0 0215 PM-0230 PM 8 - 7�- 0230 AM-02:45 AM D. 0 0230 PM-0245 PM - 8' 14"- 0?95AAA -03:00 AM 0: 0-1 0245PM-03:O0PM.' 16' 37, 2 3 -5 44' 711 N5 03:OOAM-03:15AM 0 0. 03:OD PM-03:15 PM 31 81 I r' 03:75 AM-03:30 AM 0 - 0 .. 0315 PM-o3:30 PM 27 73 03:30 AM-03.45 AM 2 t - 03:3D PM-03:45 PM 105 101 03:45 AM •09:OOAM 0 - 0. 03:45 PM--04:OO PM - 265- _ 961•: 1 ffff .; . -.... 2 . 1 : 3 428 352 .7801 �04:00 AM-04:15 AM 3. '0. 04:15 AM-04.30 AM 2 1 .... - 04:OOPM-04:15PM -04A5PM-0430PM 20 27 - 14_ 12- 10430AM-04:45 AM 1-: 4 043o PM-04.45 PM 21. 10- 04:45 AM-05.00 AM 3 - 0.: - ..14 64:45 PM -MOO PM 12 6 . t 9 5 _ B0 _, 42.,; 1221 t MOOAM-05:15AM 1 0 - - 05:00 PM-05:15 PM 14 12 - I05:15AM-D5:30 PM 1 0. - 05:15PM-05:30PM 9 11 .i 65:30 AM-05.45 AM 3 1 - - 05:30 PM-05.45 PM 6 8-' .. 05:45 AM•06:00 AM 7 0 05:45-PM-06:00 PM - 8.. 8 8 1_; 7 37 39 - 76 06:OOAM-06:15AM 9 2 _ OB:W PM-06:15 PM 6. 14 ::: <. ::' •..- - .''.. 06:15AM-06:3DAM 0 _ 3 .. 06115 PM-06:30 PM 4 3 I - '�IOAM-06:45AM 9 5 05:30 PM-06:45 PM 9 12. _ .. CAM-07:00AM 3 0 •. _ 08:45 PM-07:00 PM 7 7 - - 21 10 34. 26 ,:.. 46 62I OT.00 AM-07:15 AM 10 1 - 07.00 PM-07:15 PM 3 13 4 � 07:15 AM-07:30 AM 13 4 - 07:15PM-07:30PM 3. 3 M, 1' o7:30 AM-07:45 AM 26 /] 07:30 PM-07:15 PM. 0 12 107:45 AM-08:00 AM 22 22 _ 07A5 PM -MOD PM 8' .6 - - - 71 41 it5.:.: -12 -'. 34, ° 46 ' 08:00 AM-OB:15 AM 13 28 _. OB:ODPM-08:15 PM 9 9 . 08:15AM-08:30AM 22 u 08.15PM-08:30PM 2 8 - - - `, 08:30 AM-08:45 AM 26 19 08.30 PM-08:95 PM 5 12 .. i �M45AM-M.00AM 3D 31 08:45 PM-09:00 PM 5 ,.' 11 ,• ':"� 91 113 204. • : - 21 40 •:. 61 109:OOAM-0915AM 156 188 03DOPM-09:15PM 7 7 p9:15AM-09:30AM 202 112 MASPM-09:3OPM 2 S < "• 09:30 AM -WAS AM 33 17 :09'.30 PM-04.45 PM 1 6 09,45 AM __. 14 11 0045 PM-1000 PM 3 2 •' _� 405 328 733. 7, :_ 20 :.... 271 10:00 AM-10.15 AM 10 8 10.00 PM-1015 PM 0 4 . 10:15AM-10.30AM 13 8 - 10:15 PM-1030 PM 0 2 -' 19.30 AM-1045 AM 11 9 - 1030 PM-1045 PM 1 p - 1045 AM-1190 AM 14 8 - 10.45 PM-11:00 PM 0 7 _8 -- N A------lL -------'-- 1 7 11:00AM-11:15AM 9 3 11:0OPM-11:15PM 2 3 11:15AM-11:30AM 15 11- 11:15PM-11:30PM D 1 11:30AM-11:45 AM - 9 8 11:30 PM-11:45 PM 2 0 11:45 AM-12.00 PM 19 7 11:45PM-12:00AM 4' 3 52 29 - $1-•. 8 7 15 Total Volume 707 567 1 1274- I.- Total Volume 888 859 Doily Taal:: 1595 1426 �� Loptlob:.6orte Yllasa Q . ao Pauba Rd., • , 6od.. NR SB;, EB -..:WB PM Period '' 148 .. SB 12 DO AM-12.15 AM 0 0 12AS AM-12:30 AM 0 0 . .. 12,30 AM-UAS AM 0 0. - 12:45AM-01:00 A2.1 0 0 .0 -- - _ 0' 0 01:00 AM. 01: 15 AM 0 0 01:15AM-01:30AM 0 0 01:30AM-01:45AM 0 0, 01:45 AM-02:00 AM - i:. 0� _ all 02:00 AM-02.15 AM 0. -.0;,. 02.15 AM-02:30 AM - 0 0, OZ.WAM-02:45AM 0.- 0- 02:45AM-03:00AM 0 0 PM 13 6 PM 7 6 PM 20 9 PM 1423 54 01:15 PM 4 01:30 PM 5 01:45 PM 3 0215 PM 51 02.30 PM 4 0245 PM 2 03:OD PM 18 44 e 3' 2' 4 EB' 'WR -34 6 is 3 8' 13'' ; 291 so: 79 03.00 AM-03:15 AM 0 0 03:00 PM-03:15 PM 44 /6 03:15AM-03:30AM 0 .0, 03:15PM-0030PM 45 - 9'' -. M30AM-03ASAM 0 .1 r .03,30 PM-03:45 PM' 54 114 - ^1,•, . 03:45AM-04:OPAM 0-:: 0 :. i;..'. ...,1 �03,45 PM-04:00 PM 12 '20' - 0 1 t ... - 155' -161 - 310 - 04:00 AM-04:/5 AM 0. 0 04:00 PM-04:15 PM 10 14 04ASAM-04:30AM 0. 0. 64:15 PM-04.30 PM 4 10' _ 04:30AM-09:45AM 0: 1 .'-. _ :.; ''+ 7 D4:30PM-04:45PM 4 6' 04'45 AM-0&00 AM'. 0 �.. 0 - -04:45PM-6SoOPM, : 6" 9 -05:00AM-05:15AM 0. 1 0&OOPM-OSASPM 4 7 05:15 AM-05:30 AM 0 05.15 PM-05:30 PM 5" 1 : - D5:30AM-05:45 AM 0. 2- MOPM-O&45PM 5. 3 . 05:45AM-06:OOAM 1-. 0- + '. 05:45PM-06:OOPM_ 6`. 5:�. - .... - 1 _ 4 . - 6 20 " Is, 36 ! 06:00AM-06ASAM 1 3 - 06:0OPM-O&15PM 9- 2'' t 0&15AM-0&30AM 3 8.. - --06-.15PM-06:3OPM 3. 2 _. 06:30 AM-06:45 AM 9 11 063OPM-06:45PM 11 5 06:45AM-07:WAM 7' 6 06:45PM-07:OOPM 11 �'6' 26 26 46.. 34 . 15 07:00 AM-07:15 AM 07:15 AM-%:30 PM 10 7 2 7 - .. 07:DDPM-07:15PM 0715PM-%:30PM 3 4 5 5 .� . 07:30AM-07:45AM 15 11 .. 07:30 PM-07:46 PM 3 2 .:•. 07:45 AM-08:00 AM '18 9 - 07:45 PM-O&OD PM.. 5 •_ 5 ". Si 29 79:r 15 `•. 17 32� !08:00AM-WASAM 18 16 - O&OOPM-08:15PM 2 1. . 0&15 AM-09:30 AM 25 19 O&15 PM-0&30 PM 3 1 0&30 M4-08:45 AM9 2 08:30PM-08:45PM 2 '- 5. -0&45 AM-0900 AM 54 24 0&45 PM-09.00 PM- 1,' 2_ 09:ODAM-MA5AM 156 103 - 09.00PM-09:16PM 1 .3. l 09.t5 AM-0930 PA1 19 28 0915PM-09:30PM 4 2 ' 09:30AM-o9:4SAM 8 6 09:30PM=6945PM 1 0' 0945AM-1000AM 7 6 - 09.45 PM-1000 PM 3 -0.... I O.W AM-1015 AM 3 6 - 1000 PM-1015 PM 0. -: 1015AM-1030AM 4 5 .. 1015PM-10.30PM 0 1 { r 103o AM-1045PM 2 2 1D.30PM-/0.45PM 1 1 10.4SAM-11:0DAM 3 10.45PM-11:OOPM 3 1 12 19:. 37...: .. - 4 4:. 6 eR 11:OOAM-11:15AM 2 3 11:o0PM-11:15 PM 3 0 l `11:15AM-t1:30AM 4 3 -. 11:15PM-11.30PM 0 0 11:30AM-11:45 AM 10 1 - M3OPM-11:45 PM - 1 0 I 11:45 AM-12.00 PM /0 6 - 11:45 PM-12'OO AM 0 syy 25 13 39' 4 2 6j Y Total Volume 406 297 707 :'Total Volume 375 - 377 - 752 I Daily Totals: 781 674 1455 Volumes for Tuesday, June 10, 2003 Gity of Temecula Locafton: Pauba,Rd. L&w/ Corte yilll6 'a. AM Period NB 86 EB w . B PM Period NB SS EB WB 12.06 AM - M.15AM 2 5 120LLPKf--12.I5PM-. 37 57 12 15 AM - IZM AM 2 2 1215 2:15 PM - 1ZW PM 42 49 z10 IM - 1245 M 1 2 12M ' PM - 12.45 PM 56, I I I295pm-01wpm 6 to Is Iss 215 MI 01 MAM-01:15AM 1 1 ovoo PM -at 15 PM 45 33 rCZ, 01:I6AM-01:36AM 0 0 01.15PM-0130PM, 3t 38 01:30AM-01A5AM 1 1, 01:W PIM - 61.'45'PM' 321 0145 AM - 0200 AM 2 D 01:45 PM - 02.00 PM -27,. 38 4P 149 287-11 4 2 6 02.ODAM-M:ISAM ?�:� ;'! , a, 02: W PM - (YE 5 PM 32 38 02-15 0230 AM 1 2 0z15pM-02:3DPM 36 77 02.30 AM - OZ45 AM 7, 1 02-.30 02:45 PIA'," 25 47 02--45AM 03.WAM 1 0 -7 M45 PM - 03'.W PM 79 5 2 208' 377 03:00AM-n.15AM 0 0 03:00 PM - 03:15 PM OT.15AM-03.30AM 2 4 03:115 PM - 03-.30 PM 106! 70 01.30 AM - 03:45 AM1 3 03:30 PM - 03:45 PM 87.45 12 . 03AM - 04:00 A M 0 2 03:45 PM - 04:00 PM. is 64? 3 9 12 325 333 663 CkM AM - 04:15 AM 0 1 04:001`M-04:16PM 47 65 04 15 AM - 04:30 AM 1 2 04:15 PM - 04.30 PM 42 36 04:30 AM - 04:45 AM a 6 04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 957 43`. 1 0445 AM - 0500 AM 0 7 0445 PM - 05-00 PM 4 54 I Is 17 191 Is$: 3" i MWAM-O&ISAM 2 9 Q5:WpM-05:15pM 54 52 05:15A'M-O&.30AM I It om5 PM. - M30 pm 63, 51 05.30 AM - 05:45 AM 1 9 05-30 PM - 05.45 PM 74 42, 05A5 AM - 06-OD 4 24 . 0545 PM -O&M PM. 57 50 a 53 St 20 195 441 OSWAM-.M.15" 7 30 06.00 PM -as 15 pm 33 0615AM-06:30AM It 23 0615pM-M.-30pw 41 29 AM - WAS AM 13 24. 06:30 PM - 06.45 PM 58 40 AM-Ol:W AM 20 31 06.45 PM - G7 W PM 46 42, 1 51 108 96 1" i i 07:ODAM-07:15M 26 50 07:15 AM - 07."30 AM 20 .104 07:30 M - 07:45 AM 613 100 0745M-0'00AM 73 102 in 3" 08:OOAM-08:15AM 98 101 OB15AM-OMM 56 72 M30 AM - 08:45 AM 23 65 WAS AM - 09.W AM so 86 227 324 551 M.00AM-M.ISM so 113 09.15 AM - M.M M 29 60 0930 AM - ft45 M 20 38 M.4 M - I&OD AM 20 28 149 239 3a8 . MWAM-10.15AM 26 23 IMSAM- 10.30M 24 27 10:.30 AM - 10,45 M 2B 29 is 44 97 123 220 I I OD M - 11:15 AM 19 37 11 15 M - 11:30 M 28 46 1130 AM - I 145 AM 29 50 1145 M - I 2W M 43 34 Total Volume 119 161 286 855 1417 2272 07:W PM - DTI 5 PM I 07:15 PM'-07:30 PM 46 32 2 07:30 PM - 07:45 PM 41 31 .4 -w.WpM sS 22 259 08.00 PM - 08.15 PM 34 21 08:15PM-08,MPM 35 22 08.30 PM - 05.45 PM 36 17 08:45 PM - 09:00 PM 2111' MOO PM - M.1 5 PM 23 ORA 5 PM - M.30 PM 29 Is ORM PM - 09:45 PM 17 9 WAS PM - 10M PM 17 19 M 66 1521 10.00 PM - 19. 15 PM 13 13 I e. 15 PM - 10.30 PM is 12 1030 PM - 1 a45 PM 10 2 II 19.45PM- It WPM 16 12 39 931 SO It OOPM- IIAS PM 10 3 11-15pm- 11 MPM 3 1 11:30 PM - 11:45 PM 7 2 11:45 PM - 12:00 M 4 2 --j4_8 32! Total Volume 1876 1756 3631 Daily Totals: 2730 31173[l i Totals: 54 _-18 22 17 15 59 2V 242 12 11 512 20 1010 Peak HR 0.574 0.638 0.848 0.894 Fa Oi.74T Factor. AM Peak Hour Begins at: 7:00 AM 15 Mm. Peak 7:45 AM Peak 42 17 19 12 13 49 27 193 10 10 412 18 ;822 Volumes: Intersection Control: 2-Way Stop (N & S) s� Y� isi InfersefcomTurni>fg 1VlovGount Prepared7iy. Mwithland ba-C'ouafers ' Prepared For. Urban Crossroads ClientriP' raject Name Thursday, June 1-2; 2603 Client's Ref-, 00775' Project No 03-006-007 N--S Street Corte Villosa E-W Street.. Pauba Rd. Areas Temecula NatlhBound nutiiBdund East trurid ::�WestBound NL: . NT -. NR :, ,. SL ST SR: EL ET ER WL' WT WR Total Lanes: p; 1;: 0.. _..0 1 1. 1: 0.. 1 0 p, 1: 0 6:00 PM 3. 0 1 2 ;' 1 1 6 35 ' 8 3 27 3 90 6:15 PM a 2 1 0 2. 1 4 48 14 2 30 4 1'11 6:30 PM 2. 0 1 3 0 2 7 39 8 7 40 2 -111 6:45 PM 1; 1 0 31 1 6 3 25. 4 0 34 Q c 78 7:00 PM 1 1 2 0. 1 4 4 30 2 5 30 0 80 7:15 PM 5: 0 0 1 1 3 5 37 3 2 16 1 74 7:30 PM 2. 1 1. 2: 0 2 2 41 3 2 25 3 84 7:45 PM 0 0 0 2. 2.. 0 3 22 6 1 13 0 49 Totals:, 17 5 6 13 8 19. 34 277 Peak HR 0:625 :0:55o 0.761 Factor.' 48 22 215 13'- '677 0:7761 1 6.878 PM Peak Hour Begins at 6,00 PM 15 Min: Peak: .6:15,PM Peak 9 3 3 8 4 10 20 147 34 12 Volumes: Intersection Control: 2-Way Stop (N & S) Intexsectton. Turn ng:lllovement Count Prepared by:.Southland Car Counters : Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Clients Project,Nama Thursday, June 12, 2003 Client's Ref. 007.75 . Project No , 03 6926-002 N-S Street" Camino Romo EL Street; Corte ;Villosa Area: TeWecula .'•4, ., N.orthBound _..So` .. WevBound „ NL. •,. NT.:,. NR =::' .SL ST. SR'; EL; ET: : ER 4 WL; WT' . ;; WR. Total Lanes: 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 ._0.. 1 0._ 0.. 6:00 AM 1; 1 .. 1 0 1 .. 0 t A, 6:15.AM 0.;`,: 1 0 0 2' 1 4: . 6:30AM 1:::r 2 0` 1. .6:45 AM 0 0 7:00 AM 1 4 2 0 0` 1 8.. 7.15 AM 2` 7 3 2 2' 2 18 7:30AM 2 '. 11.. 4. 1 7:45 AM 2 '.: 21 . 12 3 1` 1 ;.: 40 Totals: -- 9 48 23 7 9 5 2:101 Peak HR 0.000 .U00.. 'A:000 0.000: 053] Factor. AM Peak Hour Begins at: T00AM. 15'Wn.Peak: 7:45'AM Peak 7' 43 21' 6 4' 4, " 85 Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) Inter�eei£an"T rl g, , or edunt Prepared Uy. Southland Cni°Counters Prepared For Urban Crossroads Client's RojecfName Thursday, June 12; 200.3 - Client's Ref,- � D0775 Project No N-SStreet CaminoRoino E-tYStreet CorteVillosa ;area. Temecula NorthBourid `., •,S#WhBound ;• Eus7Borind > West&oi nd NL . NT NR, ? SL -; ST i-- 'SR . EL ? _ ET s. ER -^° WL" WT" WR Total Lanes: 6:60 PM 1 Z 1 1 2 1 8. 6:15 PM 3. 1 1 2 2 0 g 6:30PM 2- 2 3 1 f. 2 6:45 PM 1 . 4 2 0 2;• 1 • : ;,10 7:00PM 7:15`PM 1., ,' 1 2 1 1.1- 0 6 7:30 PM 0 2 1 2 0:. 1 6 7:45'PM 1 3 3 1 1• (t :.-.. 4. Totals: Peak AR 0;810 Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at Peak Volumes: 10 16 14 9 0.616 0.727 6:00 PM 15 Min. Peak 7 9 7 4 Intersection Control: I -Way Stop (SB) A 1 :. Fntergga lk *mq Count ,gn,47urning Prepared,by Cnr counters :. ••Southland Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Thursday, June 12, 2003_, Client's Re% 00775 Prbject N6 030926-003, N S Street Camino Romo E-W Street , Rdhcho Vista Rd Area Temecula or:Elrllaund; . ;,Sditth&aund .. • tistBaund, - V egillound NL- NT _ NR L ; = SL ST `r SR EL - "_.; ET ER , . WL''" WT WR Total Lanes: 0: 1:. 0: 0 0:.. 0 0 1.'...... 0 0; 6:00 AM 3 . 0 8 1 ;0. 29 41 6:15AM 1i 0 1 1 2 13 18:-: 6:30 AM 3 1 . 5 0. 1" 14 24 6A5 AM. 4: 3 10 4 0 43 64 7:00 AM 9r 1 40 6 1 113 170 7:15 AM 17 4 135 15 5 212 388 7:30 AM 10 3 81 16 13 72 195 7:45AM 9. 16 41 23 48 65 202.r. Totals: 56` 28 321 66 70 561 1102 j Peak HR 0.690 0:000 0.0.00 0:000 Factor. AM Peak Hour Begins at: TOOAM ., 15•Min. Peak: 7:15 AR4 Peak 45 24 297 60 67 462 955 Volumes: Intersection Control: I -Way Stop (NB) r:1 InterSIM on 7u rit�tgMo"ue�iteii't aunt Prepared by: Sditth6trd ear'.Couiiters. ` Prepared For Urban Crossroads Client's'Projed Name Thursday, June 12,2003 Client'sRet-� 00775 Pro%eetNo '.�•�. 03-0926-003 N-S Street Camino Rollo E-W Street RahM6 PFsta Rd. Area: Teineetfla l ortliBotin'd` Soutfr&bund EIMROwid :: W7 stBound NL . ,:; NT ; . NR SL . ST '. SR EL "` ET. :i. ER WL ` Wl - WR Total, Lanes: 0 ., 1 0. 0 .. 0 _. 0 :: 0 1 0.-1 0 1 :. 0 - v 6:00 PM .. 1 .... 0 . 28 6 5 25 65 6:15 PM 2- 2 .. 28 2 2. 24, ;: 60 6:30PM 5,, 3 '. 26 4: 2 . 14:: = 54 6:45 PM 0::. 0 28 3 2 26 . t I tZl 59 7:00 PM: 3 . 1 41 3 1 18 `. 67 7:15PM, 6 5 19 6 0 6= 42 .` 7:30 PM 2 0 16 4 2 14 38 7:45 PM 31• 2 : 20 2 1 17 45 - Totals: 22 13 206 30 15 144.. 430- ` i Peak HR O. 00 0,615 0.727 0.790 Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at M & PM 15 Min. Peak: 7 00 PM Peak 10 6 123 12 7 82 240, Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (NB) MlI InferSeqji94 - ?tgWoveTen�:Cohnl Prepare4,Py;.Sqfffh!an4. Cqf-, Counters., Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Thursday, June 12, 209131. Client'siRef': 00775 Project No' 03-0926-1004, N-S S-treet jVegjjows Pkwy.. E-WStreet: -, Patiba.Rd. Area:.. TeMecula.. N 00409*0 -So rRJ)U4d.,.o..,E-a&1Bound Wh ..-,,W4WBbund. 'Lr flT NR SL. ST; SR = EL ET, ER WL -i WT %v` WR Total' Lanes-. 1 2 0 t, 1 2 2 1 t. I 0� 6:00 AM 7 11 0 2 5 3 �O 0 6 2 2 8 0. 46 6:15 AM 7 12 0 1 13 1 3 4 0 2 7 2`9 52..! 6:30 AM 9. 22 2 2 14 5 2 17 4 3 12; 4, 6:45 AM' 17 21 4 2 16 6 3 19 6 6 28 6". '134% 7:00 AM- 30 55 3 4 41 13 .4 11 8 9 42 10 230 7:15 AM 44 81 2, 3 77 21 13 17 14 9 47 10 338.1 9 24 28 9 65- 309 7:30 AM 21 38 6 2 69 34 7:45 AM 24 67 12 6 72 43 16 36 33 21 58P. 10% 398 Totals: 159 307 29 22 307 126 50 134 95 61 267 44- .'16011'' Peak HR 0354 Oi795 -0.626 :,-U26 rl'10.80V, Factor. AM Peak Hour Begins at: 7400 AM 15 Min: Peak: TWAM 4 Peak 119 241 23 15 259 Ill 42, 88 83 48 212 34, 1275 Volumes: Intersection Control: 4-way stop Prepared For Iri%rSeCtion Tzir rirlgYl oidemei t bout t' Prepared by'SditthlahJOr Counteis' Urban Crossroads Cliant'sProjectName Thursday; June 12, 2003 Client's'Ret.' ' 00775 Project No 03`69'67004 N-S Street Meadows Pkwy. E-W Street Pauba Rd. Areal NorthBound`%>.,St uthBound' BdstBounti Ves?Bound NU - NT - NR `' SL ST `" SR EL ET ER WL WTI" WR Total Lanes: 6:00 PM 8 56 10 9 43 7 7 16 14 6. 22 8% 206 6:15PM 17 40 7 11 41 3 7 22 28 6_ 17' 5' `''N 6:30 PM 17 40 5 4 53 6 8 28. ' 18 7 21 ' 6 213 ` 645 PM 10 51 5 13 52 5 5 ''' 14 10 6 ° 15' 7 '193 7:00 PM 12 4.1 6 5 39 6 5 14 8 4 23 11 174 7:15 PM 10 35 4 8 50 5 9 22 21 16 13 S' 108 7:30'PM 10 35 7 13 43 4 9 18 24 4 16 8 191 7:45 PM 2 31 8 ' 4 29 4 4 11 12 2 11 T. 126 Totals: 86 329 52 67 350 40 54 145 135 51 138 57 1604 ,; •Peak HR 0.899 0.882 `0176 '0:875 0:958 Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at 6:00 PM ' 15 Min. Peak: 6.30 PM Peak 52 187 27 37 189 21 27 80 70 25 75 26. :816 Volumes: Intersection Control: 4-way stop �l3 - Inle, eciion Turn ug Movement Ca'unt a5 n * ., 1. Prepared by Soa{htand•Car Counters,, Prepared For Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name .: Thursday, June 12, 2003 ,. Client'srReE, 00775 Project No 03=0926 005 N-S Street e 11Qeadows Pkwy. E-W Street Rancho Vista Rd. Area: Temecula ..' 111grthBound , 6 SOuthBOltnd.' East,R nd q , ' : WestBound NUMT,;_ NR : SL ST SR' EL— . ET ER WL " INT. WR. Total Lanes: 1, 2 0• :'.. 1". 2- 2. 0 1. 0 0' 1 O 6.00 PM ---7 .., 47 2 , 6 54 10 7 9 11 8 9r 9 6:15 PM 1151 ,: 6 .: 2 , 62 - 12. 10 9 11 3 9`. 6 192. 6:30 PM 5 40 8 :. 8 _45 : 5 6 ..: 13 9 : 4 6 8 ' 6:45 PM 4 31 3 0 59 _ 13 4 ;,; 8 15 7 6 3 153; TOO PM 4 30 4 12 49. 9 10 18 17 ' 2 ` 6. 5.. `: 106: 7:15 PM 3 31 . 3 3 32 3. 3 10 11 : 0 0.. 3. 102 7:30 PM 6, 30 1 : 8 41.: 5 5 ,'. 4 7 6 5r. 51'1 123 .' 7:45 PM 7 28 4 3 - .. 37 < 3 5 3 14 3 7, 3 117 Totals: 47 288 31 42, 379 60 50 74 95 33 ; 48 _' 42 1189 . Peak HR 1790 T.908 _ 0:933 0.750 0:887 i Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at . 6,00 PM . 15 Min: Peak: 6:15 -PM ; Peak 27 169 19 16 220 40 27 39 46 22 30. 26 681 Volumes: Intersection Control: 4-Way Stop Am . ,�rtter.,�e�+�i��: Tur�tn� 1Vlo>°rerit¢►i't��'l�ttnt Prepared'by.,Soilthkttd Cdr Coilnters+ s Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's>Project+Name Thursday, June 12, 20Q3. Client's Ref.. <00775 ` Project No ' 03'D926-005 N-S Street Meadows Pkwy. E-W Street _,. '.'Rancho Vista Rd. Area. Tenreeida' :, NotEhEound ••So rthBbund : EustBnurtd ,b, tW,&M 4hid`' NL ; ;; -NT ;:. NR ,> SL ST °. SR - EL `? ' ET - ER =' WL WT WR Total Lanes: 1: 2 0 1 '. 2 2 0 1 `: 0 Q.:. 6.00 AM: 15, 12 2 0 5 3, 2 2 2 1 11 9 "64 6a5 AM 5 17 0. 1 13 4 0 1 1 2 9 4 `57 6:30 AM 7: 28 1 2 18 0., 2 3 1 2. 8 8 8Q 6:45 AM 13 28 2 4 :: 20 13 .. 3 4 3 3 18 12 123 7:00 AM 51 33 2 3 25 19 14 23 25 5 21 13' 234- 7:15 AM 81 , 37 2 5 46. 35 22 M 47 3 39 11 366' 7:30 AM'. 33 46 4 2 :: 50 25 13 29 44 11 34 10` 301 7:45 AM 29 _ 66 5 8 - 91 45 9 24 23 19 34 15 3W Totals: 234 267 18 25 268 144 65 124 146 46 174 82 1593 Peak HR 0;810 0.615 0.727 0.790 %'V 862. ' Factor. ' AM Peak Hour Begins at: 7:00 AM, 15 On. Peak: 745 AM Peak Volumes: 194 182 13 18 212 124 58 114 139 38 128 49 1269 Intersection Control: 4-Way Stop A16 fwer�ect qm Turning Moventent ounti' Prepared=by: }Southland,Car, .Counters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Thursday, June 12, 2003 ClientsRef. b0775 Project No - 03 0026 006 ?� N-S Street CalJe Cedral E-W Street Pauba Rd. Area. •' Temtrcula XgrthBound Soi#40,ound.' . .Xdsf-Bv ind W,&Wo.und: NL NT NR SL ST '' SR . EL ET ER WL Wi-=` WR _Total Lanes: 6:00 PM 1 1 0 49 30 r 0 81 6:15.PM 1 1 2 64 34 0 I:10,2 - 6:30 PM 0 0 1 54 41 1 37 6:45 PM 0 0 0 33 45 ` 1 ;79 7:00 PM 1 0 0 47 32 0' _ `80 7:15 PM. 0 .. 0 '.' 1 43 23 1 ' .. `68 ; 7:30 PM . 0 1 2 46- 26 0 '77 7:45PM 1 0 1 34 14 0 50 Totals: 4 3 7 370 247 3 Peak HR 0:610 6.615 0.127 `0.790 Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at 6:00'MA 15 Min. Peak: 61,5 PM Peak 2 2 3 200 150 ` 2 359' Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) 1 1 0 Intersection Turning- MlauementCo'unt ' Prepared by: Southland Car. Counters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name. Thursday, June 12, 2003, Client's Ref..-• 60775, Project No -' 03-0926-006' N-S Street Calk, Cedral . E-W Street. Pauba Rd. Ared: ' Temecula . NarOBound ,.:Southftun,d ; :.:Eak oaind� -` WdfBound NL .:: NT ,> NR -. SL ST . ; SR "EL-. .'ET. ''.' ER ' WL WT-WR Total Lanes: 0 0: 0 .: 0.- 1 1 0 1 0 0 6:00 AM _._.. 0 " 1 0 12 "` 16 0 29 6:15AM 0 0 0 19 15 0- ',34 6:30 AM 0 0 0 5 26 6:45 AM 0 1 0 27 51 0 79 7:00 AM 1 0 0 26 101 0 128 1:15 AM 1. 0 1 49 139 0 190 7:30 AM 1 - 0 0 65 133 1 ' 200 7:45 AML 0 :: 0 0 89 145 1 L235 Totals: 3 2 1 292 626 2 926 Peak HR 0.000 0:000 0.000 0 000 0:801 Factor. 71 AM Peak Hour Begins at: 7:00 AM 15 MinPeak: 7:45AM Peak 3 1 229• 518 2.,_ 751 Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) I-7 Intersect oix; urning.MoveftzeWC.V unt- Prepared by. Southland Car C-ounters•, Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client!s,Proiect Name Thurs,day,.June 12, 2003..Client's Ref.": 00775 Proved No 63-OkO00'7 N-Sstreet. GiefftTree Rd. E-W Street .Pau&and. �A r'ea. � a.- ieI �Tehie&416 N-014BBound SvwhBound, Ekrsi 1DO ith d - NL NT NR SL r ST SR,�� EL I ETER, WL 'w r WR Total Lanes: .0 0 0 0 1 1 6:604M 0 1 0 U 17 0 32 6:15 AM, 0 1 1 19 15 .36 6:30 AM 0 1 0 5 27 0 6:45 AM, 1 0 0. 25 50 7.00 AM 1 2 1 26 99 0 129 7:15 AM: 0 1 1 48 137 0 187 2 0 0 7:30 AN 65 133 1 A i 7:45 AM 1 90 146 1 I, 240 Totals: 5 7 4 292 624 3 035 KIM Peak HR 0.574 0.638 0.646 ff.894 0.189 Factor. AM Peak Hour Begins at: T.ffAM 15VinjPeak: 7:45 AM Peak 4 4 3 220 515 2 7 . 57 Volumes: Intersection Control: 1 -Way Stop (SB) A19 Intersection Turnzng-Movem,&n1 G''ount Prepared bye Sbuthlaird`Car Counters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Thursday,'June12,2003. Client's Ref 00775, Project No 03=092(i-00T'' NIS Street : Green Tree Rd. E-W Street Pauba Rd. Area: Temecula North -Bound SouthBound : EaStBound , .,. 'WeStBbund NL` NT NR- SC ST;:' SR EL': 'ET ER' _" WL' WL WR Total Lanes: 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0' .0. 11 0 6:00 PM 2 1 1 45 30 .. t . `•. ' 80 6:15 PM 1 , 2 2 65 . 34. 0 104 6:30 PM 0 ",. 1 . 2' 55 41: 0 99 6:45 PM 1 0 1 32-i. 43- 2 79 7:00 PM 0. 1 0 46 31 T, 79. 7:15 PM 2 2 1 42 21 S.',. 69 .: 7:30 PM 1 3 2 47 ' 29 0 82 7:45"PM 1 1 1 33 13.. 1 -= .50 I Totals: —--- 8 11 10 365 : 242 6 ' 642Y Peak HR 0.625 0550 0.761 0.776 Factor. PM Peak Hour Begins at 6:00 PM. 15 Min. Peak: 6:15 PM Peak 4 4 6 197 148 . 3 362- Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) A19 Interw, on Turn" Wovewwl Qount ; Prepared! by: Southland Car Counters. Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project -Name, - „ :; , Sunday, June 08, 2003 Client's Ref. : 007.75 Project No 03-0926wWt- N-S Street Corte Villosa E-W Street. , Pauba Rd. Area Temeeultr: NorthBound .SauthBound:. _ ,,EdstBound . ;: °,W&Wound : NL - NT NR-- SL - ST SR " €L 'ET ER WL WV; WR Total Lanes: 0. 1 0. 0 1'. 1. ' 0;: 1 0 ' 10:00 A 3 0 1 0, 0 1 2 17 ' 2 1 32 1 60 10:15 A 5. 2 1 2 1 3 0 20 2 2 35 1 74 -.. 10:30 A 2. 0 0 0 0 1 2 32 0 1 31 1 70 10:45 A 2. 0 1 0_. 0 1 4 29 2 2 32 3 "` " 76 11:00 A 3 0 2 0 0 2 3 28 3 2 27 3 73 11:15 A 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 32 0 2 28 0 70 11:30 A 2:' 0 3 1' 0 4.1 2 17 0 2 27 0" 56 .: 11:45 A 2' 0 0 0 0 0: 4 29 2 0 33 3 73. Totals: 22 2 9 Peak. HR U62 Factor. MD Peak Hour Begins at 4 1 15 17 204 11 12 245 12 554.' 0.417 6 893 0.921 0.964 10:15 AM Peak 12 2 4 2 Volumes: Intersection Control: 2-Way Stop (N & S) �3 AV) Inirzrsecii n u fng ovemerit'CD nt Prepared by:'S6athtand-Car 'Coanters: " Prepared For. Urban Crossroads ClientW Praject Name - - ` - •-" - , Sunday, June 08, 2003, Client's Ref '00775 Project No 03-0926-002- N-SStreet Camino Romo E-WStreet Corte'Villosa Area: Temecula ' MortkOdund' SotahBound Eakt&i�untt• T es't$ound NL � NT .,;. NR •': SL ' ST SR * EC- ° ET ER ` WL WT WR Total Lanes: 00 O c' 0: 1 10:00 A' 0 3 1 0 6. 10:15A 1' 3 3 1 0` 2 '' m 10:30 A 0 0 3 0 0: 0 't. 3 10:45 A 0 1 4 0 Ot 0 5 11:00 A 0: 1 3 4 1:. 0 9 11:15A 0' 2 1 0 1'. 0; 4 11:30 A 1 1 0 0 0' 1 "' 3 11:45 A 0 0 2 0 2- V 5 Totals: -- --- 2 11 17 5 4' 6 ' `'` 45 :Peak HR 0.562 OA17 0'893 6.921 ':0.675 Factor MD Peak Hour Begins at 10:15'AM Peak 1 Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) 15 Min. Peak: 101'5 "AM 5 13 5 1 2 27 AZT Inter�ection.T,urna>ag.Moueme t Fount . Prepared by SautA1and.Car,(7ounters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name ; Sunday, June 08,.20Q3„ Client's Ref: ,..00775• Project Na 03-0926' 003 N--S Street Camino RomO E W Street • Rancho Vista Rd., Area: Temecula Northouud:- SouEh&pund , EastBound N'est$qund, NL NT , • NR SL :, ST - ; SR EL - ET ER WL'z WV.: WR Totat Lanes: 0... 1. 0 0 0 0.. 0 1: 0.. 0 1.. 0 10:00 A 6- 1 17 ' 3 1, 28 10:15 A 7.; 2 17 3 1 24 54 1030 A 3 0 14., 2 0 22 41 10:45A 5. 1 15 0 3 18 42 11:00 A 2 2. 15 1 3 20 43 11:15 A 6 2 26 0 1 18 53 9 4 1 15 34 11:30 A 4 1 11:45 A 51, 0, 18 3 1 26 5&, Totals: 38 Peak HR Q.694 Factor: MD Peak Hour Begins at Peak 21 Volumes: 9 131 16 11 171 376 0 4:17 0.893 0.921 `=`0.862 10.00 AM 15 Min. Peak: 10:00 AM 4 Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (NB) 21 63 8 5 92 193 Interseetion �urnangltMovetn"ent C unt Prepared by: Southland Car'Cminters" Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Clients'Pr*ctName Sunday, June 08, 2003. Client's Ref.' - 00775 ` Project No OW926-004 N-S Street Meadows Pkwy. E-W Street._ Pauba Rd. Area: Temecula ` NorthBouli .S6ut1vB6und .. :. E'astBound WestBound NL''; NT ,: Lanes., 1 2 NR `_. 0. SL 1 ST ;'' 2 SR". 2. EL 1 ET 1.:. ER : , 0 WL 1:.. WT _..1:... WR 0 Total. :. 10:00A 10. 28 2 3 24 4 4 9 4 5 17 t .' `'111 10:15 A 13 32 3 5 28 5- 7 ` 11. 5 6 19'-; 1 ".1135 10:36A 7- 37 5 4 25 10' 8 20 5 4 15' 2 : 142 ' 10:45 A 13• 42 4 3 40 5 ':: 6 '' . 15 8 6 ' 24' % 3. < ; 169 11:00 A. 6 40 6 1 34 8 ' 5 16 11 8 17 2.. ' = 154, ' 11:15 A 9 28 6 4 46 4 8 11 15 4 18 2 155 11:30 A 10 38 7 0 39 6 3 ,,, 16 2 - 9 , 14 4yk ' :148 11:45 A 15 41 6 2 45 12 11 c: 10 9 5 8': 7 171 .Totals. 83 286 --- 39 22 281 54 52 108 59 47 132 22 " .1185 Peak HR 0t855 0.852 =.0:860. "0.907 4918 Factor. MD Peak Hour Begins at 11:60 AM t5 Min. Peak: 11 A5 AM Peak 40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15: 628 Volumes: Intersection Control: 4-Way. Stop �23 Intersection TuiMing�Movement Count Prepared by: Southland Car Counters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's'Project Name Sunday, June 08, 2003 Client's Ref: 00775 , Project No.03.026-005, N-S Street Meadows Pkwy. E-W Street:: Rancho Vista Rd. Area Teni7 cula Northbound,,,, SouthBound . EastBound . ••-WestBound NT NR s SL • • ST SR - EL, ET ER WL WT ' WR Total Lanes: 1 2 0 1 2' 2= 0 1 01 0: 1. 0 10:00 A 8 . - 34 2 6 20 10 2 9 7 4.` 101 3 115, , 10:15 A 6. 36, 1- 3 34 4:, 7 8 ` 5 . 4 ' %e 8'. 132 10:30 A 6: , 49 7 4 27 2 ' : 2 6 ' 5 5 ` 13 12 138 10:45A 7;' 56 7 8.. 37 16 5. 7 4- 6 9- 7 163 11:00 A 5 36 3 7 42 5 7 7 4 5 9- 3 133 11415 A 4 37 2 8 37 3 9: 11 11 4 121 10 148 4 - 3 56 4 3 5 2 0" 81`. 6 136 4 11:30A 5; 40 . : 11:45 A B., 52 3 3 46 6, 5 6. 8 8 12 9- 166: Totals: 49 . 340 29 42 •: 299 44 40 59 46 36 89 58 1131 " Peak .HR 0.790 0;873 0629; " 0:741 0'878~ Factor. MD Peak Hour Begins at 11:00 AM 15 Min. Peak: 11:45 AM c. Peak Volumes: 22 165 12 21 181 18 24 29 . 25 17,-. 41 28 583 Intersection Control: 4-Way Stop t ,.e as A 1 w i Intersection �'u'r'riin]Vlovemen E'outt" Prepared by: Southland Car Courkters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Sunday, June 08, 2003: Client's Ret''' 00775" Project No 03 `0928-006 N-S Street Calle Cedral E-WStreet Pauba Rd. 4r¢a: Temeeuia 1lt6r1hBouud' " South&ound E stBdund " ' WestBouud NL ` 'MT `' NR' . SL ST SR EL ET ER " WC WT '` WR' Total Lanes: 0- 0 _ 0:. 0,.: 1 1. ... . 1. V 0 1; 0 10:00 A 0 1 0 22 30 0" ` 53,, 10:15 A 0 ' 0. 1 23 48 0 72 10:30 A 0 1 2 34 40 0 77 ` 10:45 A 0 1 1 36 37 0" ' 75" 11:00 A 0 0 0 32 31 0 63. 11:15 A 1 0 1 27 37 0 `' 66 11:30 A 0 0 0 22 28 01- 50 ` 11:45 A 0 1 0 30 37 1 69 Totals: 1 4 5 226 288 1 525 Peak HR 0.790 0i873 O:fi29 OJ41 0932 Factor. MD Peak Hour Begins at 10:15 AM 15 Min. Peak: 10:30 AM Peak 2 A 125 156 287 Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-.Way Stop (SB) A 45. Intersection Turping,]Vloveinent,Cotint , Prepared.by: Southland Car Counters Prepared For. Urban Crossroads Client's Project Name Sunday, June 08, 2003 Client's Ref.-. 00775 Project No 03-0926-007.. N-S Street Green Tree Rd. E-W Street Pauba.Rd. Area: ; Temeculq NorABound SouthBound ,Eas$Bound ,,_WestBdund NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR, Total Lanes: 0 0 0. 0 1 b 1 1 0. 0 1 10:00A. 0 1 1, 22 30 0 .::54 10:15 A 0 1.., 1 25 47 0. ;- 74.1 10:30 A. 0 0 .3 37 - 36 0 76 :. 10:45 A 0 ;:; 0. 0 38: 38 0- - _ .16 ,. 11:00 A, 0 1 :. 0 30 28 0 59 11:15 A 1 1 1 31 36 1 71 11:30 A 0 0 0 20. 28 0. 48 11:45A, 0 0 1 36 38 0 69 Totals: 1 4 Peak HR. 0.790 0:8.73 Factor. MD Peak Hour Begins at 10:15 AM Peak Volumes: Intersection Control: 1-Way Stop (SB) 7 233 281 1 0.6.29 . 0,741 0 938 y,., 15 Min, Peak: 10:30 AM 2 4 130 149 285 APPENDIX B CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - EXISTING EXAM Wed Jul 23,; 2003 14:32c07 _ Page 3-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact.' Analysis-- - - Existing Conditions,- AM Peak Hour ------------------------------------------ _____________________________________ Level Of Service.Computation Report,: 2000 HCM.Unsignalized Method (Base Volume' Alternative)-` »x+++•xxxx»++x+»+xx+ft»#+++#++++++++++•+#x#x#x»xi+i+f++#ksf+++++�Fii+ii#i#;ixxii - -, Intersection #1 GreenTree -Rd (NS)/ Pauba Rd.(EW}- - - - - x+++xx.�r�t++i+'##»#++i++x#x++x3+'+•+v+#+#♦#x#x»»#+rff:F+#�rvfi;x�++`#jai+`ixif Average Delay (sec/veh):. 13 b.1- Worst Case Level Of Service: ; B xx++ix+x»#+++ixx#++++i#+#»xx+++xi+1"+i+++•i++++++++fxt`Jx+##ff+x++f#f+++x+++i++ir++ Approach: North Bound- .South Bound East Bound - West Bound -' Movement:. L - -T - R '.L -- T- - R 'L - T- R L - T ____________.I___.________-__I,L_-_.____________IL___. _:____-_lel_-.__ ________ _I Control: Stop Sign - Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled _ Rights: Include Include - Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0- 0- .;0 11 0. 0' '0 °1 0 0'`. 0 `0 0 0 1 0 Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 0 0 0 4. 0 4 3 229 0 0 515 2 Growth Adj: .1_06 -1..00 1_00-'1.00. 1.00 1.06 "1.00't.00 '1.00 1.00 -i-00- 1 00 - Initial Bse: 0 -0 0 4 0 4 3 229 - 0 01 515- 2 -- User Adj: 1.00. 1.00 1.o0 1.00-1.00 1_00 1.00 1.0o 1.00 '1.o0 S.00 1 00 PHF. Adj.: 1-00 1.00 1.00 -1.0.0 1.00 -1-00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.001., PHF Volume: 0 0 0 4 0. 4 3 229 -0 0. 515 2' Reduct.Vol: - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 - Final Vol. 0. 0 0 4: 0 4 3 229 - 0 0 515 2` ____________i_______________ii_______________ii__,____________ Critical Gap Module: - - Critical Gpcxxxxx xxxx xxxxx- 6.4 xxxx 6:2 -4r.1 xxxx xxibm xxxxx xxxx-'xkxxx Foll0wUpTim::xxxxx xxxx xxxxx-.. 3.5 iocxx 3.3•:' 2.2 x-cxx .xxk,:bc� xxxxk xxxx, xxioc Capacity Module: Cnflict. Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx,-.751;xxxx -.516„ 517 xxxx xxxxx% xxxx xxxk xxxxx - Potent Cap.: xxxx-xxxx'xxxxx 381 xxxx 563�� 1059 xxxx oc.ixx xxxx xxxx j..xxx - Move Cap.: xxxx -xxxx xxxxx -:381 xxxz 563. 1059-xx4zx xxxxx xxxx xx�ix xxxxx - ------------i - =----- n--------------- ii---------- - -ii =------------- Level Of Service Module: - - Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.4 xxxx xxxxx xxXXx x=t:Xxxxx LOS by Move: +. x + x + » A x + • x . # - - . Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RTLT- LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx 454 xxxxx: xxxx xxxx xxxxx' xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.1 xxxxx '8.4 xxxx'xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:+ x » + B - x A + x • . + :» ApproachDel: xxxxxx 13.1 xxxxxxxxxxxx ApproachLOS: x - B- + » Traffix 7-.5,1115 (c) 2001-Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS;• IRVINE a EXAM, wed Jul 23, 2003 14:32z07:_ Page 4-1 ---------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Tiaffic.Impact Analysis. ---------------- Existing Conditions ---------------- ---------- AM Peak Hour --------------------------------------------- Level Of Service,CoTputation Report 2000 HCM.,Unsignal.ized.,,,Mpthcd,., (Base Volume Alternative)".- Intersection #2 Calle Cedral (NS)/..Pauba,Rd. .(Ew), Average DelayAsecIveh): Worst Case -Level of' Service: y Approach: North, Bound-, South, Bound ., East. Bound i�.We6t Bound Movement: L - T R L T- -, R L T - R L T R ------- --------------- Control: ., Stop, Sign. -,-Stop ----------- 7--- ------- 77- --- Sign Uncontrolled -------- Uncontrolled F Rights:' include Include - Include. include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 " 0 1 0, 0 0.. 0 0.,;1 0 0 0 0* 0 -1. 0 1 ------------- Volume Module: ------- ------- --------------- ---------- Base Vol: 0 0 3 .1 0 0. 1 : 229 0 0 518 2 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.60 .1.00 1.00 1.00 11.00A.00 1_60 1.00 1.00 1. 00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 3 0 0 1, 229 00 518 2. , User Adj: 1.010 1..00 1.00 I -do 1.0.0, 1.00 1.00 1_00 3.00 1.60 1.00, 1.06 PHF Adj: .1.010 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00� PHF Volume: 0 0 0. 3 0 a 1 229 0 0 518 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Final Vol.: 0 0 0 3 0 0 1. 229 0 --------------- 11--7 0 518 .2 ----------- 7,7 -------- Critical Cap Module: --------------- ------- I 7 Critical.Gi):xxxxx xxxx xxxxx . 5k4 XXXX XXXXX 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx)e, - FollowupTi��n_:29MXX xXXX xxxxx --- ------i 3:5 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx.. i---------------1A ---------------i i--------------- xxxxx. ------------ 7 7 Capacity Module: Cnflict.ljol: x*xx xxxx x.x= 74-9 xxxx xxxxx .520.xxxx xxxxx xxxx xXxx xxxix-, Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. _382 xxxx xxxxx 10,56 xxxx XXXXX. xxxx xxxx. xxxxx "I , Move Cap.: occx,xxxx xxxxx ,382.xxxx xxxxx 1056 xxxx xxxxx'. xxxx xxxx,xxxxx, ----------- ------------- Level Of Service Module: ----------- -------------- ---------- Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 14,5 XXXX XXXYX8.4 xxxx ixxxxx XXXXX XXXX xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxXX xxxx, xxxxx xxxx XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX xxxxx Shrd StpPel:XXXXX xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.4 xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xx= Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 14.5 XXXXXX XXXXXX ApproachLOS: # B Traffix 7.5�.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed toURBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE t4 EXAM _ Wed Jul 23, 2003 14.:32h01 Page 5-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact -Analysis' Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour - - Level Of-ServiceComputation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized: Method.(Base Volume Ajt6rnative)` Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)/- Rancho 'Vista Rd:-.(EW) '- ww»•ww wwwwww»•tit:fww»»ww»ww:}iwi}ww+iwiw+»»»w}wwi}}w»}#}w•}»}w}i�li»iiw:}#fig»wi' ' Average Delay ,(sec/veh}h 16�.41Worst Case Ievel Of Service6 C .-.• - ww»www+ww+www+}tt»w»w»»»w»»wwww»#wiw}}}}ww»www»}}www»}»t»»»»»w}i}}»w>ww#ia»wiwi Approach:. -North Bound - 'South Bound East .Bound West Bound - Movement: L ,- T R L- ,T R L- 'T - R L- "T - R-'- -------- _______ _ Control: ,.Stop Sign_ Stop Sign 'Uncontrolled - :Uncontrolled Rights::. Include Include Include Include ... - Lanes: 0 1 0 0- 1 0 ,.0 - 0 0- 0.' -0':0 '0 _1. .. 0. '0 1 0 00 Volume Module: - Base Vol: 45- -0 24 0 0 0 0 297 - 60- 67- 462 - 6 - Growth'Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.60 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.66 -1.60 1.00 1.0o Initial Bse: 45 0 24 0. 0 .0 '0 297 60 .67' 462 0 User Adj: 1.00 1-:00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00 1.00'1.60 1.00 1".00-"1.0o 1.00 - PHF Adj: :1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 45_ 0 24 0" 0' 0 0 297 60 67 462 -'01 Reduct .Vol: 0 0 0, -0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 Final Vol.: 45 0 24 0 0 0 0 297 6o 67 462 0 - ------------ .L--------- _ _______________II_____ _________I -I Critical Gap Module: - - Critical Gp: 6,4-.xxxx - 6.,2'xxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx-xxxx xxxxx 4-1 xxxx•xzXbcx �.':.' •. Fo11OwUpTim6 3.5 xxxx 3-3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx- ..2.2 xxicx-xxicxx Capacity Module: --- - Cnf lict. Vol: .923 xxxx 327, xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. .357 xxxx Potent Cap.,: - - 302 ,xxxx 719 xxxx "xxxx xxxxx` xxxx xxiix XXkc i 1213 xk,= xxxxx "'�""' ` • - ` Move Cap..: 289 xxxx 719-. xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx XXXXX'r 1213 xxxx xxxxx ------------ I--------------- II--------------- II------------ .__II_______________I Level Of Service Module: - - Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx 10..2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx"xxxxx'- 8:0 xxxx -xxxxx ' LOS by Move: • > - B w w » • w» p Movement: LT - LTR--- RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR'- RT - - Shared Cap.: 289'.xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx- xxxx xxxx xxxxIX xxxx zxxz xxxxx Shrd StpDel: 19,B xxxx-xxxxx`xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx.. xxxxx:: ,0;.1-xxxx>'xxxxz Shared LOS: C • + + » w w ,w w -A ApproachDel: 16..4 xxxxxx xxxxxx XXXXxX ApproachLOS: C • • • - - Traffix 7.5.1115, (c). 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE EXAM Wed %JuL. t . 211, .2003 14:32'07 Page 6-1 ------------ ------------------------------------------- - ---------------------------- LOS Church Traffic Impact Analysis,': Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour ' -------------------------------------------------------- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method -(Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #4 Camino Romo (N$). Corte. Villosa. i (EW). Average Delay.(sec/veh): 8-, 5:, worst Cabe Level Of '.qerVite: Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound :..West Bou . nd Movement: L T -. R L - ..T - R L T - R L - .. T ------------ 17 -------- 7 ----- -------------- ----------- ---- ----------- Control: . Stop Sign. Stop.Sign Vncontrolled Uncontrolled Rlghtsz Include Include - Include 'Include Lanes:. 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 :0 -1 :0 01 6 20 0 1 0 ------------ ---------------- --------- ------- -------- V olume Module: - Base Vol: 0, 0 0 7, 0 43 21-- 6> 0 0 �':% 4 Growth Adj: 1.001.,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00-�1.00 1.00 1;,0001.00 1-.00 Initial Bse- 0 0 0 ..7 0 43 21: 6 0 0 4 4: User Adj- 1.00 1.00 1-60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.010 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00-1.00 1-60 1.0011.00 1.00-� PHF Volume: 0 . 0 0 7 0 U 21 6 6 01 4 4 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0` 0 0 Final Vol.: 6 0 0 7 0 43 21 6 0 0 4 4 - -------1----- ---------- --------- --- 1V --------- Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6,4.xxxx �6'.2 4.11 xxxx yo-oom xxxxx xxxx 1==e FollowUpTimixxxxx' xxxx xxxxx 3-5 xxxx 3.3. 2.-2 xxxx xxxxx, xxxxx.;Xxxx 3666&, I__________ ---------------- 11- ------ ---------- 1-�- Capacity Module; Cnflict VOL: xxxx xxxx xxxxx .. 52 XXXX 4, ,%-S.xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxx Potent Cap,.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx- 9.62 xxxx - A085 1625 xxxx 3db6cx :XXXX X�x xzkibi Move Cap.:1085 1625 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxx2be- .XXXX XXXX XXI= xxxx ------------ --------------- --------- ------- Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx XXXXX 8.8 xxxx 8.5 7�.2 xxxx'xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: » x A A :A Movement: LT LTR - RT LT - LTR-- RT LT LTR - RT LT- LTR RT Shared Cap.,: xx xx xxxx xxxxx.. xxxx XXXX xxxxx xxxx XXXX, xxxxx xxxx kXXx Shrd Stpbel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. xxxx- 3bo= 7.2 xxxX.xxkxx xxxxx kxkX xxxxx Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: XXXXXX .8.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLO.S: A Traf fix 7.5.1115 (c) . 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to ORBAN cRosskoAbs, IRVINE W 11 Al 1-fl 3 IJ EXAM _ - Wed Jul 23; 2003 14:32:07 Page 7-1 ____________________________________________________ __________ LDS Church Traffic- Impact' Analysis Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour - - ________________________________________________________________________________ Level Of Service Computation Report . 2000 HCM Unslgnalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) ++�rw»»»»»+iw»ww+++w+»+�»+++w»+f»+#+++»:ii++»»iiyawiw+�if fi+li+•»»» •'�ii++++"�yas�w .. . Intersection N5 Corte villosa.(NS).:/• pauba Rd (EW) ++w+++w•ww+3+ii�»�♦.+++++++++•+#++i+»+:++•++i+w:r#wi+w##'iii•f i'#++iiii+'w'i wf+wyi�»w+w'w Average Delay'-(_sec/veh): lfi:6 v- Worst Case Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound ...South ;Boundi East Bound West Bound Movement.: : L T. 'It L, _ .. T . R L ..T : ,_ R .L T R Control: _ Stop Sign, Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights:._ Include: •Include Include - 'Include - Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1_ 0. 1 0 6 1 0:` -1. 0 0 1 0-- i 0 0 1 Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 42 .17 19:-. 12: '.13- 49 27. 1'93 - 10 10` 412 18 Growth Adj:. 1_00 1.00; 1.00- 1.00 r.00 1.00" 1.00 1.00 :1.00 1.00 1.00'"1-.00: . Initial Bse: 42 17 19 12 13 49 27 193 10 10 412; - 18 User Adj.: 1.00 1.00 1-_.00 1.00 1..00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1`.00 1.00 - . PHF Adj: : 1.00 :1.00 11Q0" -1'.00 1.00 L.00 .1.00 1'•.00 1.00 r.00 1..06 1.00 PHF Volume: 42 17 19 - 12: 13 49 27 '193 10 10 412 16 - Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0. •0 0 0 `' 0 0 Final Vol.: 42 17 19 12 '13 "".49 - 27 `-193 10. --16., 412 16 Critical Gap Module: - - - Critical:_Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 _6.5 6.2. :4".1 XxXx xxxxx 4.1 i000C xxicCx Fo11:owUpTim: :3.5 4.0 3.3 -: 3.5 -4.0 3.3 2.2 xxo xxxzx 2,2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module; - Cdflict_Vol: 719 697 193 702- 689 412 430-xxxx xXxxx 203 "xkkx xxkxx Potent Cap.: 346 367 854 355 371 644 1140 xxxx xxxxx 138i• i6ccx1x� Move Cap.: .304 356 854 327 .360 644 1140 xxxx xxxxx 1381-xj6m xxxxx Level Of Service Module: : Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 9.3 xxxxx-xxxx 11.0 8.2 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxzx LOS by Move: +- + A "» + B A + » - A.' Movement: -IT - LTR --RT -- IT --LTR -. RT. LT - LTR - RT' LT -`LTR - "RT Shared Cap.:. 317rxxxx xxxxx 343xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx` - Shrd StpDel: 18.9 xxxx xxxxx 16:3 xxxx xxxxx B .2 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx `. Shared LOS C ». -» C. + », A + » A ApproachDel: 16.6 - 12.8 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: -C B + _+ Traffix 7..5.1115 (c) 2001, Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE EXAM Wed Jul.23, 2003, 14:32:07." Page 8-1 LDS church Traffic;lnipact.Analysis Existing Conditions i. AM Peak Hour ------------------- - Level Of. Service :Computation. Report - 2000 HCM .4=Way.Stop..Method (Base Volume -:Alternative) •if♦iiifii+rrix`»+f aif,r�if w>.:riiwti:3#.hty3iiit>iisxaf.��.�f:re#wrff :�f #i vi :'✓fi��i:'i. Intersection k6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista Rd. (EW) •�xf••mar♦iiiviiit�>,��ii,:i��a�aa,i.:xxia,a.*i�.4�.�3is+��3rrrrif ��.t��iwx 3.�+�.f�iyiti�L�i •...-_ _ -. Cycle (sec): 0 --Critical Vol./Cap. (X) 0.427 Loss Time (sec).:., .0 IY+R �= ,4 sec)- Average Delay::(sec/vehY: >-12.3 '+ . Optimal Cycle �,.:� 0 Level Of Service - B - �t+,e++t:tii��xfi�iie++iii���i+fa»ia:�w��i,e+��i�3i»�:t;yiy�a3 Approach: North Bound South Bound. - East Bound - West Bound Movement _ :. L T R� L : T R L ,T R L - -: T - R�: - ---- --- - i ----- -- - i i - -- ----- E i --- - - - - -_ ------------r Control: Stop.Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign ,Stop Sign Rights: _ Include, Include -. ..IncludeInclude Min_ Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •:0 Lanes: . -1 0. 2 0 1 1:- 0 ,2 0:..1 ....0 1. 0. 1 0 0 1: 01 0 -------------- Volume Module.: - Base Vol: .194 .182 13 18 212 124 58 .:114. 139 .- 38 -128 49- - Growth Adj: 1-00 1-00 - 1.00 1�-00 1.00 1.0.0 1..0.0. 1.. 00 1-00 1.00 1 .00: 1.00 - Initial.Bse: 194_ -182 13 18 212 124 58. _114 139 38 128 -49� User Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1'.00 PHF Adj:. 1.00.1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1:.00 3.Oo-I'.00 i.o0 i.Oo 1-.00 1.00:. --. PHF Volume: 194 182 -. 13, 18 212' 124- - 58 _114: 139- 38 -128. 49- Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0' Reduced Vol: 194 182 13 ..IS 212 124 .58 114 '139 38 `128 49 PCE Adj: 1,00 1.00 1.00 1. 0_Q 1.00 1.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1:00 1.-00" MLF Adj: 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00, 1.00 Final Vold 194 182 13 18 212 124 58 114 - 139 38 128 49` - ---- . -- -__� __-------- -Ei ----ii ______ii-.___. Saturation Flow.,hjodule: Adjustment: 1ti0Q 1-.00 1.00 1-.-00 :1..OQ. 1-.00 1:00-I-.00 1..00; 1'00-11..00 1:00,-- Lanes: - 1.00 2.00 1-.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.37 0.73 0.90 0.35 1...19 0.46 - - Final Sat.: 454 962 527 440 943 519 179 358 481 165,--572 '',221� Capacity Analysis Module: - - Vol/Sat: 0...43 .0.19 0.02 0.04 0.22 0-.24 0�32 0.32 0.29 0.23-0.22. 0.22- - Crit Moves:.. i..w +,..• •.+x ..:.•, Delay/Veh: IS-6. 11.4 9.3-10.8 11;9 11:2, 13:-0. 12.8. 11.4: 12.0 11.7 1r. 2: Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1z00 1:00 1.00 1:00 1:00 1.00. Adj Del/Veh: 15.6..11.4 9.3 10:B 11.9 11.2 13:0. 12.8 11.4 12.0 11.7 11>2. LOS by Move: C B A B B B B B B B B B�_ ApproachDel: 13.4, 11.6 12.2 - 11.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 13.4 11.6 12.2 11.6 LOS by Appr: B B B B •�•>ew�a��+wt+�++if+++iw�its»>•ii•++ii��itaiiti33�•++�+as•:3•�:ta•••,e•ifff>iia♦ Traffix 7.5.1115.(c) 2001,Dowling Assoc.. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE.- EXAM Wed Jul 23; 2003 14:32 07, Page.9-1 LDS Church Traffic :Impact Analysis- Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour ---------------- -__--- - ------- ----- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM. 4-Way Stop Method(Base Volume Alternative) rrrr+r_r rr i.ei+++r+w,r rtr+ri r.,:+i++.rrrrrr•++rrrrr rrrr+'+++rrrr•+�3+'r i'r+#'i t'iyariirri+i. Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd:. (EN)- rr+r++rr+++,+.r,�r+,�+rr+rr,##++#rrs+++rr.r'#+++++'r+i###wr Cycle .(sec): 0 .. .CriticalVo1,./Cap. (X); - 0.465 " Loss Time (sec): .Or (Y+R-= 4 sec)Average Delay (s'ec%veh)':' 12.7 OptimalCycler 0 Level.Of' Service: - 8- ++#r+rrr+rrr++r+rrrrrtr rrr#+#r+++r#rrr+rrrrr rrrrrrrr++++rrr#rrrr#rrr#r rr rr++rri'i'. - ' Approach: - -North Bound South Bound. East Bound West Bound Movement:,.. L- T. R L.. - T - R L-- T. _ R;,, L._. _,.. Tc ._ R Control:_ Stop Sign: Stop Sign. Stop Sign Stop Sign " Rights:. Include - Include- .Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 o: ` 0 Lanes: - - 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2' 0 1 1 0- -1 0" 1 1 0 1 0. 1 ... Volume Module:, - - Base Vol: 241 23 15. 2S9 Ill > 42 88 83 48 212 34. Growth Adj: .I.00.1.00 1.00 1-00 1:00 1':00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 initial Bee: 119 241 23 -15 259 111. 42 88 83 - 48 212 '34 User AdY: 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1�00 PHF Adj-: 1.00.1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 .1.00 2.00 1.00 '. PHF Volume: 119 .241 23 15 259 Ill 42 88 83 48 212 34 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0--0 Reduced Vol: 119 241. .,.23 15 259 Ill 42-.'88 83 48 212' -`34 PCE Adj 1.00 1.00, 1.00.1 1.._00 1-.00 1.00 1.:00 1.06 1200 1.'w l.-00 - 1-.06 MLF Adj:_ 1.00 1..00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I.00 .1.00. 1.00 Final Vol.: 119 241 23 - 15 259 Ill 42 88 83 48 212 ' 34 . �__________7_77117_____7________��__:__ ______.__r�_____ ___------ Saturation Flow. -,Module: : Adjustment. 1.00:-1.00 1,09, 1,00 1:00 1.00 1r00 1.00 1.60 1-:00 1_00 1.00=- Lanes: 1 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 •1.00 - Final Sat.: 440 937 509 434 934 513 406 433.472 423 -456 491' - Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.26 0-.05 0,.03 0.28 0.22 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.11 'O.A 6 0.07 + Crit Moves: .. r+r Delay/Veh 13,12 12.3:.. :4.6 10A, 12.6 11:0:-- 11.8 12.2- 11.1,E 11.7 16.0. 10.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 13.2, 12.3 9.6 10.8 -12.6 11.0 11.8 12.2 11.1 11.7 16.0 10>0 LOS by Move: B . B A B B B. -B B B B C A' ApproachDel: 12.4 12.1 11.7. 14.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 12.4 12.1 11.7 14.6 LOS by Appr: B B B B rr+rrr rrrrr+++rr#rrr#r+rrrr++++rrrrr++++rrrr♦rrr+rrrr+r+rrr rrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrr+rrr Traffix 7..5;1115.: (c)' 2001.Dowling Assoc. Licensed -to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE E%PM Wed Ju1.23, 200314.40t14 4-1 `. --------Page LDS Church Traffic .Impact Analysis Existing Conditions - - x, �?�,' PM Peak Hour •. - Level Of Service Computation Report. 2000 HCM Unsignali2ed.Me1thod (Base Volume •Alternative) s.s sssssssssss+ssssssssfsssaxsss sss s,essssssss»s.•:��+��+r»ssss ssfssy ifs-sf sssWsssi - . Intersection #1 Green Tree Rd (NS)/ Pauba Rd.,(EW):.:: .. s ssssssssssrrsssss si sssssass s+,ass.sis.:::is,»s.sa sssa:sti.sssa s.✓.ss r»rssaxfs's is ax'+.i33'f r#i... .. Average Delay (sec/veh).: 9.9.. :Worst.Case Level Of Service: zA s ssssssss•sssssessssss:ss ss sssisss•.ssss»s#ssissss»sss s:s ss ssssssisssssss�rssssi: "-South Approach: North Bound Bound ,-••East. Bound - West Bound Movement.: L., -.. T . -. R L- - - T : - R. L - T - - R L - - T - R Control:. Stop Sign-. StopSign--Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include.. Include - Include Include - - - Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 1! -0 0 0.. 1 0 0 0 :0: 6 0".-1 - 0 '. ____________1______ _______ 11r__._ _ _____ II__.___________ _11-- ------------ Volume Module: Base V61: 0. 0 0_ 4 0. 4 6•:1 197 0- - 0 148 3 - - - Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.60; 1.001.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 - - Initial Bse: 0 0 0 4 0 4 6 197 0 0 148- - 3 User-Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1•00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:_. 1.-00 1.100. 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1:.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 4 0 .. 4 6 197 - 0 '0 148 > 3 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 .+-" 0 0 0 0 0- 0 Final Vol.: - 0- 0 0 4 0 4 ..6 197 0.- a 146 3 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx. 6.2 4 1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx °'?1 FollowUpTim:xxxxx_ xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx -3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx I ------------- _ 11-;_-_-_ _-______ _-------- =11---__________ ------------- I Capacity Module: - Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx ... 359 xxxx": 150 151 �xxxx'xxxxx xxxxxxxxmonof Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 644 xxxx 902 1442 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx axxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 642 xxxx '902:. 1442-xxxx xxxxx xxxx -xxxx xxxxx --• ------------ 1-7____ ________11--____--------- ,11----- _--------- 11______._____-_ Level Of Service Module:. - - - - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx7.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: + • :. . x s, A > . » •-. x.. .._.. .. Movement: - LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR.- RT LT.-- LTR - RT - Shared Cap.: xxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx 750 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx - 'Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 9.:9xxxxx. 7.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS. + * + - > - -:A - s A- ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.9--xxxxxx - xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A k9, g� a Traffix. 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN. CROSSROADS, IRVINE" - .3 J FXPM Wed Jul 23, 2003 19c40.14 Page 5-1 ------------ _-------------- _-------------------------------- ___________-_______ --. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - _ Existing Conditions - -. PM Peak Hour: - ____________________ _______ ________ Level Of Service Computation Report - 2000 HCM Unsignalized.;Method'(Base Volume Al ternative). +#:+er.++###rr+rxrr++»»r»+»»rr»+t++###++#},�+##f ##i Intersection 42 Calle Cedral (NS-)/ Pauba Rd. (EW).. ... ++.++•rrrr r.+r#r#•r+yrr+�+++ir#i»++r+tii#+++*#*+*r#:•+++++++.»+3»#i#+i•++++r•#ter»#*' ' Average Delay (sec%veh) 9..8_,? Worst Case'Level Of Service +s*riwrr+++++#++++++++r#»r++++r;3#++rr#raita+»++rrar++•ti»»»♦+r+t+i.»rir»rr+i':i#i#+# .. Approach: North Bound - South Bound.,. East Bound - West.Bound'' Movement: L- T R L- T R : L - T - -. R L - T R - - Control: -- Stop Sign .'Stop Sign` :Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 _0 0 0 0 ..0 11 0 0', -0 1 0'. 0 0 ' 0- 0 - 1 0.1 _______ _IL______ ________IL____ --- ____>__II_____________ Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 2. 0 2 3_ 200 0 0 :.ISO 2 Growth Adj:: 1:00.1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00':1.00 1.00 1.00.. 1.00 1•.00 1-?00 Initial Bse: 0 0. 0 2 0 2 3 200 0 0 :ISO 2 User Adj: 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.. 00 1.60 1'.00 1.00 1.00 - PHF Adj,: 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 :1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 2- 0 2 3 200 0 0 150- Reduct.Vol: 0 0 0. 0. 0- 0 0. 0 0 0- 0 0 Final Vol..: 0. 00 2 0 2 3- 200 0 .0.150 __ ____ _i--- _____ __ ____II_______________II____ :_________IL____ Critical Gap Module: _ Critical Gp.:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6,4 xxxx .6,.2. 4.1 ,xxxx xxxxx xx�ocx xxxx xxioc)F. - - FollomUpTi_m:xxxxx.xxxx xxxxx 3.5 .xxxx 3,3,. 2-.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx icxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict_VOI: xxxx xxxx -xxxxx 356 .xxxx .150- 152 xxxx-xxxxx root 36cxx a .... Potent Cap.: xxxxxxxxx 646 xxxx 902} 1441 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxx� = a"- - Move Cap.; xxxx xxxx xxxxx 645 xxxx 902 . 1441 'x7exx xn000c _xxxX jtXXx x x• :. • .. ------------ I --------------- IL------------ ___LI--------------- II_______________I: Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 .xxxx xxxxx -xxxxx xxioc.: xxxxx LOS by Move: + + v » +' + A • + + + +. Movement: LT -.LTR _- RT LT - LTR - RT LT -. LTR RT LT - LTR - RT. - Shared Cap.:: xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx 752 xxxxx: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Shrd Stppel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx:xxxxx 9.8 xxxxx 7.5 xxxSe-xxxxx i6cxxx xxxx xxxxx .. Shared LOS: * * * * A * A * + * * * - ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9..8 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * A Traffix 7..5.1115 (c) 2001,Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE EXPM - Wed Jul' 231' 2003'14:.4'0:14 - Page 6-1 ________________________________________________________________________________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis -° Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation. Report, 2000 HCM Unsignali2ed Method :(Base Volume Alternative)' fi if #i#/�f###f if#t#tiff:#i#ffi#ff1#tt#iff#ltteiiftiff»f if ii,f itffiffiif t###fifif#i "' �' Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)l Rancho Vista Rd.,(EW) f if t+f�dffff»f i�#iff ii»iiff+#»fff»fff#f#i#oaf iifi#iff;ii:��ifftf ii :if»#»ii»isiift . Average Delay (secfveh):: 9:A Worst Case Level Of Service: A -: f#iitf:�Rtiffifffffiiifaf:ffffi#f'#»ftfif#t#f if iiffii»t»fiif'iiffifi i}f ifif:i iifff Approach: _ North •. Bound:;. South Bound- -Edgt Bound_ ' 'West Bound .- Movement: L - T R L - T - ` R L. `- : T- - R L T - R ___ __I____. ____ II_____ _ LI ____ ___ --------------- Control:,. Stop Sign.: ,Stop Sign �llncontrolled .'Uncontrolled Rights: Include .Include - Include Include Lanes: _ - - 0 1 0 --- -- 01 1 _--- PI---=- 0- 0 0 0 0 ----.-- II 0 -0 --=- Ao .1 ---------II----------- 0- 0 1 �0 0 0 . -1- Volume Module: -Base Vol: 1 10. 0 - 6-- 0' -0 0 0 123 12 7 82 0 Growth -Ad3 1.00.1.60 '.1.00 '1.00 1. 00 1.00 '1 .00 1.00 1_00. 7.00 1.00 Initial Bse: •.10 0 6. 0 0 0 0 123 .. 12 7 B2 tl User Adj: 1.00 1.00 _.. 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1:00 1.00 1.00. 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Ad1-: :1_00 1..00.. 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 10 0 6. 0 0 0 0 123 12 7 82 0 _ Reduct,Vol. 0; 0 0 0 0- 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 10 - Final Vol.: -. 10 . -0 6 - 0 • 0 `- 0 0 123 12` 7 ------- 82 tl . -----------1--------------' Critical Gap Module: -.. Critical Gp: .6. 4. .xxxx 6.2 xxxX xxxx xxxxx c xxicxic -xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxx - FollowUpTim: 3.5-xxxx' 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 'xxxx xidock -2.2�kxxX xxxxx': _ ________ ____________I_______________II___________-___II________._._____LL____ Capacity Module:-. - Cnflict;Vol: 225 xxxx :129 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 135 xxxx.xxxxx Potent Cap.:. 768 xxxx..--926, -xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxkX -xxxx xxxxx 1462 xxxx'.. xxxxx Move Cap.: .765. xxxx 926 xxxx .xxxX xxxxx xxxx xxxx .x xxx 1462 xxxx ..xxxxx . - _________ I_____ ____ _II_________ Level Of Service Module: _____ _________IL ---------------- - Stopped.Delcxxxxx xxxx 8.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx -xxxxx 7 : 5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: f - » - A - + i f f i f A t. • - - Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR.- RT Shared Cap:: 765 xxxx xxxxx� xxxx. xxxx xxxxx .xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxkx xxxx-t Shrd StpDel:: 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx.. xxxx XXXXx xxxxx xxxx xxkxk 7_5 xxxx xxxx3t 'f Shared LOS: A » f' f » i•: », -i A # :ApproachDel: .-9.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A _,t LZ a Traffix' 7.5.1115•(c)' 2001 Dowling-AssOc:.•Licensed .to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE - r $:4 13' Z EXPM- Wed Jul-23, 2003 1440:14` - Page 7-1 --------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Existing Conditions, - PM Peak Hour- - Level Of.Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Sase Voldme'Alter$iative) •x#i.••f•ff•fi>##x4f.�ffi�ffwf•f xixxxff•rx••tff}ix#fiif#x#ix•'#xif xti xxl#x•fxff xx•x Intersection #14 Camino Romo (NS) / Corte Villosa (EW)' - - #•fffxxx#x#xfi##tiff•xft#sff••##ffxxxxxx#x•x#•f•xf#Yitlf i.i€xf ixxi>:iiixixi•fiffff Average Delay (se c/veh,) 8L,5 Worst CaeeLevel Of service:.' A -` •ifff.#fxx#>x#fxa•,.x##•##f#•fxxffx#f#fx#•+x##xfx•aFf.43x#1x#3•if###Lii:lixxif f#xtx•f' Approach: North Bound , South Bound East.Bound --West Bound Movement: L - ,T - R- L T- -- R L - T-''`R'. 'L - T - R .- ------------ 1------ _________11________-___ 11--------------- 11--------------- Control:. .Stop Sign Stop Sign �Uncontrolle& uncontrolled Rights:- - .Include- : Include .Include Include Lanes: - 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1- '0 1 '0 00 0_ •0 1 0 1 --------------- ii--------------- 1.1__-------------- 11____ 1 Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0 0 0 7 0 9 7 4 0 0 7- Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.`1.0o:1.00 1:00 -1-:0'0 'T`.00 1 00 `- Initial- Hse: 0 0 0 7 0 9 7 4 0 0 7 4 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1 00 I.00 •1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1111.00 1-. o0 1:00 - 1100 1.00 1 00' PHF Volume: 0 o 0 7 0 9 7 4- 0 0- 7 4'' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Final Vol.: 0 0 0 7 0 9 7 4 0 0 7 4'- - I --- ----------IC---- ---= - Ih----=-------- II ----------- Critical Gap Module: Critical-Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx:-.6=:4.xxxx 6;2 9-.1irxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xz5cxx• - FollowUpTim:xxxxx. xxxx xxxxx.. 3.5`xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxkx xzxix xibczx xxxx xxxxx I---- - ---- ---- II--------------- fl-------------- -11.--------- Capacity Module: - - Cnflict,rVo1:. xxxx xxxx xxxxx: -<25 xxxx 7 --11 xkxx-xxxxx xxicx xxxx :xxxxx" ': . Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx' xxxxx 9,96: xxxx 1081 1621 xkxx xxx�bc. Xs"t cx xicxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 993 kxxic 1081 1621 xxxx,xxxxx x3txx xxxit xxxxx ------------ I --------------- 11--------------- 11--------- :_____11_______________i. Level Of Service Module: - Stopped..Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxic. 8:7 xxxx 8.4 7:2 xxxx xitx xxxxx xx xxzioc - LOS by Move: • # # A f. .A A f ;x "f • .•:.. .. Movement LT- LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT LT- LTR - RT Shared Cap-,: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx -xxxx =ocx xxxx ixi xxxxx - Shrd-,StpDel:xxxxx 7.2 xxxx xxxxx'xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • x • _# • • A • -• -f '•. ApproachDel: xxxxxx -8_5 xxxxxxxxxxxx- ..... ApproachLOS: x A • x Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc:Licensed to'. URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE�.•-. ��3 EXPM Jul 23.. 2003 14 40 14,_ Page 8=1 - --------------------Wed LDS Church.Traffic.Impaet-Analysis' Existing Conditions .PM Peak Hour _____________________ ___________ ___ _______---------------- Level Level Of Service Computation Report- -------- . 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base. Volume -AlternativeY - >+xx>+++xrixx+++x++>x>rrfrxw+t>x>+ir'>r>+x>+xe;xr»xxr; t,xxrf i>♦.{xx{xi{>{r{Arriif{> Intersection #5 Corte Villosa (NS); (�Pauba Rd .,(EW). - -" Average.Delay (sec/veh) ;:, 10 9 ;�,; Worst Cade -:Level 0€"Service x++»rfrxx+++++frxxt+++>.e r'i{>x+>x»xxx»>ti>xxr,>+xsr.r>x;irxrrrrxrrrxrrr>xix{f> Approach:, North Bound South.. Bound: -East Bound':- West Bound' Movement: .L'- - T -. R L. - T - $ L - T- - R. L - -T ____________I Control: _____ ___.__II _______ ______II ______ ___11-------- Stop Sign., Stop Sign Uncontrolled�l. Uncontrolled• ` Rights: Include - ,-• ,Include .... Include '- :Include Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1. 0 1. 0. 0: 1 0 'l 0 0- 1 'O Y '0 0 1 - - - - Volume Module. I -- - -`- -- 11-----_--------II--------------- - -- Base Vol: 9 . 3 .3 8 4 10 '. 20 147 - 34 12:, 131 Growth. Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1•.00:-1.00 1.00 1.00; 1.00 -1.00- 1.00 1.00 1t00 Initial. Bse: 9 3 3- 8 4 10 20 147 34 12- 131 9'-. User Adj'.: 1.00 1.00 1..00, 1.00.1.00 1.00. 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.0d: PHF Adj;: 1.00 1..00 1.00, 1•00. 1.00 1.06 1..00 Y..00 :I'. 00 _ 1.00. 1.00 1.00- - PHF Volume: 9 3- 3 8 4 - 10 - 20. 147 34 12. 131 r9 - Reduct Vol:. 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 .0: Final Vol.: 9 3 3 8 4 10 20 147 - 34 ,' 12 - 131 '9- __- ___-_._I Critical Gap _._,____._____I�_______________II_.______________II Module: `- A Critical•.Gp: .5. .7.1 .-6., ..6.4. 2, 7,.l 6-5 6.2 -.1 xxxx. xxxxx• 4 1 Xzic7c xxiooc' r.'. FO11owUPTim: 3.5 4.10 3_3;, 3:.5 4..0 3.3 2-.:2 xxxx xxxxk,.. --fl 2 xx:2: jrx-xioaor - i ------------ I ------------II---------------II-------=---- Capacity Module: P Y Cnflict. Vol: . 354 351' 14,7',. 362 376 131 140 xooc. xxxxx: 181 xxxx xxbticx�' � Potent Cap.: 605 .577 905... 598. -558- 924.- 1456 xxxx -xxxxx:; 1407-XkS xxxxx. - Move Cap.:.-.,. 585: 564 905:., 583, 546 924. 1.456.-xxxx. xxxxx 1407v3bcxx�,-.xxxxk-:. ______I ______________11__--- ___________11.___________-__11_____-___ Level Of Service Module: --. Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 9.0 xxxxx. xxxx 8:9 T.5xxxx xxxxx: 7:6 kick -A xxxxx` - LOS by.Move: > :. A- r > A A .: > -p Movement: ,LT - LTR - RT J.T.- LTR -.RT LT - LTR - RT- LT - LTR RT i Shared Cap.:. 580 xxxx xxxxx.: .570_ xxxx. xxxxx . xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel.:. 11.3. xxxx.xxxxx• 11.5 xxxx:xxxxx 7.5 xxxx-,xxxxx. .7.6 xxxX x3bD&-!. Shared LOS: B +. + g + + A r r A- ApproachDel: 10.9 10.3 >xxxxxx :XXxXXX x ApproachLOS: B B > x Traffix.7.5.1115_(c)•2001,Dowling'Assoc. Licensed Ito URBAN 'CROSSROADS`, IRVINE: R/l EXPM .. Wed Jul 23, 2003 14:46:14 Page 9-1 ______________________-_____-______-____-_______-________-__________________.- .. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis` Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour - _____________________________________-__________-_--_____-________________ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way StopMethod -(Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 46 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista Ad. (EW)``--- Cycle (sec);, 0 % Critical Vol:/Cap.-(X):: 0.176 Loss -Time '(sec): 0 .(Y+R = 4 sec)'Average'belay (secJoeh)i 9.0 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: IA - +++++++++++>+wxw Approach.,-,. North Bound South Bound East Bound`. ''Weak Bound. - - Movement: -•L .,T - R L - T -` R L T R` L -. -T - R -------------- ----------------- - ------------ Control: stop Sign - Stop Sign 'Stop Sign ' -'§top Sign ' Rights: Include Include include Include - Mina Green:, 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0- 0 - 0 0 - .Lanes: 1:0 2 '0 1 .1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1. 0 0 1" 0 10 Volume Module: Base Vol: 27, 169 19 16 220 40 27 39 46 22 30 26 Growth;Adj:: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00.. Initial Bse: 27 169 19 16 220 40 27 39 46 22' 36 26 User Adj':• 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.-1.60 -1.00 1.00 1.00 I.06 PHF Adj::" 1,00<1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00•' PHF Volume:: 27 169 19 16. 220 40 27 39 .-46 .22 30 26 " Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 .0 .0 0 -- Reduced Vol`. 27 169 0 16 220 40 '27 39' ` 46 22 30 26 PCE Adj_:.. 1..00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.. 00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 ` MLF Adj: 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1..00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 I-.00 1.00 1.010 1.06 Final Vol.: 27' 169 .i9 16 220 40 27 -39 46 '22 -30 26 Saturation Flow Module: - - Adjustment: 1..00. 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 'I.00100 1.00 1.00 -1":0a- Lanes: " : 1.00 2.00 1:00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.48 6.70 0�:62 0.56-'0.77 0.67 "`- Final Sat..:- 561 1220 690 574 1250 710 2-72 -407 531 312 450 417 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat,:_ 0.05 0.14 0.03 0.03'0.18 0.06 0.10 6.10 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.06 Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 9.1 9..2" 7.8 8.9 9:4 7.8 9-.4 9.1 8.4 9.3 8`.5 8 4' - Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00 1.00. 1..00.' AdjDel/Veh: 9.1 9.2 7.8 8-.9 9.4 7.8 -9:4 9.1- 8.4 9.3 8.9 8:4 LOS by Move: -"A A A A A A A A -A A A ApproachDel: 9.1 9.1 8.9 8.8 - - Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 9.1 9.1 8.9 8.8 ` LOS by Appr:_ A A A A +wx++w+++++++w>+w++>+++++»++++++++++++++++»xxx+wax xxw+wxwx i•+x>»x»iwx»x»xx»ix♦. Traffix. 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS,' IRVINE --' 13i5 EXPM Wed Jul 23, 2003 .40.:14 -:. ,, 14 Page 10-1 - LDS Church Traffic. Impact Analysis , Existing Conditions- _______________________________________ PM Peak Hour, . _ __________________________________ Level Of Service Computation Report. - - 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 47 Meadows Pkwy.(NS)l Pauba Rd. (EW), ++++++++x+x+++x++++++xx+xx�xixr•++++}+xx:•++++it:�+++x+xxt+3 xx++xx q+x+x+x++++++� ... Cycle (sec): 0.. Critical Vol./Cap. (X):- 0.167- Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4sec) Ayerage,Delay;-(sec/veh);: 9-:7 Optimal Cycle: 0 Lexel Of. Service: +xxx+x++++�++++xxr+xxxx+x+x+xxx:ix+rx:�t++xx++xx+xxxx �xxx+x+xx+++xx+:.+�.+s x•+++x,i Approach: North Bound South Bound .: East Bound -..-'.West Bound Movement: L- T - R. L - T. - -R L - T -- R L. - -T - R Control: stop Sign. -Stop Sign Stop Sign ,-Stop Sign .. - Rights: - Include. -' Include ,.. Include Include Min. Green: 0 0- 0- 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 -'W Lanes: 1 0 2 0. 1 .. 1 -, 6 2 0 1.. 1. 0- .:1 0 1? 1 0 1 0 1 . Volume Module: ___11 --------------- II___, ---------- - ----------- Base Vol: -52 187 27 37 189 21 27, 80 . 70 25 75 2C, Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1_.00 1.00 .1.0.0.1.00 1.00-.1.00-11..00 1.00 .. Initial.Bse: 52 167 27 37 184 21 :: 27 80 .. 70 •25 75 26 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1�.00 4.90 1.00 -:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1 06 PHF Adj:. 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00'1.00 .-1:00 1.00-1.00 ,1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 PHF Volume: 52 187 27 37 -189 21 :.27:_ 80 c' 70 25 75 - 26' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q Reduced. Vol: 52 187 27 37 -189- 21 27:. 80 .-70 :i25 -75 26 - PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1-00 1.00 1.,0,0 ..1.00 1'.00. t1.00 1-00 1.00. 1.00. 1_ MLF Adj:- 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1..Q0-.1:Q0 1-00 1..00 :1.00. 1.00 - Final Vol.: 52 187 27 I___ 37 189 21 27 : 80 70 ___. ________II_.___ __.___.� 'I 25 ___ 75 26 ____. _ ------------ -- ______.I'____ Saturation Flow Module: - - Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00,1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00. 1.00 1,.00 1.00: 1 00 Lanes: 1,00 2.00 .1_00 1.00 2. 00. 1-40 1.90 1 00 -1. 0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 -• Final Sat.: 527 1138 637 522 1130 631 498 537 599 488.. 526 58431 --_____ _ - ___-______I_ Capacity Analysis --_ -_____ _��____. Module: ,______��_______________11____- Vol/Sat: 0.10 0..16 0.04 0.07 0.17 0.03 0.05 0.15 0:.12 0.05 0.1�4 004 Crit Moves: ++x+ - x:i+ - .. xax.+- :. x+x+ Delay/Veh: 9.9 9.8 8.2 9.7 9-9 8.2 9x9 10.0 9..0 9.9 10.1 9.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00, 1:00 1.00 1.06 -- AdjDel/Veh: 9-9 9.8. 8.2 9.7 9:.9 8.2- 9-.9 10.0 <910 9.9 10.1 8.6 e LOS by Move: A A A A A A .A B. A A B A nn ApproachDel: 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.8 LOS by Appr: A A A A s% x+++++x•x+x+++++x��++xxxfxxxxxxxx+xxxxx*+xxtxix+xxixxxxxxxxx xxx+xx+++++xxx+x++xx t r.r Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE ?i. EX MID DAY - Wed Jul 23, 2003. 15t15:29 Page 3-1 LDS Church Traffic•Impact Analysis Existing Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour -(Sunday). ________________________________________-__._._____-____. Level Of Service: computation Report -- 2000 HCM Unsignal;ized method .-(Base. Volume.AlCernative)- - ♦•*+i»fi»t+•»»»».•,wig».»4'»+fxw.•,»3-+»»»��»,#f.»».»»f♦va.♦#»�.#»i#»vs»�a4f:�t ♦Y#ii#�'ir#i#i`' - Intersection -#1 Green Tree Rd (NS)l Pauba,Rd. (EW)^ w»a+i»+:•ar»•»»»»»fitrf»,:�,i;:ewi�;+eef�.�»f.s-»rvta:irf.i#.».:fv»ff»�xiti �fxwx: �f f##Yf ##f taf- .. Average Delay ..(sec/yeh).,b0,; - Worst CateLevelOf Serbice:- -a,ta»•t»»x:»»♦»fiwrity,33f»ii»+i;.i,##�x,�,+:+:i#,si3aw.av»i#-.t.f�»f:rtr#i:vv»>fiy:4ii3#ice• � ... Approach: -North Bound. South Bound-. Bound 'West Bound Movement: L- T R L- T R L . T - R L- T- R -- - _________ _______ ____-___-LI------- ________I Control:. Stop Sign. .Stop Sign -,Uncontrolled .Uncontrolled . Rights: •Include .Include _ Include .Include Lanes: _. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0.: 1 +0 1 0 0 'a: 0 0 -1 0 0 ___:____-__I_______________II_________-_-___II____-:_________II__-_ _______ ..I Volume Module: Base Vol: -0 0 0 0 0 -,. 2: 4.. 130 . 0 0- 149 0 Growth',Adj-. ,1.00 1:00-.1.00. I.O.D. 1.00 '1c00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 b 00 - Initial Bse 0 0 0 0. 0 2 4 130 0 0149 tl User Adj:, 1.00 1i60 -1.00 1.00. 1:00 1.00-::1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00., 1.00 1.00 Z. PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 I. 1:00 ,1:00 1.00:1.00 1.00 1.00,1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0-. 0 - 0 0: 0 2. 4. 130 0 0- 149 0' "- Reduct, Vol : 0. 0 0 - 0 0., 0 0, 0 0 0" 0 - 0 . Final Vol.: 0, 0 0 0. 0 2 4. 130 0 0 149 '0' _______________II_____________._LI_______________II____ ___-_.___L Critical Gap Module: . .. Critical Gp: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 :4..1..xxxx xxxxx �xxxxx x xxx :'Xxxx][ .:.. ..� . FollowUPTim:xxxxx-xxxx XXXXX xxxxx xXXX 3.3 2.:2=xxxx xxxxx xxxxx: xxxx xxxx:,. ------------- IL-------------- _II ------------ ___II____ ______ I Capacity Module: - - - Cnflict_Vo1: xxxx:xxxx'xxxxx xxxx xxxx - 149 -;149 xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx 'xxxxx Potent ,Cap.: xxxx..xxxx xxxxx .:xxxx exxxx :903" 1445,xj=, xxxxx ':xxxxzxxxx xxiooc - - Move Cap.:,. ocpx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx .:-.903 1445, xxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxx-xxxxx ` ------- -- i - II ------------:11------------- - 11.--------------- Level Of Service Module: -- - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.0 7-5:xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx)= xxxxx" LOS by Move: » • » + ♦ A - A i • a • ». Movement: LT -.LTR - RT LT LTR.-.RT ?LT -.LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT - Shared.Cap.:..xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx -xxxxx .. ... . Shrd StpDel:xxxxx.xxxx-xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx �7:.5,xxxx xxxxx xxxxx _-xxxx' xxom Shared LOS : ♦ • + • r. • A . - • - : a e ..' ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.0 - xxxxxx :xxxxxx - ApproachLOS: • A - • _ • _ . Traffix 7.5.1115 (c), 2001...Dowling Assoc.. Licensed..to URBAN, CROSSROADS; IRVINE. 817 EX MID DAY Jul 23,°2003 15:15218' Page 4-l' -----------Wed ---------------------------------------------- -- ------------------ LDS Church Traffic. Impact Analysis Existing Conditions Mid -Day .Peak.Hour (Sunday) ---------- ----------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Level Of.SeFviceComputation RepoY.t 2000 HCMVns.ignalized Method (Base Volume Altenative) Intersection #2 Calls Cedral (NS)l Pavuba Rd.. (EW).. Average Delay: (sep/,veh) R.O. Worst Case' Level Of Service. A V* **'aIk-V* Approach:, North Bound. South Bound: East,Bound. West Bound, Movement: R �L T + R L T -' R L - T - R ------------ 7- -7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Controlt, Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled. Uncontrolled, Rights: include Include Include 'Include Lanes. .0 0 1-0 0". 0. 0 0 0 0 .1: 0 1 D 01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0 1. 0 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0z 0 1. 2 4 125 0 0 156 -0 GrowthrAdj-.- f1.0.0'%1.001.00. 1.00 1.00 Z1.00 1.00'1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00. I 00 Initial Bse: 0-0 0 0 0 2 4� 125 0 0 156 0'. User.Adj: :1.00,1.00, 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00; 1.00 PHF Adj: -11 * 00 1.00 1.00 r1-00 1-00 1,00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00'PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4- 125 0 .0 I56 0 Reduct.Vol: 0. 0 0. 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 0 21 4.. 125 0 ----------- ------ -------- 11- 0 156 0 -------- ------ _____._______I_________ Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx-xXXx xxxxx --ctxxx xxxx. 6-2 4,1,XXXX XxxxxxXXXX'XXXX xxxxx FollowUpTiM:xxxxX:XXXX 3.3... 2.2xxxx xxxxx - xxxxx, xkkx kxxxx - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7-- Capacity Module. - - - - - - - - - - 7 Cnf lict Vol.: xxxxx xxxx- xxxx 156 ..156-xxxx xxxxx XXXX xxxx xxxxx Potent,Cap;:,xxxX�XxX.XxxXXX. XXXX,xxxx --895 1436 xxxx.xxxxt,. xxxx xxxx, xxxxx Move Cap.: NXXX.,-xxXx,xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1436 xxxx xxxxx -xxXx xxxx xxxx I x ------------- ------------ --------------- ----------- Level -Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.0 7.5 xxxx xxxxx xxkxx'xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * > > A A Movement: LTR - RT LT - LTR -.RT. LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT Shared Cap.i.xXXX.Xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd St.pDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx:xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xXx*x Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.0 xxxxxx xxxx ApproachLOS: > A Traf f ix 7.5.1115 (c):2001`Dowling`Assoc.'Licensed to, URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE • EX MID DAY. Wed Jul 23, 2003 15:15:28 page 5-1 --------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Existing Conditions, Mid -Day -Peak Hour (Sunday) ------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------- Level Of;Service'Computat' ion I Repoft 2000 HCM Unsignakia6wd Method (Base V61me Alternative j ) Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)l Rant'ho Vista Rd (EW) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9. X Worst Case� Levelof 'Ser icq ,; Approach: North Bound South Bound °East'Boun t Bound Movement: L .- T - R L- T - R L - T R L T - R; - ----------- -------- ------ -------------- ----------- ---- --------- -- Control.: Stop:Sign: Stop Sign UacontrbAled' Uncontrolled Rights:, include Include •Include .:Include Lanes: -0 -1 0 0 1, !0 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 a 1 0 0 6 ------------ ----------- ------ J ----- ------- i Volume Module: Base Vol: 21• 0 4 0 - of 0 63 5 92 ' 0 Growth Adj: 1.00-1.00 1.00 '1.00`i.00 1;0 . 0 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 - 1.00 . 1% 60 Initial Bse: 21 0 4 0 0 0 0 *63 8 5 92 6 User Adj; 1.00 1.00 1.06 �1.00 1.60 1.00 1.06'1' .00 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.06, PHF Adj:. 1.00,1.00 :1.00 1.60-1.00 1.00 1.'00 1.00 1.00 1.00:�i.60 1.00 PHF Volume: 21 0 4 0 0 0 63 B 5 92 0 Reduct.Vol: 0 0 0 0.� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, Final Vol.: 211, 0 4 0' 0 0 0 63 8 5 92 ------------ ---------- ------------ ------- Critical Cap Module: Critical .,Gp: ,6yt4I;3b=x 6d2r bc� x �obm xxxxb 6�x. FollowUpTim:-: 3T:S: xxxx 3i3 ?DEXXX•XXXX -xxxxx x66x XXx XXkkk 2 2 xxxx ------------ I -------- --------------- ]I--- ---- 7-1 capacity Module:, Cnf I ict: Vol::. .169 -xxxx - "67 X)LtX 'XXXX xxxxx 'xxxx xxxx XXXx6t 71:xxxx, xxxxx Potent Cap-,: '826,xk>oe 4002 -xxxx xxxx xxxxx 56xxxx �:k� )jxxxxxi542 iCxxx Xkj& � Move Cap. 824, x �1002 xxxx xxkx xxx .ibbix �ocx. kx'xxx 1542 �- x=Ek ------------ I ---------------- III --------------- ---------------- ----------- Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 8.6 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx XXXXX 7.3 xiccii xxxxx_ LOS by Move: A A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT LTR -RT IT - LTR - RT IT LTR - RT, Shared Cap.: 824 XXXXX 'xxxx-k>DEX XXXkk 'jObEk xxxx xxxxx i06ct icxxit xxxxx Shrd.StpDel: 9- 5 XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXx�oc1� kXkk' XXkXX 7.3 xxxk Shared LOS: A A ApproachDel: 9.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxk= ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) :2001 Dowliag'As.46c. Licefised%'to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE [319 EX MID DAY - Wed Jul 23, 2003 15:15:2181W --------------------------------- --Page 6-1 o: -------------- A ------------ LDS Church Traffic, Impact Analysis i . L Exsting Con& itiP4s., Mid -Day Peak. -Hour, (Sunday),, --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Level Of Service. Computation. Report_ 2000 HCM Unsignalized. Method (Base, Volume Alternative) Intersection 44 Camino Romo (14P✓ Cgrte.Villosa.(EW) Average -Delay (sec/vehl: ..Worst Case Level Of -Service:,,- Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bouq(A,, . West Bound Movement: T R L7 - T R. L T - R. L 71 R- [7 7 - ---- --(I----------- Control: Stop Sign, Stop Sign Uncontrolled. -------------- Uncontrolled". Rights: ...Include' Inc ude Include Include Lanes: 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0., 1 '0 0; 0-t 0 1 0 1 . .1 ------------- ---------- ------ -------- volume module:. -0 ---------- Base Vol: 0 0 0 1. 0 5 ;. 13. _5 0 0 1 21 Growth Adj: 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,60:': Initial Bse: 0 0 0. 1 0 S.� 13 5 0 0 1 2 . ,- User Adj: I06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. j.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00• PHF Adj: 1.00 1.60 i.00 1_60 1.00 1.00 1.0011.00 1.00 1.00ii.00 1.00- PHF Volume: 6. 0 0 1' 0 5 13 5 0 0 1 2. Reduct Vol: 0 0 6 0 0 0 Of 0 0 0 0 096, Final Vol.: 0 0 0 1 0 5 .13, 5 r 0 -------- --------- 0 1 --------------- Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xx�oo[ -4 A?90C q_2 fi 1: )a= xxxx xmuix- F611OWUpTiM:XXXXX X= XX)= 3.5xxxx 3.3 _2.2 xD ,;xx, xxxxx ------------------ --------- mx xxxxx -------------- Capacity Module; Cnfl*ct Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx .32 xxxx 3 xxxxx'. Potent Cap.: xxxx. xxxx =XXX 987.xxxx 1090. 1632:xxxx Y?txx.x xxxx xxxxXxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx.)=DbE'-981-xxxx 1090 1632 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx-. xxx-x-x-_: ---------- ------- -- --- Level Of Service Module: ------ stopped Del.xxxxx 8.,.7 >o� 8.13� 7.2 xy-ot, xxxy_� LOS by Move: A A. A 4, Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT LTR RTLT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT .Shared Cap-: Xxxx . xXXXx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx,. xxx,x xxxx X�_ X� xX=-.XxxjLk :. xxxxx >0= xxxxx xx?tx� xxxx =oExx 7x 7� .2 xxx' Shrd StpOe__L'- xxxx xxxxx, Shared LOS- A ApproachDel: xxxxxx r, ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c),.2001 Dowling°Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE )3z_0 EX- MID DAY Wed Jul. 23, .2003 .15:-15 E28. Page - 7-1 -, LDS Church Traffic.. Impact Analysis Existing Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday):.- __________________________________________________._-____.-___________.___-_c_____ Level Of Service:.ComputationReport - - 2000 HCM Unsignalized_ Method. (Base Volume Alternative) - xww,�+.+*»++v+>ww++#»i»w+>w+,r.w Intersection H5 Corte Villosa.(NS)./ Pauba:Rd. .(EW)> + Average Delay (sec/veh):.. lo.l ,Worst Case Level Of Service: - B - Approach: - .North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound''-• Movement: L. T .--..R .L- T _ R.-... L-- >T -R .. L .1, --. R.. .... Control:. Stop Sign Stop Sign - Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: _ '.Include. Include Include Include - - 'Lanes:, 0. .1 0 .6 1 _ 0 1 0 0 1 0.. 1 0 '0. 1 - 0•--:l o 0- 1 __________i i.-- ____________II___.__.________ II__-__ _-_____-- Volume Module: - - Base Vol.: 12 2 4 2 1 7, 9 109 7 7- 125 8 Growth Adj:. 1_.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00. 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.00 1-.00 1�.00- Initial Bse: 12 2 4. 2 1 7 9 109 7 7 125 User Adji 1.o0 1.00 1.00 1.00 -.1.00 l.00 1.:Ao .i.00 I.00 -1.00..E-oo 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.06-1.00.1.00 1_.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 -.1.00 1.00 I%oo PHF Volume: 12 2 4 _ 2 1 7 9 109. 7 7 125 1 811t' Reduct Vol: A 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 _ Final Vol.: 12 2 4 2 1 .7 _ 9 109 7 7'-125• 8 Critical Gap Module - - - - Critical. Gp: 7.1; 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.:1 xxxx 3ocxxx -4.1 xxxx xxxxx� .. Follow'PTim: 3.5: 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 '3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx. xxxxx; Capacity Module-- - •. Cnflict Yo1:. 274 274 109 273. 273 125 133 xxxx xxxxx 116 xxxx xxxxxl Potent Cap.:. 683 637 950 684 637 931 1464 xxxx xxxxx 1485'-xxxx ibc=;Ue Move Cap.:,. 671 '630. 950 674 ;630.931 1464 xxxx xxxxx. 1485.-xicoc xxxxx - . " Level Of Service Module:. Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx 8.8 xxxxx xxxx 8.9 7.5 xxxx xxxxx 7.4 xxxx xxxxx: LOS by Move: * A * * - A A * * A *. ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT:--LTR - RT LT - LTR --.RT LT --LTR- RT `Shared Cap.: 665 xxxx xxxxx 659 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx' Shrd StpDel: 10.5 -xxxx xxxxx 10.5 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx 7:4- xxxx xxxxx - - Shared LOS: B *- r* B * * A' * * A ApproachDel: 10.1 9.4 xxxxxx "xxxxxx - .. ApproachLOS: B .A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS., IRVINE ". �2,) EX MID DAY �, Wed Jul-23 2003 15 15.28 -' - - page 8-1 _________ ___ _______. LDS Church ___________________ _______.-__________________ Traffic -Impact Analysis - . Existing Conditions. -- ---------------------------------' Mid -Day PeakHour(Sunday)~ - ----------------------------------_- Level Of Service. Computation Report - 2000 HCM 4-Way StopMethod (Base Volume Alternative) xxxxx#x�xf+fix;xxxxxxxt++3f#xxix x+++fff.x.w+w+f 3xx x'x#ffxxxifxxxx#if xifffiixi+xff Intersection 46 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista Rd. (EW)-- f #xf wxwwix:•ww+xx#xxxxx+xfx.#xxxti:+f+i:f++ixfx x+##iff+xxii++i+f#x x.#•#ix ff ifxx4 +xf - . - Cycle,.(sec): :_ 0 .. "Critical Vol -/Cap. (X): - 0 141 - Loss Time (sec):- 0.(Y+R = -4 sec) Average:Delay-(sec/tleh)t '. 8.8{ Optimal Cycle: 0. ... Level Of Service: -_ •A - xxrwxxx+wxwxf xx#x#wwx:+xxxxfxxxxxxxxxf+xxxx#xw#xwwfx x#•f ♦+ixxxw'f ix•+xx###xwf i+rx.' '.' . Approach:. North Bound 'South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:. .-L_ -,. T -"-R. .- L - T - R' -Lc'-. T'-- R V `-. T,...- R Control: - Stop Sign .Stop Sign Stop=Sign Stop Sign Rights:. Include Include Include Include 'Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Lanes:. 1 0 2 0. 1 .1 0 -2 0 1 0. 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1- 0 volume Module:- - - - Base Vol: 22 165 ..12 - 21 181 18 24 29 25 17 41 28 Growth Adj:--:. 1-.00-1.00 1.00. -1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0011.00 1.00, Initial:Bse: 22 165 12.21 181 18 24. - 29 25 17 41 -User Adj: 1.00.1.00 1.00 '1-.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1i00 1.00 i.00 - PHF AdT�: 1,00 ',1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 :1.00 1.00 :1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 22,. 165 12 121 181 18 24 .29: 25 - 17 41 - 28---- Reduct Vol:- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -le - 0. �O Reduced.,Vol: .-22 165. --.12 "21 181 - 24 29 25 17 41 28 ,\ PCE Adj: - 1:00-.1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00, 1. Ott - MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00 Final Vol 22 165 12 21 181 18 24 29 25 17 41 28; _ _____ I_..__-_ ___ .�I.__. _._ _-___.____II_____ ________I __-- Saturation Fl©w�Module.-•. -- Adjustment:: 1.00 1--.00 1d00- 'I.00,1-:00 1.00 1.,00 I.00 1.00: 1.00 1.001.. 00' ". ... - Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00, 1.00 0.62 0.74 0:64 0.40 0.95 0.65 - Final Sat.: 582 1272 723 587 1281 731 354 455 419 232 SB3 '427-- - Capacity -Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.13 0.02 0-.04 0.14 0.02 0.07. 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: _ 8:9 8.9 7.5 8.8 9,.0 7.5+ 9:0 8.6- 8.2 9.0 8.7 13.2 ._ Delay Adj: 1.00 1-.00 1-:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 - AdjDel/Veh: 8.9 8.9 7.5 8.8 9:0 7.5 9.0 8.6 8.2 9.0 8.7 8.2 LOS by Move: A ,A A A A A A A A A A A -� ApproachDel: 8.8 8.8 8.6 8.6�> Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . ApprAdjDel: B.8 8.8 8.6 _ 8.6 LOS by Appr: A A A A xxxxxxxx xxx xxixxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxfxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxix xxxxxxxi Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed'to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE w - i L 1327 xi EX MID DAY Wed Jul 23,2003 15:15:28 -Page 9-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Existing Conditions Mid-Day.Peak Hour (Sunday) ----------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report _ 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative) x xxxxxxxxxxx:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxtixxxxxfxxxxx x'xx x�xxxxxxxxxx♦ Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd. (EW) xxxxxxxxxx+xxaxxxxx�x�xxxx x.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' Cycle (sec): - 0 Critical Vol./Cap: (X): 0.134- Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): - 8.9 Optimal Cycle 0 Level Of Service: A xxxxxxxxxtxxxxxxxxxxxfxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx♦xxxxxixxt�xxx Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - RL - T - R -------- ____L--------------- II_-------------- _II--------------- I -I___ -_-_________I ... Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2. 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1.. 0 .1 ------------ I---------- _____II------------- __'I--------------- I1____________.___-L.. Volume Module: ,Base Vol: 40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 40 147 25 .7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15. User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 PHF Volume: 40. 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 Reduced Vol: 40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.001.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 "1_.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 40 147 25 7 164 30 - 27 53 37 26 57 15 ------------ .--------------- II--------------- _______________II_____,_________, Saturation Flow Module:. Adjustment: .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00. 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Final Sat.: 566 1232 697 563 1225 694 533 576 648 529 572 641 - ____________I_______________ --------------- --------------- _______________� Capacity Analysis Module: - Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.12 0.04 0.01 0.13 0:04 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.05 0.10 0.02 Crit Moves: *x+» -xxxx xxx x- xxxx - Delay/Veh: 9.2 9.0 7.8 8.9 9.1 7.8 9.4 9.1 8.2_ 9.4 9.2 8'.0- Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -AdjDel/Veh: 9.2 9.0 7.8 8.9 9.1 7.8 9.4 9.1 8.2 9.4 9.2 8.0 LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A A A A ApproachDel: 8.9 8.9 8.9 9.1 - Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 8.9 8.9 8.9 9.1 LOS by Appr: A A A A xxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxfxxxxxxxxxxixxx xxf xxxx xxix+xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxixxfx#xxxxxx. Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE 0213 PEAK'HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) Existing Gonditions Timeframe = AM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Meadows Parkway.. Total of Both Approaches (VPH) - T43 Number of Approach Lanes Major Street = 2 Minor Street Name = Pauba Road High Volume Approach (VPH) 311 Number of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 2 WARRANTED. F.OR A'SIGNAL 311 I -. I i � 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - VPH ---0— 1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) —i2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major).& 2+Lanes (Minor) -- 0-2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) —x—Major Street Approaches - dK -. Minor Street Approaches .. NOTE: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FORA MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE., Urban Crossroads RURAL (MEAD_&_PAUB).xls (RURAL AREA WARRANT) �3 1200 13CO 7/24/2003 . PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural: Areas) _ Existing Conditions Timeframe = AM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Meadows Parkway Total of Both Approac*e v(VPH) = 76& Numberof Approach Lanes Major Street = 2 Minor Street Name = Pauba .Road , High Volume Approach (VPH) = 29W Number -of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 1 WARRANTED FORA5IGNAL Soo t 400 U A O a a m 300 E i t 200 m m m 0 100 c 0 300 400 6o0-- 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - VPH z a. --0-1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) . —6-2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major) & 2+ Lanes Minot --- 0-2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) —)t—Major Street Approaches 1_ -)K - Minor Street Approaches " NOTE: { 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME POR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER:' THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE: Urban Crossroads RURAL (MEAD_&_PAUB).xls (RURAL AREAW. ARRANT) 7/24/2003;: APPENDIX D CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE- CUMULATIVE (2005) GROTH WITHOUT PROJECT CUM GROWTH AM. (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:46AS -.. Page�A-1'' ------------ __________ LDS Church Traffic.Impact-Analysis _ Cumulative (2005) Growth without Project Conditions - -- AM Peak :Hour - Level Of Service.COmputation�Report 2000 HCM Unsignalizedd-Method (Future' Volume: Alternative)< xx+xxxx++++++#++++tx+x»++##+x+x+,+;ix,»»»#+x+++xfxx#»i++ix+»+i#i•+»####»#ter#rf'f»i+ . Intersection #1 Green Tree Rd. (NS)I Pauba Rd '(EW) »»#xxt»++x#++++#»xx++#xx'#».»++#Y»+i+x+.#»#+xx++»##a####'f #x^x+br#i»i»+♦##»x##f ti'i :exi» Average Delay (sec/veh)• 16.5- " Worst Case-Level-Of'Servieee t++#+++x+++3++x��i+++##a++#s#x»:x+#♦#x»+»x'+�+xxx»#»####xxii xf-x#»##x#»»x»'»'i i'xixr x-'.: .. Approach: North Bound, SouthBound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T - R.- L - T - R L- .T - R - L- T R r ------------ I--------------- II--------------- II_---------11------ --- I Control: stop Sign ,. .Stop Sign' Uncontrolled' Uncontrolled Rights: - Include Include - Include - Include Lanes: 0 -0 0 0 0 "0 0 It 0 0t 0 .1-. 0 0' 0' 0- 0 0 1 0 " ------------- _7LI--------------- II--------- : ____-II_--__ Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0 0- 0 4- 0- 4 3 229 0 0 515 2- Growth Adj: 1-.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-.10 1.10'1..10 I -la Initial. Bse: 0 0. 0 4 0. 4 3 252 0 0 567. ' 2,'- - Added Vol: 0 0 0- 0 0 0 D 57 0 0 153. 0: PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 369 0' 0' 720 User Adj 1-.00 .1.00 .1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1:00 " PHF Adj: 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 ' PHF Volume: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 309 0 0 720 2` Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 00 0 -- Final Vol.: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 309 0 0 720 2' CriticalGapModule: Critical Gp:xxxxxxxxx xxxxx- 6.4xxxx :6.-21 4-..1 xxxx. xxxxictxxxxx xxiboc FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. 3.5 xxxx •.3.3 "2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xx2= ____________I____ ---------- II_________.____ II__------------- LI.__----------- _1 Capacity. Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 1036 xxxx 721: :722 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 259 xxxx 431 890 xxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.:. xxxx xxxx xxxxx _258 xxxx 431. 890'-xxxx xxxxx xxxx x5occ xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II___,----------- II___-___________� Level Of Service Module:Stopped Del: xxxx _xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx xxxxx. ,9.0 -xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxiexxxxx LOS by Move: # # + + + p + .+ .+ •x» _ Movement: LT - LTR - RT .LT - LTR'- RT LT - LTR.- RT LT.- LTR --RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xx -xxxxx xxxx 323 xxxxx. xxxx xxxx-xxxxx' xxxx xxxx xxxxx _ Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx .xxxxx xxxxx 16.5 xxxxx --9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx:xxxxx . Shared LOS: + » + + C +p ApproachDel: xxxxxx 16.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx. ApproachLOS: C Traffix 7:.5.1115. (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS,. IRVINE. CUM GROWTH AM MY Wed Jul 23, 200 17:46:45 Page 5-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth without Project Conditions AM.Peak Hour -------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- Level Of Service'Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized-Me.thod (Future- Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Calls Cedral (NS)l Pauba Rd., (EwY, Average Delay. (sec/,w7eh) 15.,1, Worst Case Level Of'"Service. 1 Approach: .North Bound South Bound East Bound West Sound Movement: L - T R L - T - R L - �T R �� L - T - R ------------ --------- --------------- 11 ----- - --� Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign: �- Uncontrolled --------- Un&ntrolled Rights: Include - Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 .10 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 --------- ------ -------- a 0 �1 0 1 --------- ---------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: Q 0 0 3 .0 1 229 0 0 518 2 Growth Adj,-. 1.10-1.10- 1.10 L. ID 1.10 1.10 1.1.0 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 0 0' 0 3 0 0 1 252 0 0 .570 2 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 153 0� PasserByvol: 6 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, % Initial.Fut: 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 309 0 0 723 2.1 user Adj: 1.00 1,00 1.1.00 1.00 '1. 00 I.05 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.0'0 1 .00 1.00 PHF Adj:- 1.00 1-00 1.00 17z00 r-00 tl00 1% 00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.06 1.00 PUP Volume: 0 0 0 3.: 0 0 1 309 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.. 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 309 0 0 723 2 Critical Gap Module: Critical -FGp:xxxxx:xXXx.xxXXX6-4 xxxx xxxxx 4�:l xxxx xxxxx- xxxxx -xxxxxx-xxx' FollowUpTim;xxx?m xxxx xxXXX, 3,.5 XxXX XXXXX 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 'xxxxx ---- I --------------- ------ xxxxxxxxx, --------- Capacity Module: Cnflict v . oIA xxxx xxxx xxxxx, 1.034 xxxx xxxxX 725 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx x3.c= Potent Cap,: xxxx xxxx xxxxx- 259 xxxx xxxxx 887 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap..- xxxx.xxxx xxxxx '-259 xxxx xxxxx 8 a17 xxxx xxxxx ----------- --------------- xxxx xxxx xxxxx --------------- ------------ -._ ------------- Level Of Service Module: Stopped.Delrxxxxx xxxx xxxxx 19.1 xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: C A Movement-. LT - LTR RT LT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT -_LTR - RT Shared Cap.:. xxxx xxxx xxXXX xXXX xXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx-xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx Xxxxx xxxxx XXXX xXxXX 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOST. A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 19.1 XXXXXX x,xxxX ApproachLOS: C Traf fix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001-- Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE CUM GROWTH AM (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003:,17:46:45 Page 6-1 ___________________________________________._______-._________________ _ LDS Church TrafficImpact Analysis. .. - Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions AM Peak Hour ----------------------------------------------------------- _-------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative). Intersection 43 Camino Romo -(NS)/ Rancho Vista:Rd. (EW). +xxx:+x+++x+xxx++++xx++�++x+++x+xxix:.x+++++++»+fix+�++i++++»xxxxxx+++:++x +•+•wir»x w+" .. . Average Delay (secfveh): -18,9 Worst Case..Level Of Service 'C .. Approach: North Bound South Bound .- .-East Bound West Bound _ Movement f L - T - R - L T - R . -L - _ T - - R L - . T - 'R L____________------- ---------------- II_____._-______-_� Control:. StopSign - -Stop-Sign ,. Uncontrolled. Uncontrolled Rights; Include Include Include Include- Lanes: - 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 1., 0 0- 1_-0 0 0 - Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 45 0 24 0 0 0 0 297 60 67 462- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 lAo 1.10 1-.10 1.10 1.10 1:10 Initial Bse: 50 0 26 0 0 .0 0 327 66 74 509 0`. Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 .0 0 7. 0•. PasserByVol: 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� .. Initial. Put: 50 0 26 0 0 0 0 342 66 , 74 515O`...". - User Adj.: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 PHF Adj.:-,. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00-1.00.1.00 1.00 'I.00 1.00 1.00 - - PHF Volume: 50 0 26 0 0 - 0 0 342 66 74 515 0 Reduct Vol: - 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 50 0 26. 0 0 0 0 342 66 74 515 0. Critical Gap Module: -- Critical,Gp: 6.4:.xxxx 6..2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4•;1 xxx-o•xxxxx Follow1jpT m: :.3�..S xxxx.- .3,.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxi'c 2,.2 xxxx xxxxx ".. `.. -------------- ___II --------------- II___________-___I�___-___________I _._.-. Capacity Module: -Cnflict Vol: 1037xxxx 375 xxxx xxxx xxxxx ,xxxx xxxx xxxxx: -.408 xxxx xicxxx Potent Cap.: 258 xxxx 676 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1162 xxxx xxxxx - Move Cap.:-. 245 xxxx 676 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 1162 xxxxxotck- Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 10..5 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. 8.1 xxxx. xxxxx LOS by Move: • + 'g A Movement:. LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR -RT; Shared Cap.: 245 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. xxxxx -xxxx xxxx xxxxx; xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd'StpDel: 23.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx, 8.3 xxxx xxxxx .. Shared LOS: C * * * * * * * * A* ApproachDel: 18.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS,- IRVINE,_ V13 CUM GROWTH AMAO) Wed Jul 23,' 2003 17:46:45 Page�7-1 J] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Pr0'jLct Conditions AM Peak Hour - Level Of ServiceComputationReport 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method .(Future VolumeAItdxjiaEive).i Intersection #4 Camino ROMO (NS) Corte Villosa (EW), Average Delay (sec/veh): 8.5 worst Case Level Of Service: -: A , Approach:: North Bound South Bound East.;Bound West Bound Movement: L T - R L T - R L T .-: R L - T - R :�-� ------------- --------- ------- --------- ----------------- Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign,, = Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include ,Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0. 0 1 0 0 0 1 :0 'tI 0 0 1 0 0. a 1 0 1 ---------- ------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 7 0 43 21 6 0 0 4 4- Growth Adj:: 1.10 1-10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10 1.10 1-10, 1.10 1-10 1.16 i.10 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 8 0 47 23 7 0 0 4 4 Added Vol: 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 '0' 0 6 PasserByVol: 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 D 6' Initial[ Fut: 0 0 0 8 0 47 23 7 0 0 1 1: User Adj: 41.0,0 17.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 . 0 1.00 1-00 1.00 1'. 0:0 1.001.00 I .00;r PHF Adj: 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00-' PHF Volume: 0 0 6 a 0 47 23 7 0 Q 4 Reduct*Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 .Final Vol.: 0 0 0 8 0 47 23 7 0 0 4 4 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx )000cc 6.4 xxxx 6.2 'A I xkxx: xxxxx M&Xk.Jo&X =66(k" FollowUpTim.-xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3-.5 xxxx 3'3 22 x56& mc,xx xkxxx.S,. ---------------- --------- -------- ------- Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 57 4 9 3UMx xxxxx xxxk xxxx. X)U= Potent Cap.: XXXX 955 xxxx 1085, 1624..xOx xxxx xxxx XxAki Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 945 xxxx 108$ 1624 xxxk xxxxx xxxx xxxx MD66� --------------- --------------- ------------- __-_____---_I_______________ Level Of Service Module: stopped Del: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.8 xxxx 8':5 7.2 xxxx xxxxic axxxx xxxx LOS by Move: A > A A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT LTR RT---LT- LTR RT LT LTR RT:' Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx XXXX xxxxx xxxk Xxxx xxkkk Shrd StpDel:xx)= xxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx' xxxxx Shared LOS; A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.5 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Lic - ensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE -4, CUM GROWTH AM: (0) - Wed Jul-23, 2003 17:46:45 Page 9-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative(2005) Growth Without Project Conditions AM Peak Hour - - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _.. Level Of Service Computation Report - 2000 HCM Unsignaliied'"Method (Future Volume Alternatiive). ++++»+»+.xxxxx++xx++xfxx'xxr+x+xv.i iixx+x»xia#»»i+'��+x♦xx»+x+:�+++++xxfxxa+» a+xxxi».. Intersection #5 Corte Villosa (NS) / Pauba Rd -'(N) Average Delay-(sec/veh): 26.4Worst' Case Level Of Service: D ++»x++++f+xx+ixxx+xxxxxxxi++txx+'xx•+'++x+i##x»x+++'�#'f:»fix x:.i +f x+f++f++++xi•�if ♦x+xx . Approach: North Bound 'South Bound Bast Bound West Bound Movement': L T R L..- T -,.R .L T R.., .L .,.,T R. . Control:- Stop Sign' Stop Sign Uncontrolled "Uncontrolled Rights': Include Include Include. Include Lanes: %' 0" t 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1' - 0: 1 0 .0 1 0'- 1' 0 0 1 _ Volume Module: - - - - - - Base Vol: -42 17 19 12 13 49 27 193 10 10 ,412. 16 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10 1.10, 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 - InitialBse: 46 19 21 -13 14 54 30 212 11 11 453 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 -153 6� PasserByVol: -0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 Q _ Initial'Fut: 46 19 21 13 14, 54 30 269 11 11 606 - 20 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 " PHF Adj`; 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.. 00 PHF Volume: 46 - 19 -21 13 14 54 30 269 .11 11 -`606 - 26 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 6. 0 -0 0 0' Final Vol.: 46 19 21 13 14 54 30 269 11 11 606 20- Critical�Gap Module: - Critical-;.Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.xxxx xxxx.1 x.'- .. .. - ... Fo1lowUpTim:. 3 5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2:2 xxxx xxxxx 2i2 xxxx'odctc - Capacity Module: - Cnflict Vol: 1001 977 269 982 968 606 626 xxxx xXkx 280 xxxx xxxxx` Potent Cap.: 223 253 774 230 256 501 965 xxxx xxxxx 1294 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 185. 243 774 204 246 501 965 xxxx xxxxx 1294 xxxx xxxxx - ___________I_______________ --------------- -------------- w__-------- ------ I Level Of Service Module: - - Stopped'Del:xxxxx xxxx 9_8 xxxxx xxxx 13.1 8.7 xxxx xxxzx 7.8 xxxx xxxxk' LOS by Move: + +- A + + B A' + + A + .•. Movement: LT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT - Qir - 1irk -'RT Shared Cap.: 199 xxxx xxxxx 224 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx -xxxxx xxxx xxxx x)0= Shrd StpDel: 31.7 xxxx xxxxx 23.3 xxxx xxxxx 8.8 xxxx xxxxx 7:8 xxxx xxxxx` Shared LOS: D + + C - • A + + A * + ApproachDel: 26.4 16.5 - xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: D C + + Traf f ix 7. 5. 1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE'' P-7 MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH AM (0) Thu Jul 24,. 2003,11:19:28 _ Page 1-1 ---------------------------------------------------- ____________________________. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth without Project Conditions. AM Peak Hour -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way-Stop Method AFuture Volume Alternative).-- xx>>+x+++++x+++>+xw++',�++i+++>i+ii�+++++>f++»+x>+>Y#.{+>i.f Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) [ Rancho Vista Rd_ (EW) Cycle (seC): 0 Critical, Vol /Cap. (X): Loss Time (sec).: 0 ;(Y+R =. 4 sec). Average Delay .(sec/veh):... - 13.B• ... .-- Optimal Cycle:- 0. -, ,.. Level Of Seryice: - -: ,•. B. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound .West Bound - Movement: L - .T - R L -,.T- R,. L. -,. T - R. .•. L•,.-, T - R -' Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign: Stop Sign •,. Rights: _-Include - Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 -0 0 0 0- 0. 0- 0 0 0 0 Lanes: - 1, 0 1---------------II=-------------- 2 0.,1 1. 0 2 0:.-.1 II 0 1 0 1..0 ---- --------►I- -0 1.0 -7 ---------- 1 0<: Volume Module:. Base Vo1: 194 182 13 18 212 ; 124 58 114 139 38 128 49 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1_10 1, 10- Initial Bse: -213 200 14 20 233 136 :69 125 153 42 141. 54 - Added Vol 1 7 0 5 5 - 6 12- 0 - 3 0 0 7 PasserByVol:; 0 0 0- 0 0' - 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 Initial Put: 214 207 14 , 25 238 .142 _76 125 156 42 :141 61 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 _ PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00. PHF Volume: 214 207 14 25 238 -142 76. 125 156 .42 141 -61 Reduct Vol 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 ,0 0 ;O 0 0 Reduced Vol: 214 207 14 25.238 142 -. 76 125 156.. 42 141 - 61 PCE Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1,.06 1.00 1100 '1.00.1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 . MLF Adj: - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1..00. - Final Vol 214 207. 14 _____ II 25 238 142 76 ,125. 156 42 -141 61. _ ______ _ _I_---_ Saturation Plow Module: ______________II_,__ Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00: 1.00 - Lanes: 1.00.2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.42 0.70 0.88 -0.34 1.160 50 Final Sat 429 -902 ,490 II_______ 4;14 -886 485 ______II____ .194 327,. .444 -_____ .151 -___ 525 -235 _- __ __-__ I. ------------- I --- Capacity Analysis ______ Module:: Vol/Sat: 0.50 0.23 0.03 0.06 0-27 0.29 0.39 0:38 0.35. 0.28_0.27 0.26 Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 18.2 12.5 9.8 11.4 13.1 12.5 14.8 14-4 12.8 13.2 12.8 12..2 a:s Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.2 12.5 9.8 11.4 13.1 12.5 14.8 14.4 12.8 13.2 12.8 12.2 LOS by Move: C B A B B B B B B B B ApproachDel: 1S•2 12t8 13.8 12.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 15.2 .12.8 13.8 12.7--¢ LOS by Appr: C B B B +w+wx++ww>++w+xx»ww:x++w+++x++ww+++w>+++»++++++w+»+w>xx>xx»>x»+•++++>++ie>+++++ c; Traf fix 7.5.1115 (c).2001 : Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE "<- 5 vs _= MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH AM (0) Mon Jul '29,-2003 r5:59:21 Page 1-1 - LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth WithoutProject Conditions- With Improvements AM Peak Hour - - -------------------------- ______________________________________________________ - Level OfService Computation Report - 2000 HCM Operations Method '(Future volume Alternative) ###»»»»»»###a##x»»»xxxa»#»#»xx##x#+##'#:�##'#tx}}x#»•}�i}'##»':�»#xi»}}}i+ir�x»»}»##»a�- Intersection 46 Meadows Pkwy`(NS) /-Rancho Vista Rd`_'(EW)• - - -- Cycle (sec): 0- - Critical. Vol./Cap. (X):� 0.295 Loss Time (sec)': 8 '(Y+R ... 5-sec) Average Delay.(sec%veh):10'.5 Optimal Cycle 60 Level Of Service: B' - .. .. .. Approach: North Bound, South Bound' - East Bound - 'West Bound Movement: L - T R : L -:T -- R L - T R 'L - T R _____________ Control: Permitted 'Permitted Permitted' Permitted Rights: Include include "- Include Include - Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 - -10-` 10' 10 10 10 10 10 Lanes: 1 0 2 0; 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: -:194 182 13 18 212 -124 58 114 139 38128 4.9 Growth,..Adj: -1.10 1.10 1.10 1.101.10 1.10 '1.10 1.10 '1.10 1.10 1.10- 1.10 ' Initiai_.'Bsec 213 200 14-- 20'-233 136 '-64 -125 153 42 -141 54 Added Vol: 1 7- 0 5 5 6 12 0 3 0: 0 7' - PasserByVol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'- 0. - 0 .0 0' d Initial Fut: 214 207 14 - 255"238 142 76 125. 156 - 42 -141 6r User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. do 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 - PHF Adj;. 0.55 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0:95 0.95 0,95 '0.95 0.§5 0.95 0.95=- - - PHF Volume: 226. 218 15 -26 251 ISO 80 -132 164 44' 148 '64w` Reduct .Vol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0' 0' 0"- Reduced;'Vole 226 218 15 - 26 251 150': -80' 132- `164. 44 148 64 PCE Adj:- - 1:00-1.00. 1.00 �1.00 1,00 .`1.00 11.00-'i:00 -1.00 1`.00 i'.00 1.00 MLF Adj-.. 1.00 1.00 1.06 '1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 - Final Vol_: 226 218 15 `'26-'251, 150 80 132 164 - 44 146 64'.' ------------- I---------------- 'I--------------- II--------------- II______________ -I Saturation Flow Module: - Sat/Lane: 1700 1760 1700 1700 1700 .1700 1700-1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 - - Adjustment: 0.94 1.06 0:94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.06 0.94 0.94 1-.60 0.94`. Lanes: 1.00 2.00 •1.00 '1.-00:2.o0 :1.00 0.43'0.67 0.90 0.35 1.13 0.5Z Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 694 1147 1427 569 1916 829 Capacity Analysis Module: - - -- Vol/Sat 0.14 0.06 0.01 0':-02 0.01 0.09 0-.12 0.12 0.12 o.OB 0.08 0.09 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 6.48 0.48 0.39 0.39 0.39 -0.39 0.39 0.3.9 Volume/Cap: 0.30 0.13 0.02 0.03 0.15 '0.20 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0:20' Delay/Veh: - 9.8 8.8 8.3 8.3 8.9 9.2 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.2 12.2 12.2 - - User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, Adj Del/Veh:_ 9.8 3.8 8.3 9.3 8.9 9.2 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.2 12.2 12.2� - DesignQueue: 4 4 0 0 4 3 2- 3 3 1 3 1. Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN, CROSSROADS, IRVINE HIM MITIGS CUM.GROWTH AM (6) Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:19:41 Page l-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative. (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions AM Peak Hour -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report , 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Futurevolume Alternative) Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)l Pauba Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 0 critical Vol./Cap. (X)-, 0:886 _ Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4.sec) Average.Delay -(sec/veh): 22.7 optimal Cycles� 0 Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound.. South Bound c,_,_-gaqt Bound. Rest. Bound.: Movement- L T R T -._R L T R L T Control:. Stop Sign ,.Stop Sign- Stop Sign, Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a Lanes: 1 0 .2 0 11 1 10 2 0 1 .1 0 1 0_1 1 0 1 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 119, 241 �23 ...15 259 111 - 42, 88 83* 48-212 34. Growth'Adj.: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10.1.10 1.10 4.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 131,265 25 17.,285 122 461, 97. 91 53 233 37' Added Vol: is. 7 0 3 5 0 0 50 a 0 135 PasserByVol: . 0, . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 149 272 25 20 290 122 46 147 99 53.,,368 38. user Adj: 1-00, 1_00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: i.00 1.60 .1.00 0.0.1.00 1.60 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 149 2 . 72 25 20 290 122 .46.147 99 3 ' 68 38., Reduct Vol: 0 a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0. 0 Reduced Vol: 149 272. 25 20_290 122 46 147 1 99 53, 368, .38 PCE Adj: 1..00.1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00.1-00 1.06 1.00 1-00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1-00. 1,00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: .149 272 25 20 290 122 , 46 147 99 53 . 368 38, ------------ -_____II_____.__________ ----------7-------- _______________II__________-_ Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1-00 1-00 1-00 1-00 1-00 1.001-00 Lanes: 1.00.2.00 1-00 11,00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.001.00 Final Sat.: 373 .705 85 41 1 9 364 .779 419 _352 373 399 378 415 .431 -------- --- ------ Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.40 0.35 0.06 0.05 0.37 0.29 0.13 0.39 0.25 0 014 0.89, 0-69. Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 17.4 15.6 11.2 12.5 16.2 13.8 13.6 17.0 .13.6 13.2 47.8 11_3 Delay Adj: 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 17.4 15.6 11.2 12.5 16.2 13.8 13.6 17.0 13.6 13.2 47.8 11.3 LOS by Move: C C B B C B B C B B E ApproachDel: 16.0 15.3 15.3 40.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 IAA 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 16.0 15.3 15.3 40.81 LOS by Appr: C C C E Traffix 7.5.1115.(c) 200.1 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed censed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE. plb R A I NEEM-M nor-4-1 ril De J MITIG8.- CUMGROWTHAM (0) Mon Jul 28, 2003 15:59`:55, Page 1-1 ----------- ------------------------ .______.------------------ _____-________________ LDS Church .Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions With Improvements - - AM Peak Hour - - _________________ ______ ________ ______ ______------------ -------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 H04 Operations Method (Future Volume.Alternative) - -. Intersection'V! Meadows Pkwy'•(NS)/ Pauba Rd'. (EW) Cycle (see): - 0 Critical Vol./Cap.'(X): 0.376 Loss Time-:(sech 8 (Y+R 5 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 13:2" - Optimal.Cycle: 60 Level Of Service: B _ Approach:.- North Bound South Bound East -Bound - `West Sound - Movement:. L- T R .L T R L - T- R L" T R t. Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted - - Permitted Rights: Include Include Include .Include` - Min. Green- 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Lanes: 1 0:.2 0,1 1. 0 2 0 1 1' 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 01 ------- _--- _.1--------------- 11--------------- 11--------------- 11---- ------- volume Module: - Base Val; .119 241 23 15 259 111 42 88 83 48 212 34 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.16 i"10 Initial"Bsei- 131 265 25 17 285 122 46 97 91 53 233 37-' Added Vol: 18' 7 0 3 5 0 01 So 8 0 135 1 PasserByVol: - 0` 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0- - 0. - Initial Fut: 149 272 25 20 290 122 46 147 99 - 53 368 �38 - - User Adj: 1.00:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00` PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 6.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95' 0.95 PHF Volume: 157 286 27 21 305 129 49 155 105 56. 388` 46' Reduct Volr 0 - 9 _ O 0 0 00 0 0 '0 Reduced,Vol: 157 286` 27 21 -305 129- 49 155' 105 56 395 -40 PCE.Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00'' 1.00' MLF Adj: 1.00 1-06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1::00 1:'00 1.00 '1.06 " Final Vol.: 157 286 27 21. -305 129 49 155 105 756 388 "40 ---------- __4--------------- II_______-------- II----------- __ _II-_-___ -_____ -I . Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 -0.94 0r94 1:00 -0.94' 0.94 1.00 0.94 . Lanes:- 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2-00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.0o 1.o0 1.o0 1:00 - - - Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 1600 1700 1600 1600 1700 1600- -- Capacity Analysis Module: - - �Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.23 0.03 Crit Moves: »♦++ :..x### - Green/Cycle: 6.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 O:61 Volume/Cap: 0.38 0.32 0.06 0.05 0.34 0.31 0.05 0.1S 0.11. 0.06 0.38 0.04. Delay/Veh: 20.8 18.9 17.0 -16.8 19.1 19.8 4.9 5.4 5.2 4.9 7.1 4.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 20.8 18.9 17.0 16.8 19.1 19.8 4.9 5.4 5.2 4.9 7.1 4.9 DesignQueue: 4 7 1 1 8 3 1 2 1 1 5 1 +»»x#»i»»+»++xxx»++++»######++###xxx##x xxx»x##+x»x#»+##++»##i#+#+++###•###ta#+#+ - Traffix 7.5.1115 (C)-2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE 'Po CUM GROWTH PM (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 17k36:39 _ Page 4-1 - ---------------------------- ---- --------__::- ------ --- --9-` ----- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions PM Peak Hour _________________ ___------------------- _- --------- __---------------------------- i Level Of Service Computation Report . 2000 HCM Unsignalized - Method,(Future, Volume Alternative) Intersection #1.Green Tree Rd.(NS)/ Pauba, Rd,-(EW) ••- -- ': "" - - xttxtt+x•+++xt♦twt+++:i+i+++i+++f+x++ii.++x:,+x++�:jt,++++r++ixx+t++++v-+++++++,t#++x,t + Average Delay_,.(sec(veh)F.,. 10.7, ,, Worst, -Case Level Of -Service: i B �. ++txf xtxtx+txtx+xxxt♦x+++x+t+xxx#i+xt+++i+fit+#txt+++tt+t+x+++++++++ttx++++ixtt+ Approach: North.Bound South Bound: ",;East. Bound West -Bound • . Movement L T R L' T - R L T - R L T R -------- -1-77-- 117-7- -;- II---- - - - - -ii --- - - r Control:. Stop Sign: Stop Sign- Uncontrolled. -Uncontrolled Rights: -Include Include - Include Include - Lanes: 0 .0 0 0 0 0.. 0 11.0 0 0 1 0- - 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 . '' ------------ - ---'-- I ----- ' - --- Volume Module- Base Vol: 0 0 0 40 . - 4 •, 6,. 197 -, - 0 0.: 148 3 - Growth Adj:. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1:10 1.10 1.10,1:10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1 to Initial Bse: 0- 0 0 4 0 4 7 217 0 - 0 163 3 Added Vol: 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 72 0 0 45. 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 -0 0 0. 0 0 6 0- 0 0'- Initial Fut: -0 0 0 4 0. 4 - 7 289 0 0 208. _, 3 User Adj: ,'I.00.1.Oo 1-.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 "1.00 1.00. 1 00 _ PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00.. 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00-1.00,1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0- 0 0 4: 0 4 7- 289 - 0 - 6. 268- Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 Final Vol..: .0% - 0 0 4 0 4 -7 ; 289 0 -. .0 ;-208 3 Critical Gap Module:." Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4:xxxx .6. 2.. 4.1_xxxx xxxxx xxxxx ;xxxx xxxxx -. i. FollowUpTim.xxxkx xxxx xxxxx 3..5 root .3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -- - - -- - - I - -- -- = Ik - -- - - -- -II-- - -------Ir -- ------ 1 - Capacity Modules. Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx,. xxxxx ,511 xxxx 209 .. 211 xxzoc xxxxx xxxx xxxx. Potent cap.; xxxx xxxx xxxxx 526 xxxx 836.1371 -xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx Move Cap xxxx xxxx xxxxx 524 xxxx . 836 1371 xxxx.xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx __________ _I_______-------- 11--------------- 11___- __________IL____ _____ __ r 4 Level Of Service Module: - - - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxxx LOS by Move: + + x . + + -A- Movement: LT -.LTR -RT LT - LTR -.RT LT - LTR - RT. LT LTR -'RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx-xxxxx, xxxx 644 xxxxiz. xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. xxxxx_ Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 10.7 xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • * x x B + p x . x. I ' + ; ApproachDel: xxxxxx 10.7 xxxxxx xxxxxx. . ApproachLOS: • -B y� Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE 2,1 i i -CUM GROWTH PM (0) WedJul2.3,, 2003 17:36:39 - _ Page 5-1 - ----------------------------------- ____________________-____________________.___ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions ' PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation .Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized.Method (Future'. Volume Alternative) - Ax+AAA+A+A+Ax#+ax++x•xx+++++aa#+�++++.#.++xx#�a+#may++#++fix++x#i#>':�+++a 3'i `i +w•a'x x++ is ,. ,'. . Intersection 02 Calle Cedral (NS:)/ Pauba Rd. (EW).:: - - Average Delay , (sec/veh) : 10;; 6""_ -, --,.. ' � - Worst Case Level Of -Service r ' A'4#++++#+#++iiil.-+xi+i+t+:++xff+,+.xx#ix..+:+#:##.f+1+f+1f1-'Iixx•fY+i +1 f'++i'+'+#if#++1tf!?>i�f• .. Approach: North Bound. South Bound ,'East Bound ' West Bound', Movement: L -_ T - R L - T R- L - T - R L - T - R Control: - Stop Sign Stop Sign - ;'Uncontrolled• 'Uncontrolled Rights: - Include Include Include 'Include-'{ Lanes:, 0 0 0 0: 01 0 0 11 0 0 0 1-. 0 0 0". -0 "01 '0 1 ------------ ____ __________------------- .--------------- II_______________( volume Module: - Base Vol:. 0 0 0 2. 0 2" 3. 200 0 0 150 2 - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.16 -. 1.10 -1.16. 1..10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10"1.10 f.10 ' ' Initial Bse: 0_ 0 0 2 0 2 3 220 0 0 165 2 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 72 0 0 45 0,. PasserByvol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 6` Initial Put: 0. 0 0 2. 0 2 3 -292 0 0: 210 2` -User Aaj: -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00 1.00 :1.00 :'1.00 1.60 1 06 % - PHF Adj; 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00`1:00 1_00 1.00.-1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0�. 0 0 2 0 2 3 292 0 0- 210 2 Reduct Vol.: 0- 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 O� 0 0 Final Vol.:.- 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 292 0 0- 210 2- Critical Cap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 ...xxxx 6.2 4:.1, xxxx xxi xxxxx xxxx xxxxx - FollowOpTim:xxxxxxxxx xxxxx 3-.5 .xxxx 3.3 . 22 xxxx 'xxxxx-xxxxx xxxx:zxxxx ".. 1--------------- ------------- __1I_______________II_-__ Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol:..xxxx -.xxxx xxxxx 509-.xxxx 210_ 212 xxxx xxxxx' xxxx xxxx 'xxxxx Potent. Cap.:. xxxx xxxx xxxxx 5281.x 835 1370-xxxx`xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxic ' Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 527 xxxx 835; 1370 xxxx xxxxx xxxx'xxxx xxxxx ------------ I ------------- __II--------------- II-------- _,_______II____.__________.I- Level Of Service Module: .. Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx :xxxx iocxxx. LOS by Move-: + + - . x . + A Movement: .;..:LT -.LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT- LTR - RT LT LTR - RT Shared .Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx 646 xxxxx":m= xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxxx 10.6-xxxxx' - 7. 6 xxxx. xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. Shared 'LOS: x + + + B ♦ A ApproachDel: xxxxxx - 10.6 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: ` B + +- Traffix 7.5.111.5 (c) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to.. -URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE' V)l3 CUM GROWTH PM (0) Wed Jul 23-, 2003'17:36:39 ---------------------- Page 6-.l LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005).-Growth Without Project. Conditions,- _ - PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method --(Future Volume Alternative) '» >+ffirfif ff r#ffff>###>t+f#>xf>iff>:f.. Intersection H3 Camino Romo (NS)[ Rancho Vista Rd. (9W) f+»>xf>#rf+xx♦>,+>#xf++#>#>++>f>#>+++f+++yfr+v#x+»f+rx#++::'»#ff#i'#if+ »f+ii>#>x Average Delay (seclveh): ;.- 9.R;: worstt-Case Level Of S'erVice --. A ®®® Approach: ..North Bound South Bound _ East Bound -West Bound Movement: L- T - R L - T - R L : T - R _ ____ _I _-__ _-_; -- 11_____ __-__ IL_____ ________II___ L T - R --------- Control:. Stop Sign Stop Sign _Uncontrolled ,Uncontrolled Rights: Include - Include Include = -Include Lanes: 0 1 0, 01 .-0 0, 0. 0 0 - 0. 0 0 1 0 --------- �---------`--- -��--_�__._--`--- -�� -.--' ------------- 0 _l. 0 0 0 " - Volume Module: Base Vol:. -10 0 6 ., 0 0 0 0 123 12. 1 82 0 Growth Adj: 1.10 1,10 :1.10 1.10.1.10 1.10 :1:10 1..10 1.10 =.1.10. 1.10. 1'10 .Initial Bse; Ill 0 7 .0 0 0 0. 135 13 8 90 - 0 .Added Vol: - 0 0 0 0 0- O 0. 28 0 0 34 6 PasserByVol: 0_ 0 0 -0+ 0 0 0 0. 0 0• 0 6 Initial Put : 11- 0 7 0 0 0 0: 163 13 8 124 - 0 User Adj: 1.00,1-.00 1.00 .1.00'.1.00 1.00 1.00'1.00 :l.00 '1.00 1.00. 1.06" PEP Adj.. 1.001.00 1.00-1.00.1.00 1:00- 1.00r1.00 1.00 1.: 00-3.00 1.00 PHF volume: - 11 0 7 - 0 0 0 0 163 13 8 124.. '0 Reduct Vol: 0 0- 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 r Final Vol.: 11. 0 7 0- 0 0 0 163 13 8 124 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp 6.4 xxxx -. 6 2 xxxxx.xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxiooc A. 1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUgTim 3 5 xxxx - 3.3 xxxxx:xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. xxxx._ XXioo ------------- .2.:2 xxxx xxxxx. - �--------------- 11 --II----- ----. -- -II----. Capacity Module: -------- 1 . Cnflict_,Vol: 310 xxxx. .170- xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxic xxxx-. xxxxx 177 xxxz xxxxx _ .. .Potent Cap 687_xxax -979 xxxx xxxx xxxxx-"xxxx xxxx xXxxX 1412 xxxx. xxxxx Move Cap.. 684 xxxx 879 xxxx.xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx Xxxxx 1412 xxxx xxxxX. ___________I_________:___--��_______________ -_______-______ Level Of Service Module:- _._____________� Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx 9..1: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx - 7.5 xxxx xx= LOS by Move: + #. p # f f - f + > A # x Movement: LT- LTR-_- RT - LT --LTR - RT - LT - LTR - RT- LT'- LTR.- RT Shared- Cap..; 684 xxxx xxxxx :xxxx :xxxx xxxxx xxxx X� xxxxx . xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel: 10.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XXXX xxxxx - 7.6 xxxx xxxxx ,. Shared LOS: B * * ' * ' -* * A ApproachDel: 9.9 xxxxxx.xxxxxx xxxxxx - °i-`' ApproachLOS: A j; { Traffix 7. 5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling -Assoc. Licensed to URBANCROSSROADS, IRVINB CUM GROWTH PM (0)- Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:36:J9. 'Page 7-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005)Growth Without Project Conditions PM Peak Hour: ______-___ ____________ __ _________________________ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM. Unsignaliaed Method (Future Volume'.A1'ternative) - .. Intersection #4 Camino Romo (NS) / Corte'Villosa (EW) -- »»»»ix.»»x}x�#+xtiii•i.a.af».»xii.»+i+»»»a»ii»»iii»»x»'»»>:i'tx'i`».»fy»'f'f i''»'»»»i»»:cif»»i .. Average Delay.(sec/veh)': 8.5Worst Case •Level Of Service. A Approach:_ North Bound .South Bound.. East Bound '-•''- West Bound Movement: L .T R L - -T R L -- T R: L - T - R - _ __________I______ _____ __'I-___ ----- __.I ------------ IL_____________ .. Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign: .Uncontrolled.. Uncontrolled Rights: - include Include include ''` Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0. 0 1 0 00 1 - 0 1. 0 01 ., 0 0 0 1 ,0 1 _______I______--------- II--------------- I.I_______________II____ 4 . Volume Module: Base Vol: 0,: 0 0 7, 0 9 7 .4 0 0' 7 4 - Growth- Adj: 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10:. 1. 10 1.10 1 10"1.10 1.10 1.10 1.1Q1`10 Initial. Bee: 0 0 0 8 0 10 8 4 0 0 8 4 Added Vol: 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 '0 - - PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0- 0 0 0 0 -0 - Initial Put:- 0 0 0 e 0 10 8 4.. 6 - 0 8. 4 - - - User Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00-.1.00 1.00 1.0011:00 '.1.00 1.6o 1.60 1.00 . PHF Adj< 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00•.1.00 .1.00 100 1.60 1.00 1A Wi .00 i.00 PHF Volume: 0. 0 0 B' 0 10 8' 4 0 0 8 - ''4 Reduct Vol: 0" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0' 0 6 Final Vol 0.. -6 -0 8 0 10 8 4 0 0- 8 4 Critical Gap Module: - - Critical,Gp:xxxxx ,xxxx xxxxx 6.4`xxxx 6.2 4.1. xiooc xxxxx-xxxxx x�oocxxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx :xxxx xxxxx. 3..5-xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxx'xx xx :xxxx Capacity Module: : - Cnflict Vol:.:xxxx xxxx xxxxx 28 xxxx 8 %12 xxxx xxxxx xiocx'xxxx x5o= Potent Cap'. :_: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 993 xxxx -1080 -1920 xxxx xxxxx xxxx.xxxx xxxxx ' Move Cap..:.- xxxx .xxxx xxxxx 989'xxxx 1080 1620 xbo: xxxxx xxxx. xxxx xxxxx - ------------ I--------------- ___ ______11_____ __.____ __-_ ________� 'Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx 8.4 .7..2 xxxx xxxxx xicxxx X>Doe xxxxx LOS'by Move:- » • » A » - ..A. --A » x » x » Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT.. LT - ITR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx ocxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx'xxxxx )b= xxxx xxxxx: xxxx'xxxx xxxxx ' Shrd StpDel:xxxxx .xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx- 7.2 xxxx xxxxx: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: x » x » » » A 3 _ » » x - ..':i •< - - ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.5 xxxxxx - xxxxxx ApproachLOS: x A. Traffix 7.5.1115.(c) 2001 Dowling Assoc.. Licensed'to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE CUM GROWTH PM (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:36:39 ------------ -------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis -------------- Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions M Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ is Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future. Volume. Alternative) Intersection #5 Corte Villosa (NS) Pauba Rd (EW) i: Average Delay.(sec/veh): 12.3 Worst Case Level Of` 'Service. Approach:., North Bound::. South Bound, East Bound-. West Bound:' Movement: L. - T R L T ------------ --------------- -------- ------ Control.:, stop sign stop Sign. L T - R ---------- Uncontrolled L T' - R ---------------- Uncontrolled. Rights;. Include Include . Include � . Include Lanes. 0 1 0 01 1 0, 1 0 0 1 0 1 b 0 1:, 0 1 0 0 1 ---------- - ------- 7� ------ 11--� ------- volume Module; ------- Base Vol: 9� 3 3 4 4 10 20 147 34 12- 131. Growth.Adj: 1.10:1.10 1.10 1.10, 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-110 1.10 1.10 1A Initial Bse: 10 3 3 9 4 11 22 162 37 13 244- 101: Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 45 0 PasserByVol: 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 - 6 Initial Fut.: 10, 3 3 9:. 4 11 User Adj: 1.00-1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .22 234 - 37. 1.00. 1.00 :.1.00-.1.100 13 189 16 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:. J.00; 1.00 1..00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.100,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 pHP Volume: 10 3 3 91 4 11 22, 234, 37 13 189 10 Reduct , Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0'-6 Final.Vol.i .10. 3 3 9 4 11 22 234 37 13 189 1.0 Critical Gap Module: Critical.Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx -4 .1 xxxx xxxxx-_ Followl�p 1m: 5 4,0, 3-. 3.. 3. 5 4.0 3.3 ------ -- -_________II-_--___:_____ 2-2xxxx xxxxx _ 2;2 xxxx xxxxx ----------- ------------- Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 5 . 06 503 234 515 531 189 199 xxxx xxxxx 271 xkxx Potent Cap 4: 460. 474 810 473 457 858 1325 xxxx Xxxxx 1304 Move Cap..:, 46.1 461 .810 460 445 858 1385 xxxx xxxxx 1304.-,xxxx xxxxx ------------ --------- ------ �11� -------------- ---------------- ---------------- Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del.:xxxxx xxxx 9.5 xxxxx xxxx 9.3 7..6 xxxx. xxxxx 7.8 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A A A A Movement. LT - LTR --RT. LT LTiZ , - RT LT -.LTR - RT LT - LTR - RY Shared Cap.: . 461.xxxxxxxxx 455 xxxx1xxxxx xxxx.xxxx Shrd StpDel.: xxxx xxXXX.1 13.2 xxxxxxxxx 7.6 xxxx,xxx�, T. 8 xx� xxxx -13.0 Shared LOS: B B A A ApproacfiDel: 12.3 11.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B B Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH PH (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 1'7:48e0i' - '- Page 1-2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without'Project Conditions PM. Peak Hour ' - _ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way.Stop. Method. (Futuke. volume Alternative)'-1 _ ++»>+++++++i++>+a++xvx-x+3»x++++»+++»•>�+»+>i'xx+�,rx iiii i'iix>i»'�ii'i �»»+'xi+�sxi+f`� Intersection k6 Meadows Pkwy:(NS)/ Rancho Vista Rd (EW).` .wr4 cycle (sec): 0 - :Critical Vol,,/Cap. (X): 0.228 .. Loss Time (sec): - 0 (Y+R 4. sec)- Average: De lay (sec/Veh): 9:"8 Optimal Cycle: 0Level Of Service: +>xxx x>+>+»x•sa•x>tix»xx>»+»xx v+>+x»»>xx irx>xx»i»+xi»x"��ii»':i»��:i :ix i',i>i>ti.»'iiix»i. �:. . Approach: 'North Bound:. "South Bound "East Bound- WestBound Movement: L - T R 'L T - R L -- T - R L T - R Control: - Stop Sign Stop Sign - Stop Sign "'Stop Sign - Rights: -` Include Include Include Include Min. Green: ' 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0' 0 0" Lanes: - 1 _.0- 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 .- `0 1 0 .1 0 0 '1 .0 1 0 I___------------ II--------------- I'______--------- I I_______________I Volume Module: -" Base Vol: 27 169 19. 16 220 40 27 39 46 22 30 26 - - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 '1.10 1.10 1.10 1'.10 1.10 1.10 1_10 1.20 1.10 _ Initial-:Bse: 30 186 21 IS 242 44 30- 43 51 24 33 -`-29 Added Vol: 4 22 0 24 24 30 25 - 0 2. 0 - 0 - 22 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 00 0 0' 0 0. 0 0 0 - Initial Put: 34 208 21 42 266 74 55 43 53 ` 24.- 33 51 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 -1,00 1.00 1.00 1.m - PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1-.00 1.00, - - PHF Volume: 34 208 21 42. 266 74 -- 55 43 --53 24 -33 51 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 .0 0 0 00 0 0 0. 0 Reduced Vol: 34 208 - 21 42 266 74. `,_- 55 43 53 '24 33 ' 51' PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0011.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 00 -1.06 1.00. 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 T.Ob I:00 1.00 1.00 - - Final Vol.: 34 208 21 42 -266 - 74- 55 43 -53 -24 33 51.1 ------------ I--------------- ___________ _______________ ---------------- Saturation Flow Module: - Adjustment: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Lane8: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 -1.00. 0.73 0.57 6,70 0.45 0-.61 0. 94; - Final Sat.: 517 1120 -625 -538 1168 '656 375 115 410 231 320 555 --------------- I I_____ _________ _.__'---- Capacity Analysis Module: - - :Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.19 0.03 0.08 0.23 0.11 0.15 0.14 0.13 0:10 0.10 "0.09 - Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 9.8 10.2. 8.3 9.7 10.3 8.6 10.4 9.8 9.2 9.9 9.8 8:9, Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.8 10.2. 8.3 9.7 10.3 8.6 10.4 9.8 9,2 9.9 9.8 8.9 LOS by Move: A B A A B A B. A A A A A. ApproachDel: 10.0 9.9 9.8 9.4 .Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - ApprAdjDel: 10.0 _ 9.9 9.8 9.4 LOS by Appr: A A A - A, Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE_` -pIl MITIG8 -.CUM GROWTH PM (0) Mon Jul 28, 2003 16t11!59 Page 1-1 - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- - LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour. - --------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Level of S,�rvice Computation Report 2000 H04 Operations. Method (Future Volume Alternati7e)_ Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) F Rancho Vistq,..Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 0 Critical Vol./Cap. (X):., 0.151 Loss Time (sec)- 8 (Y+R 5 sec) A:veragq_Delay,.(sec/yeh) 8.,9 i optimal Cycle:. 66 Level Of Service- A Approach: North Bound South. Bound East Bound;, West Bound Movement: L T R L 'T R L T R L - T R_- ---------------- ------- - ------ Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 10 10 16 id 10 10 10 io Io 10 10 10�' Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1- 0 1 0 1 0 0 111 O 1 0 ------------ ---------------- ----------------- ------ ----------- volume module; 46 22 30 .Base Vol: 27 169 19 16 220 40 27 -.39 .26 Growth Adj,: 1.10 1.10 1-16 1-10 1-1.0 .1-10 1.10.1.10 1-10 1-10 1-10 1-10. Initial bse: 30 186 21 18 242 44. 30 43- , - 51 24 33 29,-.;- Added Vol:-4 22 0 24 - 24 30 25 0 2 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0, 0. 0 .0 0 0 0 0.: 0 Initial Fut: 34 208 21 42 266 74 55 43 53 -.24 33 51 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 :1,00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj.: 0.95 0.§5 0..9-5 0.9,5 0.95 0.95 0.-95 01.95 0.55 0,.9.5 0.95 0.95 V I M . 35 2 . 19 22 44 280 78 , ;58 45, 55 -.,25 . 3S 53�' PHF o u e. Reduct Vol: 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 35 . : i 219 22 44 280 78 58 4.5 55 4: 25 35. .,. 51... PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.09 .00 1.00 1.00 1,100 1410 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj-.: I.0o 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 00 1.00 1.00 .1.90 1..010 1.00 1.00 Final Vol 35 M 22 44 :280 78 58 45 55 25.35 53 --------------- --------------- ------ -------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0-94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1-00 0.94. 0.94 1.00 0.94 Lanes: 1-00 2.00 1-00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.74 O.SS 0-71 0.46 0.59 0.951. Final Sat.: 1600 3400 ' 1606. 1600 3400 1600. 1185 930, 1140 732 998 1530 --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - 7 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0,06 0.01 0-03 0.08 0.05 01.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 Crit moves: Green/Cycle: 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.32 0.32 0;32 0.32 0.32 0.32, Volume/Cap: 0A4 0.12 0.03 0.05 0.15 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.11 6.11 Delay/Veh: 6.4 6.7 6.3 6.4 6.8 6.6 14:6 14.6 14.6 14.4 14.4 14.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 .1-00 1.00 1-00 1-00 1-00 1-00 1-00 AdjDel/Veh: 6.4 6.7 6-3 6.4 6.8 6.6 14.6 14.6 14.6 14.4 14.4 14.4 DesignQueue: 1 3 0 1 4 1 Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling Assoc: Licensed to URBAN. CROSSROADS, IRVINE VAS all � I MITIG8 CUM GROWTH PM (0)" Wed Jul 23=;-2�003 17:48:21 'Page 11-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project'. Conditions - PM Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Level. Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM�. 4-Way Stop Method (Future. Volume Alternative) - Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd: (EW)' - Cycle (sec): 0 critical Vol./Cap. ,(%): 0.319 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R =-.:4 sec) Average Delay"(sec/veh): ll 2 Optimal Cycle: 0 'Level' Of Service:. g »>++++++++»i»+i++++♦+++++f.»+»+.x xxxx+x+xfiax++iixil.xii,lxii»L:i�#>i�+++++:>ff++++ . Approach:. North "Bound; South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement- :L - T R' :L - T R •L�-- T R L- T R __________ __________------- 1-7___ Control:, Stop Sign . Stop Sign' "'Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include .. Include - Include Include Min. Green: 0 0- 0 0 0- -0 0-` 0 0 0 0 0 - Lanes:. 1- 0 2 0- 1" .1 0 -2 0- 111 0 1 0 1 1 .0 1 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol.: 52 187 27 37-.189 - 21 27 80 70 25 75 26 - Growth Ad*: 1.10.1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 'I.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10' - - Initial.Bse: 57 206 30 41,- 208- 23, 36 88 77 28 83- -29 Added Vol: 3 22 0 2 24 0 0 67 5 0 41 . -4'.' - PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 60 228 30 43232 "23 30 155 82 -26 124 -33" " User Adj:' 1.00 1.00 •1.00--1-.00_F.00. 1--00 1.00 "1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 PHF Adj:, - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - PHF Volume: 60-.228 30 43 232 - 23 30' 155 82. 28 124 33. Reduct -Vol: 0. 0 0 0- 0- 0- 0-- 0 0. 0 0 0 '�- Reduced Vol:. -60 228 30 -:43 232 23. 30. '155 82 28 124 33 PCE Adj: lA0 1.00 1.a0-1.00:1.00 1.00 '.1.00'':1.00. 1•.00. '1.00 1.00 1.00^" MLF Adj:,1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ''"1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 60. 228 30 :43 '232 23- ' 36 -'155 82 28 124 33 ___________._--------------- --------------- II____.---------- _II_______________� . Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 - Lanes: 1.00 2.00 '1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 i:.00 1.00 Final Sat.: .471 !1012. 557 467 1005 552 458 494 543 444- 477 520 - ----------- II------- ------ _._ IL--------------- II-------- _______� ' .. Capacity Analysis Module: - - Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.23 0.05 0.09. 0.23 0.04 0.06 0.31 0.15 0.06 0.26--0.06 - Crit Moves: +x+x >+e+ 1. 1»+ •»+ . Delay/Veh: 10.9 ll.3 9.1 10.7 11.4 .9.0 10.6 12.5 9.9 10.7 12.0 9.5'� Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - AdjDel/Veh: 10.9.11.3. 9.1 10.7 11.4 9.0 10.6 12.5 9.9 10.7 12.0 9.5 LOS by Move:. B B A B B A- B B A B B A ApproachDel: 11.0 11.1 11.5 11.4 Delay Adj: 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 11.0 11.1 11.5 11.4 LOS byAPpr: B - B B B Traffix 7.5.1115 -(c) 2001 Dowling Assoc_ Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH PM (0) Mon Jul 28, 2003.16:12:42 'Page 1.1 ____._____ - _________ ______________ _____ ______ _:___ .. LDS Church Traffic :Impact Analysis,... i Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project. Conditions:.With:Improvements., PM Peak Hour. - - ________________ __________ ____,_ ________________-_______ Level Of Service,Computation.Report --- _____ ____ _____ . 2000 HCM Operations Method .(Future Volume Alternative).:... :.t»»»»»++»»»»»»»»»»»ss+»i»+»»»»fii•»»»:f»»»».»+»ss:s»s»ssss.s»»»»»ii»s»»»�»'»�s»»»»- _ .. Intersection H7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd. (EW). •»»»»»»»»»»♦»»»+»+:»»+�»»»t+»»»•»»»»»+++:»»»»»»sit+»»f:»»s+»»»»»+a»ta»»»».sti»:e» .. Cycle (sec)-, 0 Critical Vol./Cap. (X)c 0-194- - LOSS Time (sec): 8 (Y+R.= 5'sec) Average Delay.;(sec/veh).: 11.1 -. Optimal Cycler �60 Level, Of �. _ _ Service- B. Approach: North Bound. .South Bound_-,. .;East Bound, .:'West Bound ' Movement: L - ,T -.-R L - T -- R L - T -- -R. L - T -' R ------------ --------- _---- Control: Permitted - _______ Permitted ,- ____________------------ Permitted .Permitted Rights:" Include _ - Include Include .. Include Min. Greeno 10, 10 10 10, 10 10 .- 10 10 10 10` -10, : 10 - - Lanes: :1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 I____------- 1 0 1 0 1. 1. 0 ,1 •'0 1 ______ _ __ _____ L_____ Volume Module: ___._.__,___II_______________.I - ____IL____ Base Vol: - 52 187 . 27 37. 189 21 27 , 80- 70 25- 75.. 26,. - Growth Adj: 1.10-1.to 1.10 1.10.1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 "1.10 ,1.10 1.10 -1;IO - Initial,Bse: 57 206 '30. 41 208 23 30 88 77 28 83 -29 - Added Vol: 3 22 0 2 24 - 0 0 67 5 0 41 •4 PasserByVol: '0 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 0 0. 0 D Initial Put: 60 228 30 43 232 23 30-155 82 .-:28 124 33 User Adj.: - ,1.00 '1.00 '1.00 1'.00 1.00 '1..00. 1.00;1100 1.00 1.00: 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: - 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 6.95 0.95 0.95 '0.95 :0.95 0..95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 63 240 31 45 244 24 31 .163 86 -.29 130 .. 34 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0. 0 0 0 O Reduced:Vol: 63 240 31 45 .244 24 31- .163 86 ..29 130 34 PCE Adj-:. 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00:1.00 1.0,0 1.00,1.00 '1.00 1_00 17.00- 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.Oo 1.00 -1Y. GO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1:. 00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 Final Vol.: ;. 63 240 .31 45 . 244 24. --------------- 31 163 86 --------------- II____ 29 130, 34 - __________I __ _________' Saturation Flow Module: . Sat/Lane: 1706 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 .1700 .1700 1700 1700` -. Adjustment.: 0.94 1.00 �0.94. 6.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1•..00 0.94 Lanes: 1_00 2.00 i..00 1.00.2-.00 1.-00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 ____-___II_____ 1600-1700 1600 _______'I___._ 1600 1700 1600- I ________ Capacity Analysis ___ __II_____ Module: - - ____._ .. -- Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.02 0 10 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.02 k Crit Moves- »»»» - ' Green/Cycle: 0..37 0.37 0.37 0.31 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0:50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Volume/Cap:. 0.11 0.19 0.05 0.08 0.19 0.04 0.04 0.19. 0.11 0.04 0.15 0.04 Delay/Veh: 12.7 13.1 12.3 12.5 13.1 12.2 7.9 a.9 8:3 7.9 8.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ - AdjDel/Veh: 12.7 13.1 12.3 12.5 13.1 12.2 7.9. 8.9 8.3 7.9 8.6 7.9 - DesignQueue: 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 0 2 1'� Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE i `k V*7O i CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0)Wed Jul 23,- 2003. 17:4207, Page 9-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without. Project 'Conditions : Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation: Report 2000 HCM.Unsignalized. Method -'(Future 'Volume 'Alternative)- - xxxxxxxxxxxx♦fxxxxx,x xxxxxxxxxx♦.x xxxx 3}}xrx x.♦xxx}xx'x xxixx3Yxixxxxixix>xxx}xaxx. . Intersection 41 Green Tree Rd (NS)l Pauba'Rd.-:.(EW). x xxx}xxxxxxxx�x,xaxx x'xx•,x}xxxx.}x:isxxxxxtx.3x'xi:iavx'}'x"i'}i'4 xY'x i�}"x x'x xxfxxx xi i:if xx} . Average Delay. ,(sec/veh)c 9-1 .. Worst case Level Of Service:' A : x}xxx:exxxxxxx x3}ixteiixix}♦itx}x}.xx.ixx.}xi•}x�f}xxxxx++v.'x}xxxxxxaxfxxx3x3xkf x•ii .. Approach: North Bound South Bound- East Bound West Bound - Movement: - L-- T - R L - T - R L - T -* R L T - R' Control: StopSign,_ Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include.: - Include '--Include Lanes: 0 0. 0 0. 0:, 0 0 0 0: 1%. - ;O : T 0 0` 0., 0 0' 1 0 0 Volume Module: - Base' Vol: - 0: 0 0 0 0 2 4 130 0 0 149 0 Growth:Adj: 1.10: 1.10: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10�1.-10 -1.10 1.10 1.10- 1.10-, Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0. 0 2 4 143 0 0 164 0' - - Added Vol: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 52 0 0 43 0- PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, -- Initial Fut:,. 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 195 0 0 207 0. User Adj: ,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00' - PHF Adj:, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00'1-.00 1.00' PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0- 0 2 4 195 0 0.-207 0: Reduct,Vol: - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 Final Vol.: 0' 0 0 0 6 2 4. 195 0 0 207 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical.Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx :xiocx - 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx `xxxxx xxxxicxk�ot 'd:'' FollowUpTim:xx-------------- ___________II_______________ --------------- ... Capacity Modulei - - Cnflict Vol: ,xxxx ,xxxx xxxxx xxxx-;xxxx - '207..207 xxxxxxxxxx xiccx xidcc xxxxx""' Potent Cap.:,xxxx xxxx xxwcx .xxxx'-xxxx 839. 1376 xxxx xxxxx -xxkx k-,00, xicxxx. Move Cap.: -xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx 839 1376 xxxx xxxxx: xxxx xxxk' xxxx,v ____________I______________________ I'--------- _______II_______________� .. Level Of .Service Module: - - Stopped,Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx,. xxxxx xxxx 9.3 7-6 'xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx'xxxxx LOS by Move:... * x' x x x A A - Movement: LT - LTR -RT IT - LTR - RT LT -LTR - RT LT LTR - RT Shared .Cap.: xxxx ,xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx--xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxicx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -7.6 xxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx': - Shared LOS: x x x x x - x A x xx x x ApproachDel: ., xxxxxx 9.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * A Traffix-7.5.1115. (c) 2001. Dowling Assoc. Licensed. to. URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE % ?A CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:42:07- Page 5-1 _________________- __________-__ ___________-_-------- __________________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - --.: Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions-" .Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM.Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)- ` Intersection #2 Calle Cedral (NS)l Pauba�Rd_-(EW). _ Average Delay (secfvehY: 9: 3:. Worst Ca§e Level Of:Servlce - A ..- - Approach: North Bound_ South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L _ T-- R L .T R L T R Control: - Stop Sign :..Stop Sign.Uneont rolled :Uncontrolled - Rights: _ Include Include - - Include-- Include Lanes: - 0 0 0 0 Ot.0- 0 0 0, 1- 0 1_ 0 0 0 -----------II----' ----- --II---- ------ --II---- - 0 0 1 0 1 - 1 ------------I .- Volume Module: ---- Base Vol: 0 0 0- 0, 0 2 4 125 0- 0 156. 0- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.16 -1.10 1.10 1.10- 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1 10 Initial Bse: 0 0- 0. 0 0 2 4 138 0 0 172 0 - Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 52 0 0 43 0 PasserByVol c- 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0- Initial Put: 0 0 0 - 0 0 2 4 190 0 0 2150 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00-1.00,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _i.0o .1.00 1.00 1 00" PHF Adj.; -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00.1.00 1:00 1.00 1_00 1.06 - - PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 190 0 0' 215 0 Reduct Vol:. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 Final Vol.: �0 0 0- 0 0 2 4 190 0 0 215 0 - Critical Gap Module: .. Criticali.:Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. xxxx 6.2 -4.1 xxxx xxaDcx xxxxx xxxx -300D x FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxxxxx IDXXX xxxx 3.3 xc 2..-2 X= xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx , ----------- ___x, ------ 11______ _____ _�I____ _________�I____ Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx .xxxx xxxx 215. ", 215 xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxiva: Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx ,xxxx xxxx. 830 4 367 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. xx:o k Move Cap.. xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 830 1367 xxxX xxxxx -xxxx 11______--------- --------- ______11------ xxxx ------------ I --------------- Level Of Service Module: ._________I Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.3 7.6--xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: *� # s ' - ' A 'A + - # + # .. + Movement: . - LT.- LTR - RT LT -.LTR - RT LT.--LTR -"RT LT -I'LTR - RT. ... - Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx .xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx =00t, xxxx xxxx xxxxx .. Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx -7-6 xxxx -xxxxx xxxxx xxxx -xxxxx Shared LOS: # '- ** * * ' A. £ ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * A S� Traffix 7.5.1115.(c) 200I. Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN` CROSSROADS, IRVINE Y ZZ. .-., `S s ,s CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0). Wed Jul 23, 20012 i7:42:08' - .Page 6-1 _________ _ _------- ----------------------------------------------------------- LDS Church-Traffic�Impact Analysis:,: - Cumulative (2005)-Growth Without: Project'Conditions Mid -Day Peak,Hour"(Sunday) -------- ----- Level Of Service Computatiori Report. .' 2000 HCM.Unsignalized Method(Future Volume Alternative)- ##xxxxxxxx#x##x#i###x#xx+♦##x###xxxx xxdii>i*xx:Cxtia�*x#*��xix###x#*3xxxxxx*+xxix. Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)l Rancho'Vista Rd'. (EW). - x#x#xxxxxx##xxx#x#xxxx#x##xif,xxfx##•i#xxi4x4ii*4i4ix##i ixixis xixxixi3xxxxi#x#x#x - Average Delay (sec/veli).: 9.8 - Worst Case Level Of Service A, x##'.xxxtf##xxx #x x##ix*xxx*#!:!*f!#*##xliif ii**i;f#:�i#*#tiixiiif xlf>lxxx#xx3i#*#x* Approach: North Bound:South Bound "Bast Bound '"West. -Bound Movement: L - T- R L T - R L - T- -- R L - T -. R.,... ____ 11--__ ---------------- 11____ ______ I Control: Stop Sign.-_ - Stop Sign 'Uncontrolled Uncontrolled R4nhf.: - TnrinAn TnrinAr TTr1,,Au Tnnl..An .. Lanes:. 0 1 0 0: 1 0 0.0 0' - 0 -0 0 0 1 -0 0 1 0 0 0 ____________I______________II_______________11_______._:_____11----------------- Volume4 - Module: Base Vol: 21 0 4 0 0 0 -0 '63 8 5 "- 92 k ' Growth Adj: -1_10 1_10 1.10 1.10 1 10 1..16 1.10 '1.10. 1�.10 1.10. i.10 1'. 10 Initial. Bse: 23 0 4 0. 0 0 0 69 9. 6 101 O Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 34 0- 0 34 PasserByVol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00`-- Initial ,Fut: 23 0 4 0 0 0 0 103 9 6 135 User Adj.f 1!i00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00-•1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - PHF Adj.i 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1- 06 1.00 1.00 1'. 0'0 1.00 1.-00, 1.00 1.00'' _ PHF Volume: 23 0 4- 0 0 0 0 103 9 6, "135 Reduct. Vol: 0 0 -0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 _ Final -Vol.: 23 0 4 0 0 0 0 103 9 6 135 Critical Gap Module: - -. Critical:.. Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6:2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -4 :1 - 3866t, k3bbiko FollowUpTim; 3.5 xxxx 3,3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxkik xxxx xxxior -2.2 A*ki "iotioci� -" Capacity Module: - - Cnflict-Vol:-254•xxxx 108 xxxX xxxx xxxxx -xxxix'xxxx xxxx, x 112 xxxx Potent Cap.: 739 xxxx 952 xibcx xxxx ... xxicxx xxxx xiooc xxxxX'.1 00 x%c _,.�. xxxxx Move Cap.: 737. xxxx 952-' xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1490 x7otic xxxxX ----------- I---------------II---------------II---------=-----II--------------- Level Of Service Module: - Stopped Del:xxxxx, xxxx 8.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx -7.4 xxxx x� LOS by Move: # x A # # - # # x x A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT: LT - LTR - RT. LT.- LTR - RT - Shared Cap_: 737 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx-xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxx- xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:. 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -xxxxx xxxx x, xD= -- 7:4' xxiat Xxb= Shared LOS: B * * * * * * * -* A ApproachDel: 9.8xxxxxx. xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A * * * -- Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS', IRVINE'� 2 / CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0) Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:42:09Page 7-1 LDS Church Traffic..Impact Analysis.. Cumulative (2005) Growth- Without.�Project Conditions ^ Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday). --------------------------------- Level Of Service.Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) - axaaxxaxxxxaxaaxaxaxfax+�+x♦f xxxfffxaai:if if xxxfaxxafxaxaxxxaxx•i xx xx xxxxxxxxxxaxx. Intersection #g4Camino Romo (NS)•`/ Corte Villosa (EW) x aaxaaa x.xxaxxaaaaa•xxxaaaaatxxffxxxfxai;+3•�xx�xax*:aaaxa a,x,xxixxxxxaxxaxxxxMxx x.„ . . Average Delay (sec(Jeh) 8 4_ Worst Case -Level Of. Service: =A - axxxxxaxxxxexxxx x'fx'fixxxxxffixxfff x�x fxfi#i',�aitxaxx+xaxa+as.a a+xx x'x xxx x-; rxwaif+rtx . Approach: North Bound.. South Bound - .East Bound West Bound - Movement-.:' - L T - R .L - T R L .T - R L - T - R. ------------- I----------- _____II_______ _______ -_____________,I1________.______� Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign -. Uncontrolled... ..Uncontrolled. - Rights:' - Include,- Include Include Include - Lanes: D' .0 0 0 .. 0 1 ,0 0 0 1 0. 1. 0 0 0.. 0. ,0 1 0 1 _ I-------------=-11 -- --= 11 ---- - --- II ------- --- Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0. 0 0 1 0 513. - 5 - 0 - 0 1 2 t.%.. Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1..10 1-.10 -1.1.0 1.10 1.10 1..10. 1.10..1.16 Initial`Bse: 0 0- 0 1 0 6 14 6 0 0 1-2•-1F. Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 '0.': - PasserByVo1: 0 0 0 0 0-- 0 _ 0 0 0 0- 0 -'.0 Initial. Fut: 0 0 0 1 ,. - 0 6 14 - 6 - 0 0 - i- 2i _ User Adj: 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00:1.00 -1.00 1.00. 1..00. 1.00, - PHF-AdjE„ 1.00-1:00 -1.00 1100 .L.00 1.00 1�:00 .1..o0 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00i PHF Volume: 0 0 _ 0 1 0 6 14 6 0 0 1:'.2� Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0:;� Final Vol.: .0 0 0- 1 0 6 14-. 6 0 0.- 1 2�: Critical Gap Module: : Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. ,6.,,4 xxxx.. .6..2 .4--1.xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxit Fo1lowUpTim-.xxxicx xxxx xx:cpcc 3_S xxxx 3., 3. 2.2 xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx:x:aOcx _____I� ______________II__. ___________II ------------- Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 35. xxxx .,.1• 3.,xxxx. xxxxx xxxx..xxxx xxxxiczd.- Potent Cap.,:. xxXx-xxxx xxxxx.. 983 xxxx 1089 1632.-xxxx xxxxx xxxx:xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx. xxxx xxxxx-- 976 xxxx 1089,. 1632, xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxX Level Of Service Module: .. .. Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx .8.3 7.2.xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx: xxxxx - LOS by Move: " • :'4 A .xA ,A Movement:- .LT - LTR- RT LT - LTR - RT .. ,LT - LTR -.RT LT -. LTR - RT Shared Cap_,:. xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxk Shrd StpDelc•xxxxx -xxxx xxxxx,xxxxx. xxxx.xxxxx 7.2 xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS :.., f- f f- x x x A... ApproachDel: xxxxx _8.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: x A * .x Traffix:7.5.1115 (c): 2001 Dowling _Assoc., Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE pn CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0) ,Wed Jul 23, 2003 17:42:08_ Page 8-1 ______________ ________________________________.__________________-_-_ - LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions: _ Mid -Day Peak -Hour (Sunday). -- ---------- Level Of Service Computation Report. - 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative). Intersection #5 Corte Villosa _(NS),'4 Pauba,.Rd.(.EW).: - .. Average Delay :(sec/veh)-. 11�.11- Worst. Case. Level.: OE- Service: B ++v:+x+'+i++�i++i�i'a+xi>•++xxxx++i.+++++++++++++++xx**++x+++++++++t++++++++•+++++++ , Approach: North Bound South Bound .Eagt Bound. West Bound Movement: _ L - T - R L T .- R, •. B T - R - L - -. T-; R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled , Uncontrolled Rights: - Include Include: Include include* Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 .0. 1.. 0 1. -0 r0. 1. 0 1 .0 0 -1 ________________ _________��____ ________ .1[__7____________1{____ ---------- I: Volume Module:-�- Base Vol: -12- 2 4- 2 1 7 9 .109- 7 7 125 - 8 ., Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1...10 1..10. 1.10. 1.10. 1.10• 1.10 .1 :10. 1.10 -1.10 1.16 Initial Bse: 13 2 4, 2 1 8 10 120 8 8 138 --9- - Added Vol: 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 52 0 0 43 0• PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 13. 2 4 2 1 8 10 172. 8 8 181 19 User Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,.00 1.00 1.00 1.,.00 1..00 1;00 PHP Adj:- 1-,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.06 1:00 PHF Volume: 13 2 4 2. 1 8 10 .172 8 8 181 Reduct Vol: 0 0_ 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0;! Final Vol.: 13 2 4 2 1 8 10 .172. 8 8 181 9 Critical Gap Module: - Critical--Gp 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4..1 4.1 �ocxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx -:2.2 xxxx xxxx x I____ __________��_____________ 11 -___ _ ___________ Capacity Module:, - Cnflict Vol: -396 396 172 395 395 181 189 xxxx xxxxx .180 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 567 544 877 569 545 867 1397 xxxx xxxxx 1408'xxxx xxxxx . Move Cap.: 556 537 877 -559 538 - 867 1397 xxxx,xxxxx 1408'xxxx xxxxx -: ------------ I--------------- ____________ _______________-------- __.____{ Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 9.1 xxxxx xxxx 9.2 7.6 xxxx xxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx ' LOS ,by Move: * * A * * A A * + A * - Movement:- LT - LTR - RT LT_- LTR RT- LT - LTR RT LT - LTR - RT. Shared Cap.: • 553 xxxx xxxxx 551 xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. x3cxxx Shrd Stpbel: 11.7 xxxx xxxxx 11.6 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx, xxxxx 7.6 xxxx kxxxx Shared LOS: B * - • B * * A * * A. ApproachDel: 11.1 9.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE v2S MITIG8-- CUM GROWTH MID-DAYWed Jul 23, 2003 17 4931 . _.. - Page 1-1 _ { ________________ _ ___________________._______:_ __________-________-_- LDS Church.Traffic Impact Ad'alysls-. _ - Cumulative (2005) GrowthWithout' Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday)-. - -------------------------- Level-Of Service 'Computation Report'- - -2000'HCM 4-Way Stop Stop Method(FuturB Volume Alternative) ii+ Intersection #6 Meadows'Pkwy (NS)/ Raricho' Vista Rd-. (EW). Cycle (sec): 0' -- Critical Vol./Cap.- (X) - 0'.175 Loss Time (sec): 0.(Y+R = 4. sec) Average Delay (see/veh)*d ` 9'.3 Optimal Cycle:.- 0 Level Of Service: A »»x++»+++»+»»+»+»xx»+»»++»+»»r»++++»Rx»+»»x+»+++x+x»»»»ixii»x»»+»++fxx,r+x•+xi+»+ Approach: --North Bound - South Bound East Bound - West Bound Movement: L -'T - R "-L-'T -'R-li - T- R.... ,.L -: T - R. Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign - Stop sigh Stop Sign Rights:' Include - Include Include .Include. Min. Green: 0 0 0 '0 - 0 0 0 '0 0 - 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2" 0. 1 - 1 0 2 0 -1 0- 1 0- 1 0 ----- -------- 11`-------------- 0 1 ------------- 0 1: b -- ------ - Volume Module: --------------- ' Base Vol: 22 165 12 21 181 18 24 29 25 - 17 41 28_. Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 }.10_-1.10 Initial -Bse: -24 182 13 23 199 20 26 32 -. 28 - 19 �'45- 31 - Added Vol;. - 9 11 - ' 0 -- 12 12. 25 . 25 0 9 .0 .. 0 11 PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 33 '193 13 35 211 45 51 32 37 - 19 45 - 42 User Adj: 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11: 00.1.00 1.100r PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OD I` bb.-`�00 -. PHF Volume: 33 193 `13 35 211 45 51 32 - 37 19 45.42 Reduct Vol-: :0 0' 0 --0 0 0 --0 0 - 0 - 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 33 193' 13 35 211 45 51 32 37 19 45 42 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 '1..00.. MLF Adj: 100.1 00 1`60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.90 100 0 1.60 Final Vol. 33 193 -13 35 211 45 51 32 -`37 19 45 42 . Saturation Flow Module: - - - Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1001 00 1.00 Lanes: 1-.00 2.00 1.00. 1-c00 2.00 1.00 0.86 0.53 0.61 0.36 0 86 0.79 Final Sat.: 545 1184 666 555 1207 681- 458 314 371 -_____11____ 19,5 4B4 490 „.1y,. ---- __________I_______________��________-______j1_____ Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: ` 0.06 0.16 0.62 6.06 0.17 0.07 0.11 0.10 0:1d 0::10 6.09. 0:09 , Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 9.4 9.6 7.9 9.3 9.6 8.1 9.8 9.1 8.8 9.5 9.3 8._6, - Delay Adj: 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.4 9.6 7.9 9.3 9.6 8.1 9.8 9.1 8.8 -9.5 9.3 8.6 r LOS by Move: A A A 'A A A A A A A A A ApproachDel: 9.5 9.3 9.3 9.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 ApprAdj Del: 9.5 9.3 9.3 9.0 - LOS by Appr: A A A A- Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE - �Y MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH MID DAYMon Jul 28, 200316:13:03 Page 1-1 LDS Church Traffic. Impact Analysis cumulative (2005). Growth Without Project Conditions -With -improvements Mid -Day Peak. Hour (Sunday) ---------------------------------------- ----------------- Level Of -Service -Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations' Method: (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection N6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista:Rd. (EW)-.` - - #>»»4#»'r#/»**»>i Cycle (sec).; 0 - Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.120 Loss Time (sec)': @ (Y+R 5 see) Average Delay (sec/veh): ` 8119 Optimal Cycle: 60 'Level rOf Service: A.. - »»>#>}#.>s,x,:##,###x.x*x»##.##»x##x�>t#f###♦*#>##»>»'»xrx ix»s»#'ti •v»»»»x#»»y';�t♦##»##} Approach;,. North Bound South.Bound.. East Bound • West Bound Movement:: L _ T < R L- T -' R L T -' R L T R Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted - ° Permitted Rights: Include Include - Include Include - Min. Green: - 10 10 10 10 1 10 10 10-' 10 -'.10 10 1 10 - 10 ' Lanes: 1 6 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 .0 -1 0 1 0:. 0 '1 0 1 0 ____________--------------- 11--------------- 11--------------- 11_______________� Volume Module: --- Base Vol: 22 165 12- - 21 181 18 : 24 29 25 17 41 28 . Growth Adj.: 1..10 1.10 1.10 1:10 1.10 1.10 1.101.10 1.10 `1.16 1.10 1.16 Initial-Bse: -24 182 13 23 199 20 26 32 28 19 45 -31 Added Vol: 9 11 0 12 12- 25 25. 0 - 9 0 0 11• PasserByVol : 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 - 0. - 0. 0 O Initial_Fut: 33 - 193 13 35. 211 -45 51 32,37=`19`45. 42- User Adj:. 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1•.06 1.00 1:00 1.00 ... PHF Adj 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 '0.95 0.95 0.95 0.'95 0.95 PHF Volume: 35 203 - 14 37 222 - 47 54 34 38 20 -47 44 ' Reduct Vol:. 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 35 203 14 37 222 47 54 34- - 38 20'47. 44` PCB Adj:, 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1:.00-1.00 1.00 MLF Adj.,. 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1`.00 1.00 Final Vol.:- -35 203 14 37 222 47 54 34 38 20. 47. 44' ------------ I--------------- II--------------- LI--------------- II______________ -I. _ Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:- 1760 1700 1700 -1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700'- ` Adjustment: 0•.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 Lanes: - 1.00 2.00 -1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.87 0.51 0.62 0.36 0;83 0:81 Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 1395 866. 990 581 1402 1299 - Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03' Crit Moves: **** •*>* Green/Cycle: 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 Volume/Cap: O.Q4 0.11 0.02 0.04 0.12 '0.05 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 Delay/Veh: 6.4 6.7 6.3 6.4 6.7 6.5 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.3 14.3 14.3- User DelAdj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.:00 1.00 1.00, AdjDel/Veh: 6.4 6.7 6.3 6.4 6.7 6.5 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.3 14.3 14.3 DesignQueue: 1 3 0 1 8 1 '1 1 1 0 1 .1 _ Traffix- 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 ➢owling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVIN8 D21 MITIG8 = CUM GROWTH MID DAYWed Jul 23, 2003 17 .---------------------------------------------------------- 49.42 --,;' ` Pa e'.1-1 Y LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis _ Cumulative (2005) Growth Without: Project Conditions Wm. Mid -Day Peak. Hour (Sunday) - ------------------------ Level ------ ----- Of Service Computation ------- ----- ----- Report - -----------• 2000 HCM 4-WayStop Method.' (Future .. Volume Alternative).. »ffxxfxx+f»xxxxxf xx xf+xxf xxxxxf xiet+ff♦xxx.fff»fiy»x»+fxxffaxfx+•itf»;f fx»x»»xrf»x. . Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/:Paubd Rd... (EW)-. .. •- fixiffxxxfxxifffxxxx»xf xffff xfff lfxx»»»cif+f»}»x»»fff xfixif l+x»»f+»ffixf»if»ff+x Cycle (sec): 0 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.202 - Loss Time (sec)- 0 (Y?R 4 sec). Average Delay."-(sec/veh): 9:-:9- Optimal 'Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A ff xx»i:x»»ffi,i»axf xxif ii.f»xxx»»»+xx,»,i»»iiif if+ff++ii if»xf x: i;�xf if :wx+»ff�»'3»»`x+»» Approach: - North Bound south Bound.. East Bound .;:West Bound Movement: L - - T - : R L - 7 - :- R L - T. - -R . L - .T - R _ ________I_____-_______ Control:. Stop Sign, ________ Stop Sign - _.--- __ I' :Stop Sign...Stop ____--- _____ Sign Rights: Include -. Include . Include :.- Include Min. Green: 0 0 0:- :. 0: 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1- ------------ - .1- 0 2 0 1 --------- 1 0.1 -0_: 1 ----- ---- 1 0 1. 0_ 1 ------- - ---------- Volume Module_: Base Vol: 40 147 25 --7 -164 30 -27 53 37 26 57 15`•- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.1.0 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10-1.10 1.10 1.20 1. 10. 1 10 - - Initial Bse: 44 162 28 8 .180 33 30 -.58 41 29 • 63 17 _ Added Vol: 1 11 0:. 9 .- 12 0 0 5o 2 O 42 9 .. - PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0- Initial Fut: 45 173 28 17 192 33 30, 108 43 29 - 105 - 25 - User Adj: 1.00 .1..00 1,00 1.001:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-0.0 1.00-1.. 00 1.06 PHF Adj: 1�:00 1- 0.0 1.00. 1.001-.00 :1.00. 1.00 1c00.1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 PHF Volume: 45 173 28 .11 192 33 30 - 108 43 -29 .105 25 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 Reduced V61: 45 173 . 28 _.17 192 -33 _ 30. 106 43 29 105 - 25 PCE Adj. 1.00 1.00 1, 00 1.00.1.00 •1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00. 1:00. 1.00 -. - MLF Adj: 1,.00 1..06 3.00 1..00 1..00 1�. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1•-.60. 1.00 Final Vol ,45 173. 28 : 17 192 33 -30 108 43 29 105 25 i' Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00, 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 _ Final Sat.: 515 11.13. 621 514: 1110 620 497 .536 596- 493 532 589 - Capacity Analysis Module: - - - - - - Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.16 0.04 0:03 0.17 0.05 0.06 0.20 0.07 0.06 0.20.E 0.04' - g? Crit Moves: ix+• f+xf - +ifi _ _ »»x» - r.>a Delay/Veh: 9.9 9.9 8.4 9.6 10.1 8.4 9.9 10.5 8.7 10.0 10.5 8.61' Delay Adj: 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.9 9.9 8.4 9.6 10.1 8.4 -9.9 10.5 8.7 10.0 10.5 B.6 S LOS by Move: A A A A B - A A B A - A B A -_ ApproachDe1: 9.7 9.8 10.0 10.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 _ 1.00 - ApprAdjDel: 9.7 .9.8 10.0 .. 10.1 LOS by Appr: A - - A A B - - xxxfxxfxixxxxxxffxxxf»xxixxxx»xxf xf»»i»+»f xxx+i+xf»x»i»»»xf if x»xfxxixx»xxixxx»if Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE'' Y),7v •'. ,j i MITIGS - CUM GROWTH MID DAYMon Jul 28; 2003 16:13:21 Page 1-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth Without Project Conditions With Improvements Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) ---------------- _____ ______________________________ ______________________ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) - +xxxxxixxxxx++xxxxxxxxxx++xxtxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx�-x xxx:xxxxxx x•xxxxxxxxxxxxxat Intersection q7. Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd. (EW) x xxxx+ixxxxxxxxxx+xx�xxxxxxxxRixx•xxxxJixxxxx �xxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxx:xxxxxxxxxxxx x'x x. Cycle (sec): 0 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.146 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R = 5 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.5 Optimal Cycle: 60 Level Of Service: - B xxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxLxaxxxxxxxxxxxix Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T. - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------II------------II--------------- II --------------- Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include. Min. Green: 10 10 10 _ 10 - 10 10 10. 10 10 10 10. 10 Lanes: - 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 _0 1 0 1 ____________I_______________ _______________ __-___________________________� Volume Module: Base Vol: 40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15' Growth Adj.: 1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1..10 1.16 Initial Bse: 44 162 28 8 180 .33 30 58 41 ' 29 63 17 Added Vol: 1 11 0 9 12 D 0 50 2 0 42 9. PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 45 173 28 17 192 33_ 30. 108 43 29 105- 25 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95- PHF Volume: 47 182 29 18 203 35 31 114 45 30 110 27 Reduct Vol: 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 47 182 29 18 203 35 31 114 45 30 lid 27. PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 47 182 29 18 203 35 31 114 45 30.-110 27 ------------ I--------------- �I--------------- I1___------ _----- �i_______________� Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 17o0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1:00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94. 1.00. 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 -1600 3400 1600 1600 1700 1600 1600 1700 1600 ---- _.1--------------- II---------------- --------------- ____________-__� Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.02 0..07 0.03 0.02 0..06 0.02 Crit Moves: 'xxx .•xxx Green/Cycle: 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0:41 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Volume/Cap: 0.07 0.13 0.04 0.030.15 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.06 0.04 0.14 0.04 Delay/Veh: 11.1 11.3 10.8 10.7 11.4 10.9 9.1 9.8 9.2 9.1 9.8 9.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.1 11.3 10.8 10.7 11.4 10.9 9.1. 9.8 9.2 9.1 9.8 9.0 DesignQueue: 1 4 1 0 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx�xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxtxxf Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE V21 I APPENDIX E CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - CUMULATIVE (2005) GROWTH WITH PROJECT CUM. GROWTH.AM (0`+ P) Thu Jul 24., 2003 08.:27:36 Page 4-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysist ,, - - cumulative (2005) Growth WithProjectConditions AM Peak Hour --------------------------------------------- -- -P-----.------------ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000. HCM Unsignalixed, Method (Future 'Volume Alternative)'' #xxx#xxxxxi#,i#+#.#xx-###f+#3x#•#r#*-x#-#r>#vxx;xr#s##x##xx'x##'##xi..x####x###########x## Intersection #1.. Green Tree Rd.(NS)/ Pauba- Rd.(EW).:,. #x#xixxx•xxxxxxxxrx#xi#xx#•#xxtxvY-i'xxxxxf+#'i xxxx#»ix####xi#»##x»x#i#»###�i#r#i##• Average Delay_(sec/veh).: 16.5 Worst,Case..Level Of'SeMce:- C ###xxxx�+########x###v xxxxxxx#xxxa•##»'x##+.x•xii#''#x�i'#3#x'x xx»x##xxi#+»###i#+##### Approach: North Bound South Bound " ,East Bound -West Bound Movement! L - T - R L - T - -R L. - T . - `R L - T - R.. - -- 1------------- 14----- -- -- II -------------ll-------------- Control:! Stop Sign - -Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rightsc -Include - Include Include Include Lanes-: 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1! 0 0 0 1 '0 0 0 6 0 0- 1 0 - ------------ I-------------- II --------------- 11------------ ___11____ ---- 7-71 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 229 0 0 515 2- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.19 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3. 252 0 0 5672 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 155 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: -'0. 0 0 4 0 4 3 312 0 0 722 2 User Adj: - 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1. 0.6 1:00 1.06 1.06 1.06 PHF Adj:'' 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.60 1.00 I.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF .Volume: 0 0 0 4 0 4 3..--312 0 0 722- ''2.. ReductVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 '.0. Final _Vol.:. 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 312 0 0 722 2- _ -Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx`xxxxx Fo1lowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx'xxicxx' 3: Sxxxx 3.3 2.72 xxxx xxxioi'Xxxxx xxzx xxx7oi '-- ------------ I -------------- __II___------------ _________11_______-__-_._.I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1041 xxxx 723, 724 xxxx xxxxx xxxc xxiix- xicxxx Potent Cap:: xxxx xxxx xxxxx '257 xxxx 430- 888 xxxx xxxxx xxxx?0= xxxilx. Move Cap.::•. xxxx ioocx xxxxx 256 xxxx 430888 xxxx xxxxx xxxic xxxx" xxxxx ------------- I ----------- ____II--------------- II______---------- 11_______________I Level Of Service Module: - Stopped--Del:XXXxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx- 9.1 kxxx xxzxx xxxxx xylkk 'xxxxx LOS by Move: x x # ♦ x x A Movements`, 'LT LTR - RT LT.- LTR - RT -LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT' Shared Cap'. xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 321 xxxxit xxxx =6xxxiix . xxxx xxxic xxx iz Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 16.5 xxxxx. 9.1 xxxx xxxxz xxxxx xxxx"xxxxx Shared LOS: + * * * C * A * + * +- ApproachDel xxxxxx 16.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * C * + Traffix 7.5 `.1115'(c) 20O1 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE E3 CUM GROWTH AM (0 + P) Thu Jul 24; 2001 08:27:36 - Page.5=1' . _____-______-_________________________ _*___- --____ ` LDS Church Traffic .Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth.with. Project Conditions AM Peak Hour ----- ----------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method .(Future Volume Alternative) xxx##x#xxxxxf xx###a++#ix#iixxa x.•#ifxxf+fxxwx�ix�axf#i#fx,##xx3i'f.ff x-f "ixtif xx #x xx,x Intersection #2 Calls Cedral"(NS)/ Pauba Rd. (Ew). f#xff##fx###ffvffx##xff#+xff##xffffx.�##f#i�yexff#ixf,ffa.ff f�f •i#,#x##w3x:#f#♦+•i if Average Delay (sec/yeh): 19.2 Worst CaseLevelOf Service:' C xi xxxffxxxxx#xxfixifif xf Yf�R if,e xf iif#ffx#xf Rf xxx##.#_#.#.;tff xffxx xf iff�ifffffx#'xf #^Rf Approach: North Bound1 South Bound.. _ E�aet Bound... ;West Bound Movement: -- L T - R L T - .- R L T R L T ____ _____ _______________II________ _____II ______________.II Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled_ .Uncontrolled: .. Rights: 'Include Include Include Include Lanes: '0 0 0 0 0. '1 0 0 0 0 .1 0 0 _0 0` 0 T 0 1 - ------------- II__________._____��_____ __________________I Volume:Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 229 0 0 -518 :Z. Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10- initial Bse: 0 0 0 3 D 0 .1 252 0 0 570 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 155 6 PasserByVol: 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a.. Initial -Fut: - 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 ,.312 0 0 -725 User Ad]:. 3.00 1.00 1.00- i.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00- 1-00 1.00 1.00; PHF Adj;. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1400 1..00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00' 1.00 PHF Volume: 0- 0 0 3 0 0 1 312 0 0.725 r2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0- 0- 0 .0 - Final Vol.: 0 0- 0 3 0 0 1 312 0 0 725 2, � N. Critical Gap Module: Critical.. Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx: .6..4 xxxx xxxxx 4-1 xxxx xxxxx.xxxxx xxxx xxxxX` FollowUpTiiO:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx:; 3,5 xxxx xxxxx 2.2xxxx xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxxx` Capacity Module: _ Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx -xxxxx 1039 xxxx xxxxx 7.27-xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx icxxxx - Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 258xxxx xxxxx .886 xxxx xxxxx xxxx XRxx xxxxx- - Move Cap.:-xxxx xxxx XXXXX 257 xxxx xxxxx 886 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------- I_-------------- II--------------- I.I--------- ______fl_______________I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx. xxxxx 19.2 XXXx"xxxxx. 9...1. XXXX XXXXX. -XXXXX $xxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ... i..•, # . ' C- Movement:- LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR -RT .LT.-_LTR - RT, Shared Cap._: xxxx xxxx xxx-ACK xXXX xxxx Xxxxx xxxx .XXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xXXx xxXXx xxXXX XXXx XXXXX .9.1 xxxx.:aocxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx: . Shared LOS: - .. x * �.. # • #, A x. . x ♦ f+;:.. ApproachDel:. xxxxxx 19.2 XXXXXx XXXXXX ApproachLOS: - f C Traf fix. 7.5. 1115 (c)..2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to. URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINB Eu CUM GROWTH AM (0 + P) Thu Jul 24., 2003 08:27:36( - - Page:6 i __________________________________________________________________________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005)Growth WithProjectConditions - - AM Peak Hour Level Of Service -Computation Report - 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Wuture.Volume Alternative) »»x»»»xxxx»»iwwxxx+»»»i»xw»»»»»xw»x»♦+•»ii�»iixxx»xiwi»»:exxxixx if»»sx�ri»xk»»i»i.' - . Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)l Rancho Vista�.Rd. (EW) - xw»»»aw»xwxxxwxx�»»»»x•+w»»ww:�x•,vwww:»w»x»»»i'»xxx»»w Average Delay (sec/.veh):. 19.Q. Worst Case Level Of Service: C' »xx»x»»x»xxxfxx+>»f»»»xfr»w»»»»fwf wxwif:if»x»f xwxi»»»xxxff:tf www»»»»x»»»»i»»xwxwy •.. �`•:. • Approach:North Bound South Bound 'East Bound West Bound ..; Movement: L - T - R. L- - T - R L - T - R L- T- R Control: .Stop Sign' -Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights:Include Include •Include -Include Lanes: 0 1 0 0 .1 0- 0 0 0 0`. . 0 0 0 1.0 0 1 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol:. 45 0 24 -0 0 0 0 297 -60 67 462 - 0 -. Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10,. Initial. Bse: so 0 26 0 0. 0 0 327 66 74 508 - -0- - - Added Vol: 1 0 0. 0 0 0 0 15 1 0 7 01:,- PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.. 0 0 0, 0 0 - Initial Put: 51 0- 26 0 0 0 0 342 67 74 -515 0 User Adj: 1.00.1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1A0 1:00 1:.00 1_00 1.00. -1.00 -.. PHF Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1:00 1:00 1100 1:00: 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 - PHF Volume: 51 0 26 0 0 0 0 342 - 67 74 515 0 - . Reduct Vol: 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..0" Final Vol.: 51 0 26 0 0 .0 0 --342 67 74 515 .0 i Critical Gap Module: - Critical Gp: 6..4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. 4-.1 xxxx xx: FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx:. 3,3 xxxxx xxxx"xxxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxxx :2:.2; xxxx;xxxxx `x 0' - Capacity Module: .. . Cnflict Vol: 1038 xxxx 375 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 409. xxxx xxxxx - Potent Cap.: 258 xxxx 676 xxxx -XxxX XXXXX xxxx xxxx xxxxx- 116,1 xxxx. xxxxx Move Cap..: 245 xxxx .676 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx.' 1461-xxxx xxxxx.. . ----- I--------------- _______________ --------------- _______________� Level Of Service Module:- Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx 10:5 xxxxx'xxxx xxxxx: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx, 8.1 xxxx-. xxxxx - LOS by Move: » + B + » w » - x » A Movement: LT - LTR - RT. IT - LTR - RT:. -LT -. LTR - RT. IT - LTR - RT , Shared Cap.:. 245 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxx.xxxxx' Shrd StpDel_- 23.5 xxxx-xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx .. xxxxx- a.3 xx:ix xxxxx' Shared LOS: C ' w » • » • • - x A » x. ApproachDel: 19.0 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx - ApproachLOS: C • » Traffix 7.5.1115 (c).2001 Dowling Assoc,. Licensed to:URHAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE. 0J CUM GROWTH AM (0 s P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 08.27:36' .- ------------------------------- Page -'7=1-� t LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis_.. Cumulative (2005) Growth:With Project Conditions AM Peak Hour __:___ __ __ ____________________ ______ Level Of.Service Computation. _____________ Report ___._______ - 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method(Future -Volume Alternative)-' Intersection 84 Camino Romo (NS) / Corte:Villosa (ER) :- - - Average-Delay (sec/veh): 8..5 .. .;Worst Case Level Of Service.' A Approach:: - North Bound.`.- South Bound East Bound West. Bound Movements L- T- R L -- T -.R -L T , R L T R Control: Stop Sign. Stop Sign --Uncontrolled Uncontrolled - Rights: - Include Include Include: Include Lanes:- 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1.. " 11------------"- 0. 1 0 00 0 0 1 0 1 --.-------'-=---�,.. ------------ -'----------- Volume Module: .: ;:,;• - - Base Vol: 0 0 0 - 7 0 43 21 - 6 0 0 4 4 Growth Adj:. 1__10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 .1.10 1..10 1.10 1 10 Initial Bse:. 0 0 0 B 0 47 23 7 0: - 0 4 ` 4: Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 O PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0- 0 -0 0 0' 0 0 0 - Initial Put: 0 0 0 8, 0 48 24 7 0 0 4 4 i User Adj: 1:.00 1:00 1:00 1.00 1.00-1-.00, 1.00 1.00. 1;00 1.00 1c00 1.00; PHF Ad] : 1;00 1e-00 1-00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00: PHF Volume: -0 0 0 a 0 48 24 7 0. --0 - 4. 4 ? _ Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 00 _ Final Vol.: .0 0 0 .8. 0 48 -24 7- 0 0 4 4' - Critical Gap Module: -. Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx_ 6_4 xxxx- 6.2 4.1. xxxx -xxxxx xxxxx xxxzxx$boc',•. FollowUpTim:xx•xxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx'. 3.3 _______________ 2,2_xxxx xxxxx ------- 1.1 xxxxx xxxX "xX- ------------ _ 7. ____________I_______________ Capacity Module: - - - Cnflict.Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 59 xxxx 4 -9 xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx•.XXXX xxxxx 953.xxxx 1085 1624 xxxx .xxxxx xxx xxxx xxxxx - Move Cap:: �cxxx xxxx xxxxx 942 xxxx 1085 1624 xxxx.-xxxxx xxxx xxxx- x. xxxx __________ _I_______________ _________ Level of Service Module: _____-________��____ - -. Stopped Del:.xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -8 9 xxxx. 8 5 7..2 XxXx.,XXXXX xxxxx )COM xxxxx LOS by Move: * " * A * A A # * x * * - Movement: LT - LTR - RT ELT -- -LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT - Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxx :. xxxx xxxx xxxxx:... xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDelcxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxXo xxxx xxxxx 7.2 xxxx_xxxxx xxicxX xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * ' * * ' # Ax-- ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.5 xxxxxx. xxxxxx . ApproachLOS: * A Traffix 7.5:1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS-, IRVINE 2 CUM GROWTH AM AO + P) Thu Jul 24,. 2003'68:27c36.- Page-8-"1 LDS Church Traffic Impact 'Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth With:Project Conditions AM Peak Hour - - Level Of _Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method.,(FutureVolume Alternative) x##x#xx#�xx#•#+xix#i#ixx-3#xixa#:�##xix3�f>#+i##xx#xia#3 i#�#.#r###rtxa#s#xxxxx#Y##'# ..° ..' Intersection 45 Corte Villosa (NS)' f-Pauba Rd .(•EW) �#x#•#i#x#####:###•v##a�+####xx##i###+:+x####+.+x#xx######,�•♦x�##iv`vi##r#x x'#•:2Y#x# .. �.." .. Average Delay (sec/veh): 27,1 Worst Case Level Of Service: D #########xx####•#�#xx#x####:�x#.e#ii:�xx#####n#ex#»#+#,w#x#»#x###,##'##+x##x##x#i##tom .. Approach: North Bound -South Bound' East Bound - West Bound Movement:. L - T :,.: R L - T•-...:-R. L.. _, T-. �_ R.. ,; L' - .T-•-=' R .. . ---------- -----_ ------ -. Control: StopSign Stop Sign'. - Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: O 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 .. Q. I. 0 0 1,, O,c 1 0 "0 1 _---------- -------------- _��____ _-_______,11.____ ____,___ '11___------------ Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 42 17 - 19 12 13 49 27 193 10:. 10 412 18 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.110 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 1.10 .1.10 Initial Bse: 46 19 21 13 11 54 30 212 11 11 453 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 62 0 0 `159 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 46 19 21 13 14 55 31 274-- 11 !:11 612-`.'20:. User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1-.00"' PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00• PHF Volume: 46 19 21 13 14 55 31 ..274 11 --11 612 20f - Reduct Vol.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Final Vol.: 46 19 21 13 14 55 31 -274 11 it 612 20 i Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1-xxxx xxxxx' 4.1 xxxx. xx� FollowUpTim: 3-.5 4.0 3.3 3..5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx _._______._____ Capacity.Module: - Cnflict Vol: 1014 990 274 995 981 612 -632 xxxx xxxxx --285 zxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 219 248 769 225 251 497 960 xxxx xxxxx 1289 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 180 238 769 200 241 497 960'xxxx xxxxx .1288.xxxx`xxxxx - Level Of Service.Module: - Stopped Del: xxxx 9.8xxxxx xxxx 13.1 8:7 xxxx xxxxx 78 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • * A # • B A • #- A • -x Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT. LT - LTR - RT. -LT-- LTR rr RT',. Shared Cap_: 194 xxxx xxxxx 219 xxxx- xxxxxxxxx xxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx - Shrd StpDel:: 32.7 xxxx xxxxx 23.7 xxxx xxxxx 8.9 xxxx xxxxx 7.8 xxxx xxxxxr:: Shared LOS: D • x C # * A • # A • # -ApproachDel: 27.1 - 16.7 xxxxxx-xxxxxx. ApproachLOS: D C - x t Traffix 7.5.1115 -(c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed•.to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE cl-1. CUM GROWTH AM (O + P) Thu Jul 24," 2003 08:27�-36 - Page -9•=1 LDS Church. Traffic.Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions- - - AM Peak Hour ------------ ------------ ----- ----- - Level Of .Service Computation Report -- ---- ----------- 2000 HCM 47Way Stop:,Method (Future Volume Alternative)'.. - xxfxx9txx.*.x xxxxf*txf;xxxfffxx*#x#fii:*#x;*ixx3xxilx##*xix*if xf#iY##i'ixf l if•wx*xi Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista Rd. PEW} """ ., ' x#xxf x.fix;w#f#,xfx,xxx##ffxx•#fxf#ixx#ff#xtx ix#y##f>*xfft*xxif *.V i#xxx*f,�#ixif r'#stiff# a Cycle .:(sec) 0"... Critical Vol./Cap. (X). 0.501- Loss Time (sec): G,(Y+R +-4,rsec)• Average .Delay'(seid[4eh):' 13.:.8' optimal Cycle: -. :: 0 Level.Of: Service: --: B f xxif#xx-ffxxx#ff#ffx#xxx":ixxxxf##ii*>+xxiirxxxxxxfiixxxxxx �*'tifx+#x*f i�efx:#*f #xxxv• � Approach: NorthBoundSouth Bound East Bound West Bound ".. .. Movement: L - - - T - • R L- _.,., � T R b L )- ; T -. R . L S'--" T -- R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign ------------ .Stop Sign " Rights:. Include- Include - Include Include- ., Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0. W-- 0 -� Lanes: - It 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0• 1 O 1 0 Y0 O 1 0-- 1 0 . Volume Module: - Base Vol: 194 182 13 -18. 212 124 58 114 139- 38.. 12B 40. '. Growth"Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 "1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 I.IO Initial;-Bse: 213 200 14 20 233 136 64 125.153 - 42 1.41 ` 54 Added Vol: 1. 9 1 5 - . 0 - 6 - - ,12 --. 0 3 - I 7. _ PasserByvol-: .0 0 0 0D . 0. 0`" ..'0 0 0 -0 0 Initial; Put: - 214 209 15 25 241 .142 ' 76- 125 '156 43 141 61 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1`.00 PHF Adj-: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, "1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume 214 209 15 25 241 142 76 125 156 43 141 - 61 Reduct Vol: -.0 . 0 0- :0" 0- 0 .0 0 0 �0 0 I'll 0 Reduced Vol: .214 209 15 25 241 -142 - •76 125 156 -43 141 - '6; PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00--1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 - MLF Ad]: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00" 1.00 1.00-.-l'.00: " Final Vol : 214 -209 -. 15 _ 25 241 .142 76 125 156 _ .__ __,__-___11_____ _______ _ - 43 :..___ 141 61 - _____-__ � . ___________ I_____________ Saturation Flow .Module:- -- - - - Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1-00 0.42 0.70 0.88 0.35 1.15 6.50 Final Sat.,: 428 900 .489 _ 414. 884 484 193 r.326` 442 _______________ --------------- 154 ------- 521 -234 ------------ I ------------ Capacity Analysis Module:`-- - Vol/Sat: 0.50 0.23 0-.03 0".06 0.27 0-.29. 0.39 0.38 0:35. T.28 0.27 0.26 Crit Moves: , Delay/Veh: 18.3 12.5 9.9 11.5 13.2 12-.5 14.8 14.5 12.9 13.2 12.8 12.3 -, Delay Adj: 1.60:-1.00 1.0o 1.00 1.00 1.0o 1.0o 1.00 1.o0 1-.00 1.0o 1.00" AdjDel/Veh: 18.3 12.5 9.9 11.5 13.2 12.5 14.8 14.5 12.9 13.2 12.8 12.3� LOS by Move: C B A B B B B B B B _B B ApproachDel: 15.2 12.8 13.9 12.8 .. V Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 15.2 12.8 13.9 12.8 LOS by Appr: C B - B B_ xffxxffxxxxx#ffxfffffxxxxfxx+f xffffxfffffffxxxxxxxxxf xffxx,ixxff xxfffxfxif ff xf xxf Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001'Dowling Assoc. Licensed.: to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE - MITIGS - CUM GROWTH AM (0 +Mon .7u1-28, 2003'.16r02:23. Page-1`--1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions With Improvements AM Peak- Hour " ----------------------------- - --------------------- Level Of Service Computations Report -2000 HCM .Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) #ffww»»»»»ff»ffw#»wwif»fffff-f#f#vffff»lf xfffffffffffff if #ffYf fwiifff#If iff fffff � " Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy (NS)-/ Raacho`Vista.Rd-. :(EW)' f riff#fifxf iffffif iff»f#ff##xw###f xf#1ff #f YYfYffif #Yif M#if i44A*f4il#f ill l it 14: 4*if Cycle (sec): 0 'Critical" Vol./Cap. (X): 0.295 - Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R =;;5, sec) Average. Delay-(sec/veh): 10;5 Optimal Cycle 60 .Level- :Of Service: fffffaffflfffffx##lffffff#ffffffiffffxlfff#f xlwf#xiiffYiYiffff ifxl#if riiif s,iaff-•'.. Approach: -North Bound. South 'Bound East Bound - West Bound " Movement: L - T R �L - T - - R- L - T R -L --, T" - R -------- '--------------- II_________�_____ II____ _________1I____ Control: Permitted. Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include - Include " Min. Green:- 10 10- 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2. .0 1 0 1 -0 1 0 0 1.0 1 0 -- __--_-__--__I_______________I�________-______II_____-___-_____II_______--______L.. Volume Module: Base Vol: 194 '182 13 18 212 124 58.114 •139 .38 128 49 - Growth Adj,: 1_10 1.10 1.10 1.16�1.10 1.10 I.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1r10 Initial Bse: 213 200 14 120 233 d36 64 125 153 42 141 -54'". Added Vol: - 1 9 1 _ - 5 8. 6 120 3 1 0 --7- PasserByVol: 0 .0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'b, Initial Fut: 214 209 15 -: 25" 241 142 -176 '125- -156 43 141 '61 User Adj: 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '- PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0..95 0:95 0.95 0.95 .0.95 0-.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 - - PHF Volume: 226 220 16 '26 _254 .150 80 -132 164 45 148 -.64' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0'- 0 0 ,Reduced Vol: -226. :220 16 ::5 :26 : 254 '150 - 80 132 164 45 -148- PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.0'0 1.00 1A0' MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00' r; 0"0 1.0.0.1.00 1.00 1.00 Y:00 1.00, Final Vol.: -226 220 16 ---26 254 _150 '80 132 164 45 : 148 64 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 17.00 1700:1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1706 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1..00 0..94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1-:00 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.43" 0-.67 0-.90 0.16 1.12 0.52' Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 .694 1147 1427 5801907- 825' ___________________________ _-_______.---------------- ------------ Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.07 0-.09 0.12 0.12' 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.08 Crit Moves: **** Green/Cycle: -0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.39,0:39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 Volume/Cap: 0.30 0.14 0.02 0.03 0.16 0.20 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.20 - - Delay/Veh: 9.8 8.8 8.3 8.3 8.9 9.2 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.2 12.2 12:2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 9.8 8.8 8.3 8.3 8.9 9.2 12.8 12.8 12.8. 12.2 12.2 12.2 DesignQueue: 4 4 0 .. 0 5 3 2 3 3 1 3 1 fit»f»»#fff»wiffif»»#lffffff wf wffffifif wffif#f»»f»»1f#»f if iff#f#»ffflfiff iff if if - Traffix 7.5.1115.(c)2001'Dowling -Assoc. Licensed to'URBAN -CROSSROADS, IRVINE C'' CUM GROWTH AM (0 + P) -Thu Jule 24, 2003 08:27:36 Page'10=1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis. 1, Cumulative (2005)�Growth With.Project Conditions: - 91 AM Peak Hour - Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-way Stop, Method .(Future Volume Alternative) xxxx+xx{xixax#++x+;x+xxx+x xxxx+ixi;�x+++xxxx�#.,txxxxxx+xx+xixxxixi:.x#x++++ixx++xxx: .. - Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/.Pauba; Rd. (EW-) - - #+:#+x##xiy++i.,>+xxxxxiit#x:xxx#+>xxxxixx++xxxxx Cycle (sec):, 0 - CriticalVol./Cap. (X): 0.893 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R =: 4. sec) Average Delay-i(sec/veh): 23.6 Optimal Cycle. 0 Level Of Service: C. +xx+xxx:ixxxx#x�+x#>++xx+ixx+#•xx#�+x+x•#+#+++{x+##+++#++x##x##x##x+#+++++xx#xxx Approach: North.Bound South Bound ...East Bound West Bound - Movement:. L T R :L :. .T - R L - ,T -,' R L `- T R -- - Control: Stop Sign, Stop Sign 7 Stop, Sign- Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include include Mina Green: 0 0 0 0. - 0 0 0- 0- 0 0 0 0 . Lanes: 1 0 2 0: 1 1 0 2 0: 1 1 0 .1 01 1- 1 0 -1 0. 1 ___________________________ _______________ -------- _------ If --------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 119, 241 23-- 15 259 •111 42 88 83 - 48.212 34 Growth-Adj,: 1.10 .1.10-1..10.1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 '1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 131..265 25 17 285 122- 46 . 91 91 -53 233 37 - Added Vol: 19 7 0 9 5 4- 3 51 9 0 136 1 , PasserByVol: 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 - Initial Fut: .150- 272 25 20 290 .126 49: 148 100 53 369 38 User Adj-: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00. 1.00 '1.00 1.00.1 00 PHF Adj o-. 1-.00 1.'00 ,.1.00 1.00 1.00 -1-00 1.00 1.00 -1..00 -1-.00.1.00. 1.00 - - PHF Volume: 150 272 .25 20-290 126 49 :148 100 - 53 369. 38 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Reduced Vol:._1,50 :272 25 . 20 290 126 -49 148 100 _53 369 38 P.CE. Adj:.: 1.00 1..00 •1.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 -1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00.1.00- 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00:1- Final Vol.: 150 272 25 20 290 126. 49 148 100 53 '369 38 - ____I_______________ --------------- --------------- ___________� Saturation Flow Module: - - - Adjustment.: 1.00 1.00 1:00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00`1.00 1.0o Lanes: 1.00 2-.00 1.00 1.00 .2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 L:QO., Final Sat. 371 780 . 418 364 776 418 ;35.0 372 398 376 .413 428 Capacity Analysis Module: - Vol/Sat: 0.40 0.35 0.06 0.05.0.37 0.36 -0.14 0.40 0.25 0,14 0.89 0.09 - Crit Moves: #r+x x++x #++x xxx+ Delay/Veh: 17.6 15.7 11.2 12.5 16.3 14.0 13..8 17.2 13.7 13.2 49.2 11.3 Delay Adj: LAO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 17.6 15.7 11.2 12.5 16.3 14.0 13.8 17.2 13.7 13.2 49.2 11.3 . LOS by Move: C C B B C B B C B B E B _ ApproachDel: 16-1 15.5 15.5 41:9. Delay Adj: 1.00 - 1.00- 1.00 1.00 - - ApprAdjDel: 16.1 15.5 15.5 41.9 LOS by Appr: C - C - C- xxxx+xxx#+++++xxx++xxx+x+xxxx+txxxxxxxx+xxxxxxxx+xxxxx+#xxxxxxxxxx+xxxxxtit#+x+x Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 .Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE .. sa MITIGB - CUM GROWTH AM (O +Mon Jul 28; 2003 16:02435' - Page '1-1 - LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis. - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions With.Improvemehts AM Peak Hour - _________________________________________________-_________________ Level OfServiceComputation Report - 2000 HCM Operations. Method (Future Volume Alternative) »>•»»»+fxx>.»r»x+>x>:»»».>»>.»»+>»»>.xx»,>»»xxxi»>»»>i>»3»»»>3»»*»�f'>»'>»- Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba.Rd. :(EW) - - - -- - »+»>*>»».»,ii.>3»:».s>»,»>»»>,»»xi:x»>x»>y>v»>»r>»>:t•>vi»vf»:i+Y'»`i »'>iie#»ii»>f a':#f'+. >'.. . Cycle (sec): 0 Critical-.Vol./Cap. (X)': 0.379 LOSS Time (sec.)::. 8 (Y+R 5 sec) Average Delay '('sec/veh)': 13.2 Optimal Cycle::- 60. Level'Of Service: �`'- B - »»»»»>»xxx»x>»»»»*>+»>»»»»»»»six>♦»a»xx»f f.>»*>»axx »xx>x♦>» »+i»»» »>ix♦»i i�-' .... Approach: North Bound South Bound East.Bound West Bound Movement:: L T r. R. L, T R c L T R .: L_:.: 'i:. T: _ R .. - .. ------------ I----------------- II_______________II._-.____________II__.____________I Control:: .Permitted. Permitted Permitted Permitted - - - Rights. Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - 10 1010 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 -1- 0 2 0 1 1 0, 1 0 T 1 0 1 0 1`" ------------ I------------ y__II-------------- _I,I--------------- II_______________I Volume Module: Base Vol:. :.119 -. 241 23 : 15 259 ill 42 88 83 48 212 34 ' Growth Adj: 1.10.1.10 1_10 1.10.1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 V'10 - - Initial-Bse: 131'.265 25 �17 285 122 46 97 91 53 - 233 -137 -- Added Vol: 19 -..7 0 3 -5 4. 3 51 9 0 136 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0, ,0 0 Initial Put: 150 272 25"20 290 126 49 148 100 53 369 - User Adj:, 1-.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0-.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95. 6.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 - PHF Volume: 158 286 27 21 305- 133 52 156 106 56 389 40 Reduct Vol: -0 ,- 0.. - D: .:, 0. 0 0 oo .. 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol,, -158 286. 27 e21 305 133 :52, 156 =106 -�56 38940 PCE Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1. co MLF Adj: 1.00 1.06 1.00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Final Vol.:. 158 286 27. 21 305 133 52 ,156 106 56.: '389 -,40 Saturation.Flow .Module.: - ' Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 17001700 1700 - Adjustment: 0.94 1:00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 :1.00 0. 94' Lanes:-1.-:00 .2r00: 1.00. 1.00 2-00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 ,1.00 1. 0.or 1:00 - - Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600-1600.1700 1600 1600 1700. 1600 ------------ I ------ ------- ��_______________��-------------- ____-______� Capacity,.Analysis Module: i. . - Vol/Sat:. 0.10 0.08 0.02.- 0.01 0-09 0-.08 0.03 0:09 0-07 0.03 0.23 0.03-`- Crit Moves: **** **** Green/Cycle': 0.26 0.26 0.26 0-.26 0.26 0.26 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 01'61 Volume/Cap: 0.38 0.32 0.06 0.05 0.34 0.32 0.05 0.15 0.11 0.06 0.38 0.04 Delay/Veh: 20.8 18.8 16.9 16.8 19.0 19.8 4.9 5.5 5.2 5.0 7.1 4.9 User DelAdj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 20.8 18.8 16.9 16.8 19.0 19.8 4.9 5.5 5.2 5-.0 7.1 4-.9- . DesignQueue: 4 7 1 1 8 3 1 2 1 1 5 1 Traffix 7.5-1115 (c)- 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE III MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH AM (0 +Thu Jul 24, 2003 09:21:59 :,Page I- . 1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth With ProjectConditions AM Peak Hour -------- ------------------------- Level Of Service. Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized. Method (Future Volume Alternative -)- Intersection #14 Westerly Access Dwy. ANS) .1 Pauba Rd-1,(EW). Average Delay (sec/veh): 17. 0 ...,Worst: -Case -Level of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound .% East Bound West Sound Movement: L , T - R L - T - R L - T-- R 'L ' T: - R ------------I---- ------ 11-- ---------- 1-7-, ------- 11--l- --------- Control- Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled. Rights: Include Include .-Include:. Include Lanes: 0- 0 0 0 Q 0 0 11 0. 0 0-': 1. .0 0 :0 0. 10 0 1 0 ---------- -------- ---------- ------------ 11-- ------------I. - volume module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0` 503 0 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 11-10 1.10 1-10 1-10 1-10 1.10 1.10 1;10 1.10 Initial Bee: 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 553 6 Added Vol: 0 0 0 .2 0 1 2 58 0 .154 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut.: 0 0 2 0 1 2 311 0 V 707 3' User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 - -00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.001 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 2 0 1 2 311 0 0 707 3 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0': Final Vol.: 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 •3111 0 0 3 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4.xxxx 6.2 4.-1.xxxx xxxx5c xxxxx xxxx FollowUpTim:XXXXX xxxxxxxxx 3.5 yu,= .3.3 2.2 xxxx x=x XX2=, ____________1______________ -----------I-------------- ------ ----------- ------ Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx.xxxx xXXXX 1024 XXXX 709 710 xxxxx Potent Cap-: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 263 xxxx 438 898 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx- - Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 263 xxxx 438 898 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I ------------ 711 --------------- ------- 11__ ------------- Level-Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx XXX= xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT.- LTR RT LT - LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 303xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx-- xxxxxxx xxxicx Shrd Stpl)el:XXXxx xxxx. XXXXX xxxxx 17.0 xx-'= 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx X� xxxxx Shared LOS: C Y A ApproachDel; x_cxxxx 14.0 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE'. . ec -11 3 3 1 91 T" MITIGS - CUM GROWTH AM (O +Thu Jul .24, 2003 09:22r05, Page I LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions -�- AM Peak Hour - __________________ _____ __________ _ _ ________________________________ ______ Level Of Service Computation Report - 2000 HCM Unsignalized-.Method(Future Volume Alternative) - #+###x##xi.#�x##axx•######.##########x###:#i#r#x##x###ii#i`i i'###i#xi i#f ♦;i i'#`##fi#f� .. ' Intersection #15 Easterly Access Dwy. .(NS) /.Pauba Rd --(EW) .##.#####x.###xx#.#,#,#..x+,##x#xx##ai.#i#xxx:#xv'##xw#v##x':rx xi#'f vf.f f#f xff#''"#'i#i#i•+3eixxx '- -. Average Delay (sec/seh):- �. �YT, 6..Worst Case Level Of Service.. C #xxxxxxx;ixx#;x#ixxxxx#x>x.xxsxxx#xxra x.####'##xt�#+xvxxxxx x'xfx'i`i#x x'#i'�-iti#siw�xiiixri '... Approach:. North Bound - South Bound - East Bound 'YTest Bound Movement: - L - T - R L - T - R- L T- RL - T R Control: - Stop Sign - ''Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include IncludeInclude Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 1! 0 0 0 '1 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 ` _______________. --------------- ---------- ______L.'.____ ;. '. Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 503 0 - - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1�10.1.10.1:16 - Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 553 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 60 0 0 156` 9 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 10 Initial.Put: 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 313 0 0 709 - 5r User Adj:, 1•_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1d00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj; 1.00 1.00 1.00 1�.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.o0 1:00 1.00 .. PHF Volume: 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 313 0 0709 - 5 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. Final Vol.: 0 0 0 3- 0 1 1 313 0 0 709� 5 Critical Gap Module:. -:. Critical. Gp;xxxxx xxxx,:xxxxx. .6.4 xxxx 6.2 4:1 xxxx xxxxx-' xxtx xx=ihoc + FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. 3.:5 xxxx 3.3 2:2 xxxx 'xxxxx'xxxxx'xxxxxzxxx^ Capacity Module: - - Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1027 xxxx 712 714 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxkx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 262 xxxx 436 .895 xxxx xxiocx xxxz'xXiti[. ]Xxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 262 xxxx 436 895 ?O= xxxxx -X)icx xxxx xxxxx ? - __I ----------- ___________________________________ Level Of Service Module: StoppedDel>xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx icX,3tk 'kxbk xxxx'xxxxx LOS by Move: # .x .x x # x'- A Movement:::. LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LT.R RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 291 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxx)Ut xxxx xxxx'-xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 17.6 xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxkxx kxxx`jox Shared LOS: * # • • C # 'A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 17.6 xxxxxx xxxxxx - ApproachLOS: > C Traffix 7.5.1115 (C)' 2001'Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to-- URBAN _.CROSSROADS, IRVINE - bI22 CUM GROWTH PM (O + P) Thu Jul'24,, 2003 08k29:10 Page 14 1 ------------------- _--------------------- _____________________________________-_. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis. Cumulative (2065) Growth With Project Conditions PM Peak Hour -------------------------------------------- ______ ______ ____-______________Level Of..Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized,Method, ..(Fgture. Volume :Alternative) x»xxxxxxx»xx»»xx»:xxx+x»x»xxixxx»xxxx x,»:ixixi.xx:xx>..xx.xx,»x�x-�x»x»:s:x x=x xx»i'x ixY'i»i Intersection #1 Green Tree Rd %(NS)/ Peuba Rd (EW)��- xxx»xx»xxxxx»x»x,x»»xxx»»xx:xxxxxi»x�xxxk;,�,:!»ivx»»»x»»xx,x:»»-xxrxxxxwx'xxxxx»»x:»x`i»»x` ... . Average Delay (sec/veh).. .Worst Case Level Of Service. & - Approach: North Bound _ South Bound .East Bound West Bound Movement: L� T R. L - T . R L- - .T -R_ L - T - R -- ---'-- --'- ---' __------ ----_'__- ---------� Control:. Stop Sign -.Stop.Sign .Uncontrolled ,Uncontrolled _... Rights: - :Include Include <Include - Include Lanes: -0 0 0- 0- 0 0 o 11 0- 0 o 1 :0 0 O 0 -0 0 1 0 ____________---------------- II_----------- .___.IL-------- . ------ II._________�._.__� - Volume Module: Base Vol: . 0. 0 0. .4 .0 4 6 197. 0 0 148 3. Growth Adj: 1.10 ¢,10 1.10 .1.10.1.10 1.1.0 -1.3.0 1-:10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1_10 Initial Bse: 0 0- 0 `4. 0 4 7 217 0 0 163 3- Added Vol: 0 0 0 0, 0- 0 0. 74 0 0 47 0�' PasserByvol. 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 -.0 0 0 Initial-..Fut: 0.-.. 0 0 4 0 4 7 291 0 0 210 - 3 User A61 1.o0 1.00 1.00 i.* 1-.00 I.. do 1.00. 1:.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 PHF Adj: 1100 1.:0o 1.00 1.00..11:00 1.00 1,00 1•:00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 PHF Volume• `0 0 - 0 -.4 0 4 7 291 0 - 0 210 3 Reduct Vol: - 0 0 0. 0 0 0 O 0 0. 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0- - 0 4 0 4 7 291 0 0 210 3-- Critical Gap Module Critical .Gp x;o=-xxxx xxxxx .6.4-MUM 6.2 - 4:1 xxxx )Oxxx-xxxxic xxxx'•xxxxx Fo1lowUpT,,im,xxxioc.xxxx:-oLx= 3..5 xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx-xxxxx xxxx•xxxx7c Capacity -Module: Cnflict Vol. xxxx xxxx xxxxx ,515 xxxx .211 -213, xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx. xxxxx _.- Potent Cap,,: xxxx..xxxx xxxxx 523..xxxx 834: 1369 xxxx xxxxx-.locat xx.xxxxx Move Cap_-, xxxx Xx xxxxx .521 xxxx $34.1369 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx: _____ _____ ____ I .___ _ _____ II_ Level Of Service Module: ______________ _____ - I - - . Stopped Del.xxxxx•xxxx mODDE xxxxx.xxxx xxxxx. 7.:6 :xxxx .xxxxx xxxxx xxxx;xxxxx .. _ LOS by Move•. ,,� x. » ;x x ,» .p:� Movement: LT- LTR--RT LT - LTR- RT- LT -LTR - RT LT - LTR -.RT Shared Cap..: xxxx x=; xxxxx xxxx. 641:xxxxx .xxxx. xxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd Stppel:xxxxx xxxx -xxxxx xxxxx 10.7 .. xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx�-xXXo Shared LOS: » x • • .:B .x. A ApproachDel: xxxxxx _ 10.7 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS:». B » x xVa Traffix-7.5.1115r'(c).2001,Dowling -Assoc. Licensed to. URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE --_1 - CUM GROWTH PM (0 + P) _ Thu Jul 24, 2003 08:29[10 ' Page 5-1 _____________________________________________,____________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis �- Cumulative (2005). Growth With Project conditions PM Peak Hour - ____________________________________________________________ Level.Of Service Computation•.Report 2000 HCM-.Unsignalized Method ':(Future''Vol. ne' Alte'tnativ'e) xwwwxxwwxw x,xw xxxxxx x.w �xxxx♦xxxx+xww x.x,r-rx+xx�xixxxxwxx�;txx'i,xxx+a+xi3 xf ix>ixxt:i i,+ ' 1LIc eL sec cull qc l,a llc l.eulal oval/. Yal1La'"rzu TOW,/,'=•" `.:•.. .'• ..• xxxxxxwx xxxxxxix xx w:wrxwxa.+:ixxi.ix.x xrxtxxr-isxwxxw'xv-:e'34xxixi3",#}#xaxxi�iiiff xiiia ixxa... .. . Average Delay (sec/veh)-:.. 10.6•. _. -'. Worst Case Level Of. Service: xtwwiwxixyxxx xxxxxxxxexxxwxwxxwxixxxxxxa xx x.w xxfixiw:ix3Ax#'x#�xxiii�iixxx+iit��iii Approach: North Bound:. South Bound - East Bound - - `WestBound Movement: L-- T- R L- T- R L- T -R L- T- 'R_,: R- ---------- I--------- ______II--------- ____ I.I _____ ___g__ 'I ------- Control: : -.Stop Sign Stop Sign UncontrolledUncontrolled Rights: Include Include - -` Include - Include _ Lanes: .0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 it 0 0' 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 - Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 .0 0 2 0 2 3 200 0 0 150 2 - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1:10• Initial.Bse: 0 0 0 2 0 2' 31-'220 0 0 165 -2 - Added Vol: 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 47 0- PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 Initial Fut: ..0 0 0 2 0 2 - 3 294 .0 0 212 2 User Adj: 1.00 L00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.o0 1:00 1.00 1S00 1.,00 1.00 1000, - PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1'.00 11:'00 -'1.00 -' -- PHF Volume: 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 294 0 0 �212 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 294 0 0 212 2- - Critical Gap Module.: - Critical. :Gp:xxxx xxxic x�xxxxx- 6 4.. xxxx`: -6:2 ,: �4:1 xxot iocxxx xxiocic It/ocx FollowUpTimexxxxx xxxx xxxxx' 3:wS xxxx-'- 3.3'- '2...2 xxxit xxxxie xxxxx xxxx xxxxx - =^:r. .Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx-xxxxx 513 xxxx -'212 214-xxxx xocx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ' Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 525 xxxx .833 1368-xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. xxxx xxxx xxxxx 524 xxxx -833 136B xxxx xxiixx xxxx boxx xxxxx - Level Of Service Module: - Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx -xxxxx T:6 xxxx-xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxki. LOS by Move: x w x x w w p- Movement: LT - LTR - RT- IT - LTR - RT LT - I.TR RT. 'LT:- LTR - RT Shared Cap.:: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 643 xxxxx xxxx--xxxx. xxxxx'. xxxx xxxx -QD= Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 10.6 xxxxx 7.6 xxxx,xxxxx-xxxxx xxxx xxxxx - Shared LOS: x x x x B x p, ApproachDel: xxxxxx 10.6 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: • B • • - Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001-Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE E15 CUM GROWTH PM (O + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 08 29:10 Page•511 _-___-_ -LDS Church.Traffic .Impact Analysis 8. Cumulative (2005) Growth .With ;Prof ectCondit ions _ - - PM Peak Hour - - - ----- ------ -- ------- ---- -Level Of Service Computation.Report " 2000 HCM Unsignalized.:Method-,(Future Volvme.AlternatiVe)' fafiffifffffifffiffifffi>1ff###ff 1f#ff•f'ffifitf,x:fii.if.iif-ff###if if xiY Yf'i #':1Y #^!i'4#v' - Intersection #3 Camino Romo (NS)/ Rancho Vista.Rd•; (EW) . x##f##ffifff�x##af xf#�#�f if#ffffifffff:t.fffffiffi#�iy####xi+x:ff #fff#i##if#f #i'i ii�! AverageDelay (sec/veh): 9.9:- Worst Case Level Of. Service _ A xx#fxxt�ixxxxxx �iffx#>#if iefffffff;vff if as###yffa-f,f+xf.f ffff###f#x•f:fvfYffyiii4ff t'. . Approach: North Bound South Bound East ':Bound West Bound Movement: L T : R L. ---- - T -. R ----- L ---------"'-' T R - -L T_ R '-• ` --- ---'- Control:. _ --'-- Stop Sign Stop - Sign Uncontrolled,,._ --'--- Uncontrolled !'• _. - Rights:-_ ,. Include- Include. . ;. Include Include. ' Lanes. 0 1 0 0 1 0 0. 0 0- 0 0 0 0 1 0- 0� 1 00.. 0 Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 10 0 6 0 0 0 0 123 :. 12 7 82 0 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1:10 1:10 1.10 I.m 1.10 Initial -Bse: .11 - 0 - 7 0 0 0 0 135 13 8 90 .0. _ Added Vol: 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 1 0 34. -cy - PasserByVol: 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0- -0 0- O Initial Put: 12 0 7 0 0 0. 0 -.163 14. 8 124 .' 0 it User Adj 1.00 1.00 1-,_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1 00 _ PHF Adj:_ 1..00 1.00 1-.00 1:00. 1.00 1.00 1-.00.1 ::00 1:00 1.00 LC 00" 1.00,-"} PHF Volume: 12 0 7 0 0 0 0 _163 14 8 124 O r +F3 Reduct Vol: 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 00 --0 •' - - , Final Vol-.: 12 0 7 0 0 0 0 163 14 8 124 a-' Critical Gap Module: - CriticalGp 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 14:I XXXX-;X� .. Fo13owUpTim:: 3..5 xxxx.,., -------------- 3_3 _._��_-_,___________ xxxxx xxxx,.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2•2 xxxx xxxxx ------------- .I. Capacity Module: - '`- cnflict Vol: 310 xxxx 170 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxx 'xxxxx :178 xxxx x3ottx -` Potent Cap- 6.87 xxxx 87.9 xxxx xxxx. xxxxx- xxxx xxxxlxxxxx-.14:11 x=c< xxxxx,- , Move Cap.: 6.84 xxxx 879. xicxx xxxx XXXXX xxxx --------------- xxxx xxxJcx 1411 xxxx xxxxx' ------------ ________-------- Level Of Service Module: _------- - . Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 9.1-xxxxx xxxx xxxxx,xxxxx.xxxx xxxxx -'h.6 xxxx:xxx�tx! LOS by Move- ' * A # # x .# ..f x :A. #. +..: .... ... Movement: LT --LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT - .LT- LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT.+-'� Shared Cap.: 684, xxxx xxxxx xxxx XXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxx.. xxxxx.: xxxx xxxx: xxxxx Shrd StpDel: -10.4 xxxx _xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx Xx ' xxxxx 7, 6 xxxx-xxxxx. SharedLOS: B # f # f x' f x - f. A x ••.• ApproachDel: 9.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx .. ApproachLOS: A R.1 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001,Dowling Assoc. Licensed to. URBAN-:CROSSROADS.,� IRVINE ., i CUM GROWTH PM (0 + P) Thu Jul , 24, 2003 08:29:10. Page 7-1 ---------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------- LDS Church Traffic -Impact -Analysis..: Cumulative (2065) Growth. With project Conditions PM Peak Hour ---------------------------------------- _______________.____-___________-_______ Level Of Service Computation Report. 2000 HCMUnsignalized Method, (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #4 Camino Romo (NS) /,.Cort�e,,Villo a,(EW) Average Delay (seclveh): -8.5' Worst Case Level Of Service- A'.:: Approach: North Bound. South.Bound ..,East Bound, West Bound. Movement: 1; T I- R L - T R, L - T ,:R L - T - R ------------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------------- Control:. stop Sign- Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: include Include Include include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 7� ------- 117 --------------- ------ --------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 7 0 .9 7 4 0 0 7 4- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1;10 1.10 1;10 Initial Bs6: 0 0 0 8 0 8 4 0 0 9 4; Adde&vol: 0 0 0. 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G.': .Initial Fut: 0 0 0 a 0. 11 9 4 0 0 8 4 User AdJ: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.061.1- PHF Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00' PHF Volume: 0 0 0 8 0 11 9 4 0 0 8 4�, Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 8 0 11 9 4 0 0 8 4 Critical Gap Module; Critical,qp:xxxxx xxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 4-1 xxxx xxxxx Xxxx FollowUpT iT: xxxxx3.5 xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx=%" ---------- ----------- -7 --------- --------------- --------------- Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 30 xxxx 8 12 xxxx XYXXX. xxxx xxxx.Xxxxx Potent Cap.: iq= xxxx xxxxx 990 xxxx 1089 1620 xxxx xxxxx M6CK xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 986 xxxx 1080 1620 xxxxxxxxx. xx2cxxxxx xxxxz _____-______I_____ _________ --------------- --------------- _______________� Level Of Service Module: .Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.7 xxxx 8.4 7.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxxx LOS by Move: A A A Movement: LT - LTR RT LT - LTR RT LT LTR - RT LT - LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx. Xxpm xxxxx .- Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xx= 7-2 xxxx; xxxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -::. Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.5, ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.5-1115. (c) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN, CROSSROADS, IRVINE -0-7 CUM GROWTH PM (0 + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 e6:25010, Page 7-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2605) Growth With Project Conditions PM Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- Level Of'Service Computation- Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future V81-um(i Alternative)'' Intersection #4 Camino Romo (NS) / Corte- V'illosa: - (EW) Average Delay (sec/veh)-- :.8.5 Worst Cade Level Of gervi:CO: A Approach:,. North Bound, South Bound'' East Bound 'West Bound 'I Movement: L T R L - T R L :R I, - T R ------- _-7i --- ---- ----- 11 ---------- --- 11----- _11_________-__ � Control:;Stop Sign Stop Sign Un6ontrolled uncontrolled' Rights: include Include Include Include Lanes: o 0 0 o a 1. 0 0 0 1 1 6 0 0 0 6 1 o I --------------- ------ -------- ------------ Volume Module� Base Vol: 0 0 0 7 0 9 7 4 0 0 7 4 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.16 I10 Initial;Bse: 0 0 8 0 10 8 4 0 0 a 4 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0. 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 8 0 11 4 0 0 9 A User Adj- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1;00 1.00 l000 1.00 I .- 700 11 ; 06. 1.00:. PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 8 0 11 9 4 0 0 8 4 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 8 0 11 9 4 0 0 8 4 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxixxxxxxx xxxxx. 6 LA xxxx 6'2 -4.'1 xxxx xxxx '=bcc FollowupTim:xxxxx xxxxxxxxx 3-5 xxxx 3.3 '2': 2 :_1 xxxx'xxxxxxxxxx -. °xiaooc -----------I--------- --------------- -------11-------------- L Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 30 xxxx a 12 Xmix xxxxx` xxxx lbbx Potent Cap.: xxxx'xxxx xxxxx '990 xxxx 1080 1620 xxxx xxxx xxxx x>000C Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 986 xxxx. 1680 1620 xxxx xxxxx 20bbc xxxx xxxxx ____________I_______________--------------- --------------- W -------------- Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxXxx xxxx xxxxx 'S. 7 xxxx 8.4 7.2 xkxxx'XXXXX :666C xxxxx LOS by Move: A A A# x x * Movement: LT LTR - RT LT LTR RT LT -LTR - RT LT LTR RT: Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx' xxxx.xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxx Xxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx XXXXX X-=x xxxx xxxxx7.2 >b= xxxxx xxxxiE xxxx-xxx)ck' Shared LOS: # # x x # xA ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: x A 3 H45 0 3 r I i' A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. 'Licensed to'URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE CUM GROWTH PM (O ,+ P) Thu Jul 24, 12003 08:291:16. ,Page 8-i -------------------------------------------- _------- ________________________ LDS Church Traffic.:lmpact .Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth'Wi'lth. Project d6hditi61fs PM Peak Hour - ----------------------------------------------------------- __________-___________ Level Of -Service 'Computation Report' 2000 HCM Unsignalized-Method--(.F.uture Volutfte-Abterhative) - x+x+xxxxxixxxxxxixxx x:x:xx;x:xxxf x,x.x:+:xxxx.x.ixxxxx xi riwr•iv,•:rix•y xxxxixx:xrixxxxxai�`>''i'�;+. ... Intersection.95-Corte Villosa.,'(NS),l: Pauba Rd'.(EW) x xxxx+x xxx++xx•i+.x.xxxxxxxxxxxi*xl.+.xxxxxxx.x.xxxxxxv+r+w^Vx'ww+:x+3 x)'i f'x'+Yf x'x•x}i'x'xxx:� .` Average Delay_ (seclveh)::. 12.5 .. Worst Case Level Of Service: B xxx+xxxxxx+xaxxx+x,ixx xxxxixixx¢ixxxxxxxxxx•+xxxxxx�.x ixx+x x:i.x 4+xixxx x•xxxxiixixxx ... Approach:'_ - North Bound $ouch*.Bound b. East Bound. West Bound Movement:. ...L T..._.. R . L-.. T..._ .. R. ; .., . L.. v..:1.... _ R . L. ... r..-., , R .::.. ___________---------- _ -_-___------ _ .. ,. Control:. Stop Sign- Stop Sign, '..-Uncontrolled Uncontrolled - �Rights: Include. -Include- 'Include Include - -' Lanes: 0 1. 0 0 1;: 0-..1•; 0 0 1 -i" 0::;:1:0.0 1-1; 0 .•1" 0 0 1 - ---- 11--------------- 11---------------11--------------- Volume Module: - -" Base Vol: - 9 3 .. 3' 8 4 10: :":. 20 147 34 12 - 131 9- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 '1.10 -1.10 1.10, 1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 Initial Bse: 10 3 3 9 4 11 22 162 37 13 144 '-10 Added Vol: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 77 0 0 50 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 - 6 -. 0 0- - Initial Fut: 10 3. 3 9 ;; 4 12 ;•23 '-239 37 -13- 194 --`10 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1-,00 1.00.- 1:00� _ PHF Adj:: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 PHF Volume: 10 :3 3 - 9 - 4 :-12 23 239 37.13 -194 -10 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0'- 0 0 Final Vol.: 10 3 3 9 -4 12 23 -.239 37 13, 194 10` -' j Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 ..6.2 :A .1 xxxx xxxxx :4.1 xxxx .xxxxx " ' FollowUpTim: 3.5. 4.0 3+.3. .3.5 4.0 3.3 2::2 xxxx xxxxx •-2.2 xxxx xxxxx -- ------------ p_______________11-.__ 11_ _.___ ______ _ 1 Capacity 'Module:- Cnflict Vol: 518 515 239 -527 543 194 :204- xxxx xxxxx 216 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.:. 471 466 805 465 450- 852 1360-xxxx.xxxxx 1298 xxxx.xxxxx ' Move Cap.: 451 454 805 451 438 852 1380 xxxx xxxxx 129a xxxx xxxxx ` ___________I_______________11__________-___-11__.__---____-___11_.___-_________1 Level Of Service Module: - - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx-;9...5 xxxxx xxxx •�9.3 7.6. xxxx xxxicx 7.9 xxxx xxxxic LOSby Move: + + 'A + + A- A • + A + + Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT LTR- RT-'. ..Shared Cap.: 452 xxxx xxxxx -.446 xxxX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx X= xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel: 13.2 xxxx-xxxxx 13.3 xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx 7.B xxxx.xxxxx• Shared LOS: B * ' $ - +. ' A + + A + + ApproachDel: 12.5. -11.4 xxxxxx xicxxxx. ApproachLOS: B - B Traffix 7.5.1115 (C).2001:.Dowling Assocy Licensed to -URBAN' CROSSROADS;. IRVINE _ ,e, 101 0 CUM GROWTH PM (a + P)• Thu Jul. 24, 2003 09:29-'16 ----------------------------------------------------- Page 9-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis ----------------- CumulatiYe (2005) Growth With Project Conditions, PM Peak .Hour --------------- ------ --------------------------------------------------------- Level Of.$ervice Computation-Roport 2000 HCM 4 -Way Stop Method . (Future ;Volume Alterogtiye) Intersection 96 meadows Pkwy (NS) Rancho. Vista, lid.. -(EW)%: *4 Cycle (sec): 0 Cri t ical Vol. /Cap. (X) 0.231 Loss Time (pec),:,. 0.. (YfR 4 sec) Average Delay (gec/veh) 9.9 Optimal Cycle: 0.. Level-.�Of:Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound. West Bound Movement.:,.,. T R L T - R L, T - R L, - T - R ---------- -------- ----------- ----------- Control: Stop,. Sign, Stop. Sign: Stop Sign -------- Stop Sign Rights:. Include-, Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: �lt 0 2 0 1 1. 01.:'2 0 1 0 17 0 1 0 ------ --------- 0 1 0 1 0 ------------ ---------- 1-7-1-.-, Volume Module: --------- Base Vol: 27 169 19 16 220 40 27 39 46 22 30 26 Growth Adj: 1 :10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10 1.10 Ihitial.Bse: 30 186 �21 IS 242 _44 30 43 51 24 33 29 Added Vol: .4. 24 1 r24 217 30 25 0 2 1 0 22 PasserByYol: Q 01 0 0 :- .0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 34 210 22 -269 % 74 55 43 53 25 33 51 User Adj.: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1-00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 E n E ENEEF71 2 W11 PHF Volume: 39 210 22 42 269 74 55 43 .53 215 33 51 Reduct Vol:, �O 10. _ 0. 0. - 0 0 0 0 .0 0 Reduced Vol:, 210 22. c-42 .269 74 55 43 53 25 33 :!51 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1;00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 Final Vol.: "34 210 . 22 42 269 74 '.55 -43 -------- "53 25 33 51, ------------- 17-_._r ---------- Saturation Flow.Module: 11 -------------- Adjustment: I_00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .Lanes: 1.00 2-00 1.60 0 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.73 0.57 0.70 0.46:0.61 O:93 Final Sat,.,., 516 1117 : 624. - .537 - - - - 1166 - - --- - - 655 - - - - - 3.74 - - 314 - - -- - - - 468 - - --- 238 317 - - - - - 547 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1-7 Capacity Analysis - - - - - - - - - - - Module: - - - - - - 7 Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.19 0.04 0;08,0..23 0. 11.' G.15 0.14 0.13 0.11 0:10 0.09 Crit Moves,: Delay/Ve h: 9:8 10.2 9.3 91.7 10.3 .8.6 10.4 9.8 9.3 10.0 9.9 8.2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.0a 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.8 10.2 8.3 9.7 10.3 8.6 10.4 9.8 9.3 10.0 9.9 8.9 14 LOS by Move: A B A A B A B A A A A A LA ApproachDel: 10.0 9.9 9.8 9_4 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 10.0 9.9 9.8 9.4 LOS by Appr: A A A A Traf f ix 7.5.1115. (c) 2001, Dowling Assoc:, Licensed Ito URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE I&S MITIGS - CUM GROWTH PM (0 +Mon Jul 28,, 2003 16:03 06: page d-1 LDS Church. Traffic Impact.Analysis- Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour - -------- _____________ ___._____________________________________ Level Of Service Computation.Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy".(NS)Rancho: Vista Md.,.(EW). - - - cycle (s(ic).:._ �0 "Critical Vol./Cap. (%): 0.152 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R =.. 5�.sec) Average Delayl(sec/veh); 8.9 . Optimal Cycle: 60 •Level.,Of Service: - A .»»»»»+>+>irxx#>,++xtxxx+>axx++++:t+xxxxx+xxx++w+»>xx+++»>xx xr•x�x>x,tx`3 x>xix - - ' Approach: North Bound; SouthBound.. :^:'East Bound:. -::West Bound Movement: L T R- L T R `L _T -' R -L - T - R - Control: Permitted .Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights; ,„ Include -Include _. Include :. Include --- Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10- 10 10 7 10 10 10 -10 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1. 1. 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1. 0 0 -1 0. 1- 0: __-------------- _11--------------- ----------- 11______-_______-�. Volume Module: .: Base Vol: 27 -169 19 16 220 40 27 39- 46 22 30 26 Growth Adj.: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10J.10 1.10 .1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial,. Bse: 30 186 21 18.. 242 44 30. 43 51 24 33 29 Added -Vol: 4 24 1 24 - 27 30 25 0 2 1 0 22 -" PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0` Initial Fut: 34 210 22. .:; 42. 269 74 55 43 .53 .25 33 51 User Adj:- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 :1..0.0 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00. 1.00 .1.00 1.00 - PHF Adj:_ Q.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 -.0_95 0.45 0_95 0.95 0.95 _ PHF Volume: 35. 221 23 44 283. 78 58 45 55 27 35 53 Reduct Vol : 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced. Vol: - 35 221 23 44 283 . 78 58 ., 45 55- :.27. 35 53' PCE Adj: 1,00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00-. 1:00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 .. _,. MLF Adj: 1:001.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 Final Vol. 35 221 23 -., 44 283 78. 58, 45 55 '.27 35 53 - ______.______I --------------- II--------------- I.I--------------- II_.------------- I _ Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1700 1700., 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700- - Adjustment: 0.94 1.00, 0.94 0.94 1.00 0..94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 Lanes: 1:A.o 2.00 1.00 1.60 2.00 1.00 0.74 0.55 0.71 0.47 0.58 -0.95 .. Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600. 1660 3400 1600 116S 930 1140 755 988 1515 ____________I_.___________.___II_______________II_______________II_,-.____._______I Capacity. Analysis Module: - Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0_.04 0.04 - - Crit Moves: »"> »>• Green/Cycle: 0.55 0.55 0.55. 0-.55 0.55 0.55 0.32 0.32 0.32. 0.32 0.32. 0.32 Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.12 0.03 0.05 0.15 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.11 Delay/Veh: 6.3 6.6 6.2 6.3 6.7 6.5 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.5 14.5 14.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 6.3 6.6 6.2 6.3 6.7 6.5 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.5 14.5 14.5 - DesignQueue: 1 3 0 1 4 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1' Traffix 7.5.1115-(c) 2001, Dowling Assoc. Licensed:,to URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE C 2� .... CUM'GROWTH.PM (O + P), Thu Jul 24 200 -, 3 08:2J-10 -- Page 10=1 . LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis'-- - - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions - - PM Peak Hour - Level Of Service Computation. Report 2000 HCM.4-way. Stop.Metbod (Future -Volume -Alternative)" xfff xfffiffffxt#x#fist x>xxssssx xf xx sxxxsfxxxxx rx xxtxxi:xxx x.4 siffxi 4:t iLifi3*+iii+s ' Intersection #7 Meadows PkwyANS)/ Pauba Rd 1(EW)..".: "li fflff x.x.#xxi;#xffff iffff;xxxxxxf'1.1-ft:lxxxxxxff#ifixxxiii•ttlif itixf tilt xf f4x*.:4* xf sf Cycle (sec):-' -0 - _..-' Critical V01./Cap. (R). 0, 317 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4-.sec) Average,Delay'"+(sec/veh)i- optimal Cycle: - 0 -•-- Level Of Service: xxsf xt:xf.x:ssxxxxxxxtx.xxxf x:xfffft xssxxf#xx fxffsxxtfx ixxxsitffxx:Jfi �:xx xx i:txfff . Approach:- -North: Bound .. South. Bound.,: -East: Bound -:West Bound Movement: L - T - R- L:. .T -".- R L - T - ^ R .L - 'T Control: Stop Sign ;Stop Sign. :Stop Sign Stop Sign - Rights: _. -.. Include ... - -Include. Include - Include ' Min. Green: 0 0 :. 0 0 0 • = - 0 -- 0•• - 0 - 0 0 0 Lanes: - .1- 0 2" 0 1 1 :0 `2 0 . 1 - 1 - `0 1 '0 - 1: - 1 0 il 0 1 Volume Module: - - Base Vol-: 52 187 27 37 .189 21- 27-" 80 70 25 75 26 `- - Growth Adj: "1.10' 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10- .1.10 1.10. 1.10 -1.10 1.16 1-.16 Initial. Bse: 57 206 : 30 41 '208 23 - 30 88 - 77 28 83 29' Added Vol: 4 22 0 - 2 -.-24 3 - 3 68' 6 - 0. 43 4- - - PasserByVol: 0' 0 0 0". 0 0 -6. 0 0 0 0 0 Initial.Fut: 61-..228 30 43 232 -' 26. 33 156 83 28-- 126 33 User Adj: . 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1-.00 "1`. 00 -1.00 1,00 1•.00 1.00- PHF Adj: - 1.00 1-:00 1.00. 1r00 :1.00 .1.. 60. 1.40A..00 1.00 1`.00 1.00 1.00' PHF Volume: 61 228 30 43, 232 '26 - 33 -'156 63 -28 126 ' 33 - Reduct Vol: 0 0. 0- 0 0 0 "- 0.0 - 0 0 0 i 0 Reduced Vol: 61 228 30 43 ,.-232 26 :-.33 :156 83 28 126 33 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.. 00: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1,06 1.06 1.00 1.:00 '1.00 MLF Adj; 1.00 1 001.00 1..00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00: -' - Final Vol.: 61 228 .30 i43 232 '' 26 '33 156 83 ______ _II______________II____ 28 126 - 33`- - �________I ___ ________I_____ _________'I_____ Saturation Flow Module: - Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1_00 1.00 11.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00` Lanes, - 1.00 2.00 1.00 1•.00 2:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00" 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 469 1007 . 554 :465 1000 ':549 :457 492 541 _III__._ ".__.__=-__II____ 442 475 'S16 -___._______f: _____,_____ --_a II__=__-.___:__ Capacity Analysis Module: '. Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.23 OAS 0.09.0.23 0.05 0.07 0.32 0.15' 0.06 0:26 0:06 - k Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 11.0 11.3 9.1 10-7 11.4, 9.1 1007 12.6 10.0. 10.8 12.1 9.5 - Delay Adj: 1.00 1:00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 11.0 '11.3 9.1 10.7 11.4 9.1 10.7 12.6 10.0 10.8 12.1 9.5 -T LOS by Move: B B A B B A B B A B B A ApproachDel:, 1i.1 _ 11.1 - 11.5 - 11.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel-: 11.1 11.1 - - 11.5 11.5 xB LOS by Appr: B B - .. - .. B ... ..B Ll x xffxxxxxxxfff xxxfifxxxxxifxxffxxfxxfifixt#xxfffxxxf xxxxxixxx if xxxixfxx#f ixxfixx Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling:Assoc.<Licensed •to URBAN- CROSSROADS, IRVINE - - MITIG8 - cum GROWTH PM (0 +Mon Jul. 28; 2003'16:03:30 -PAge 1-I LDS Church.Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project •' Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour __.___-______.______________________________________________________________ Level Of Service Computation Report - 2000 HCM.,Operations-.Method. (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy .(NS)/ Pauba >.Rd- (EW), c: .x.+xx+.i xxxifx+<x++xxxx.xx.3+x3xx3+x++:x+x+xx:xxxxxxx+:++x:.r xaxx+rx♦++x+++++i+xx+xixfxx' Cycle:.,(sec): 0,,:- : Critical Vol./Cap. -(X): 0.194 - . Loss Time- (sec):' -8 (YtR = 5.sec) Average Delay '(sec/veh) -- II.'l :.. Optimal Cycle: 60. Level -Of Service: - - B`' Approach: North Bound .South. Bound -East Bound - "_West Bound - -- Movement: •L, - T R L -. T R.. .L =. T - R,; L - T. - g ______ _1____ __________l�____ ____________------------- -��_ ___________ Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted - - >Permitted -Rights Include - Include - Include- Include Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 16 10: 10 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 .: 1 0 2 0. 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 - _------------ .--------------- II--------------- II------------- ___II_____-------- _t . Volume Module: - - - - Base Vol: 52 187 27 _ 37 189 21 27 80 70 2575 - 26 - Growth;Adj: 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1--10 - - Initial Bse: 57 206 30 41 208 23 30 88 77 28 83--'2Skl' Added Vol: 4 22 0 2 24 .3 3 68 - 6 0 43 PasserByvol: -0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 '0 01. .0 Q - - Initial Fut-: 61 228 30 43 232 26 33 156 83 218 .126 33• User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 PHF 'Adj.: 0:95 0.95 0.95 0:.95. 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95' -- - PHF.Volume: 64 240 31 45 244 27 34 164 87 29 132 34:�.,'.. - Reduct.Vol:. -.0 r. 0 ._0 .. 0 0 - 0 :o- O 0 ...., ..Q 0: .. ^.: 0 ': ... Reduced,, Vol: :64 . 240- 31. .45 2:44 27 34 -164 -&.7 =29 132•, 34 ,. PCE Adj: 1.00-1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.001.0¢.- 1.00= MLF Adj: 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1100 - Final Vol.: 64 ..24.0 31 45 .244 27 ; 34 164 87 .- 29 -132,- - 34 - Saturation Flow Module: .. - Sat/Lane: 17001700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.. 94. 1.00 0.94` Lanes: 1-00 2.00 1.00 1.00`2.00. 1.00: 1.00. 1.00. .1.00 1.00 1.00, Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 1600 1700 1600 1600 1700. 1600. ------------ ___------------- II--------------- --------------- ��..,____________ Capacity Analysis Module: _ Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.07 0.02 0-.03 0.07 0.02 0.02 0-10 0.05. 0-02 0:08 0.:02 Crit Moves: xxx• ++++ -. Green/Cycle: 0.37-0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.50 0_50 0.50 0:50'': . Volume/Cap: 0.11 0.19 0.05 0.08 0.19 0.05 0.04 0.19 0.11 0.04 0:16 0 04' -_ Deday/Veh 12.8 13.2 12.3 12.5 13.2 12.3 7.9 8.9 8.3 7..8 8.6 7.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 12.8 13.2 12.3 12.5 13.2 12.3 7.9 8.9 8.3 7.8 8.6 7.9- - Designqueue: 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 0 2 1 xxx+++++++++++++xxx+x+++++xx++xxxxxxxxx+x+xxx+xxxxxx++xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx++xxx++ Traffix 7.5.1115(c)-2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE--.. . E23 1 MITIG8 - CUM. GROWTH. PM (0.+Thu Jul. 24; 2003 09l22:15 _______________________________________________________-____________ - LOS Church Traffic.:Impact Analysis .X=„ Cumulative.(2005)-Growth.With. Project Conditions - PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized•Method:.(Future Volume Alte-knative)° - - - »f»fiffi»f»»f»»iff w#ff#ffw#fxwff if wxif»ffi»f»f ff wff#f!f»f»fiff###f#il#!'f if if if ���:•. Intersection #14 Westerly Access Dwy. (NS)t•/ Pauba: Rd. (EW)'�, ^^� - ##f»»#ff»f wf wwfff ifxxff Rf»»fffffi#fww»wf wxfxwxxffff.#fx wff if f-•Y iFfffifwtiff xf#i!;'f f} Average Delay .(sec/veh):.. 11.0:. Worst Case Level Of Service ##ff»fff»fw»»»f»ffff#xffff.f ffffx�xfwf#ff»xf xf»:ffwsff»fff wfffff #ff tf:i#f�f+w.f x'ff Approach North Bound South Bound East Bound. West Bound - Movement L - T .R L- - T R, L T - R' L. - T '.`R Control: -Stop Sign - Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled T Rights Include - Include Include - Include - .. Lanes :. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- '1! 0 -0 0:..1 0 -0 0 - 0 0 0 1 0 Volume Module: - Base Vol: - 0 0 0 0 0 0` 0 201 0 0 156 0 -'- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10- 1.10 1.10 1:10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 0- 165 "'0 Added Vol: 0. 0 0 2 0 1 1 73 0 0 46 - -2 j PasserByVol: 0 0 -0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0- 0 j Initial Put: ::: 0. 0 0 2 0 1 1. 294 0. -0 - 211 2 User Adj: 1.00.1.60 1.00 1.00'1.00 1.00. 1�.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 _. I 9HF Adj: 1.00v1.00 .1.00 1.00%1.00 .1.00 .1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0: 0 0 2 0 1 1 294 0 0 21i` Reduct Vol: - 0 0 0 -0 0 - -- '0 ":0 0 0- 0 :- -0 0 - Final Vol.:- 0.. 0- 0 .2 0 -1 1 - 294 - 0 -0.211- :2 Critical Gap Module:. -. - Critical Gp:xxxxx -. xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 4.1-xxxxxxxxx xxxxx'xxxx xxxxic - FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx X-O= 3.5 .xxxx 1.3 2-.2 xxxx xx= xxiaccc-xxxx xxxxx - Capacity Module:` Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 508 "xxxx 212 211 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 528 xxxx 833 1369 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xx:coc Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 528 ____________ xxxx 833 1369 _______________��_______________�. xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxc-. - - ____________I_______________ Level Of Service Module:. -: Stopped Del-xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -7:6 xxx xiciocic xxxxx xxxx-xxxxic .i LOS by Move: » f f a.. f f p,. - Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT -LTR -RT -LT - LTR- RT- Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx .601 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx•xxxx-7oixxx - { -Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.0 xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx _ #; Shared LOST - f # # w B f p- ApproachDel: xxxxxx 11.0 xxxxxx -- xxxxxx - ApproaChLOS: f B w f Traf f ix. 7.5.1115-(c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed: to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE FIN MITIGB - CUM GROWTH. PM (0 +Thu Jul -24',: 2003. 09.:22,:21 ____________________________________-_____,._____________ LDS Church Traffic Impact. Analysis - Cumulative .(2005). GrowthWith. Project Conditions PM :Peak Hour ____________________________._._______-_.____-____._-___ Level Of Service. Computatioa,Repo=t: 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method..(Future',VolumeAlterrratide), >>.»»>x»»>»»»x>x�ix+>*>•�.>•»»x.,v�xxxix,>:x.>,»x>=>.»x�,r>a.x.»>xx»»xi:yx»>»x>i'a 3:.''.. ' Intersection #15 Easterly Access Dwy_...,(NS),/ pauba-: Rd:,"(EW) »x=>x»x>»»x»»»t>xxxxx>3»>tr>»»»�»»�>.>»»d:x.x=,».»»:;is.»x».i •ix•ixx »»>xxxx»i»»> Average Delay -(sec/veh).: ,11.3, �,_;. ,Worst Case Level 'Of Service::' �.= 13% - »»»>xx»>»x»»:�»>xx>xx»♦»»;t.s,.»�3>3Lix>w.x>i.iy�xi».»s»:>:>»»»x»>»x>r»>xr>i>»»'• Approach: North Bound _ South - Bound :East Bound:.'.. -West. Bound Movement: L T - R L - T - ; R - L T � - 'R � L - -T R .. - - i --i i--------------rt--------- - -i i ----- ---- t Control:. _ Stop Sign.., Stop Sign Uncontrolled :; .Uncontrolled _ - .Rights: Include -.Include _ Include 'Include - Lanes: 0 0 00 0 0 0 1l 0.0 0'1 00'.:0-: 0 00 10 - ____________-__LI,_____________�I___________--- _,-t . Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 6- 0: 201 0 a "_150 - 6- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1-.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1..10.1.10 1.101.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 - 0 0 165 .. -'0: Added Vol: 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 74 0 0. 47 4'- - PasserByVol: 0. 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 -0 0. -9+^- Initial Put: 0 0 0 3 0 1- 1 295 0 0- 212'4 - User Adj: 1.,06 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 11.00 1:.m 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 PHF Adj: - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.:06 1.06 1.00 1.00 1:.00 1.00 1.00 1f.-00 1.00 -. PHF Volume: 0- 0 0 3 0: 1 1 '295 0 0 212 4 - - Reduct Vol: 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•h- Final Vol.: 0 0 0- 3 0 1 1 295 O 0. 212 4" - Critical Gap Module: - Critical.Gp:xxxxx xxxx. xxxocx, .6.4. xxxx 6.2 - 4.r1' xxxx,xxxxx: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx '^ FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx..xxxxx" 3_5_xxxx -3.3 ' :. 2y2 xxxx',.xx�ouo_,:xxjoo7 :xxxx xxxxx ,t J.:: .•. ----------1--- - ---------------- --------- - - -It------------ �:. Capacity Module: _ .. Cnflict Vol_: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 511 xxxx. 214 216 xxxx xxxxx.xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx.. 526 xxxx 831 1365 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xx?cx xx�got Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx- 526 xxxx 831 1366,, xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx•: ____________I_______________ --------------- _______________��_ _____________� Level Of Service Module: - - - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx.xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. 7.6 xxxx ,xxxxx xxxxx'xxxx..xxxxx .. LOS'by Move: • > > > » > A _> .;» > .a ♦, Movement: LT - LTR.- RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx kxxx 579 xxxxx-, xxxx -xxxx xxxxx.;. xxxx xxxx xxxxx. Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx-xxxxx. 11.3 xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx:. xxxxx., .- - Shared LOS: > >- - > > B • A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 11.3 .xxxxxx xxkt ApproachLOS: * B » > Traffix 7.5.1115 (c).. 2001 Dowling Assoc., Licensed•to. URBAN .CROSSROADS,-IRVINE �25 CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0 + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 :08:31:34 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - LDS Church -Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005.) Growth With Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of.Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalizedi Method tFutu , re,Volume Alternative)` -" intersection #1 Green Tree Rd-.,(NS)/ pLauba Rd. (Ew)'.,' Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.5 Worst Case Level Of service: A I ��t Approach:' - North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T - -R L - T - R L-- T R L - T R, - ------------ ---------------- ------------ --------- -------- .Control:, Stop Sign- -.Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uricontrolled Rights: Include Includeo Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0� 0 .0 0 0 0 0 11 0 1 0 0 0: 0 0 1 0 0 ----------- ------ ------- -------- Volume Module: Base.Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 130 0 0 149 0. Growth Adjl 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10 1.16 1.16 1.16 1 io Initial Bse- 0 0 0. 0 0 2 4 143 . 0 0 164 - '70. Added Vol; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 71 0 PasserByvol: 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 225 0 0 235 0 User Adj:. 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1::00 11.1100 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i_00 I. oo 1.00 1.00 . I . .00 1.06:. PHF volume: 0� 0 0 6 0 2 4 225 0 0 235 Reduct Volt .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VA I., Ll 11 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 225 0 0 235 Ci Critical Gap Module: Critical:Gp:xxxxx xxxx..xxxxx,xxxxx xxxx 6.2 4.1 Xxxx xkibtx' 2ocxx)E 36trot�`xxxxx- FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx-X>DDDK Y-XXX ---------- 3.3 2.2 ----------- xxxx xxxxx- xxxxx k- xja-xM6iiC __W -------------- ____-_______I_______________ Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx- xxxx 235 235 xxxx xxxxx' xxxx xxxx lcx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx x)DDDI xxxx xxxx 809 1344 xxxx xxxxX ibcix - xkkX XX560E. Move Cap-:. xxxx MOCK 3DOLXX, xxxx XXXX ------------ 809 :__11 1344 --------------- m= XxXXX XXXX SO= X-10= 11 --------------- _____-_-____I__________ Level of Service Module: Stopped Del.:xxxxx xxxx xxXXx xxxxx,x 9,5, 7.7 xxxx Xocxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A A Movement: LT LTR RT LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT LT - LTR RT. Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx.. xxxx xxxx Y,== xxioc XXXX XXXXX YVADOC Shi7d Stpl)el:xxxxx xx xx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: xx____= 9.5 ApproachLOS; A TraffiX 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed, lto URBAN CkossRoAm IRVINE I Ifl 3 I Z.4 CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Thu Jul 2.4; 2003.-08:31:34 - Page S'-=1• ____________________ ____________-__________________________________________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) - - Level Of Service ComputationReport 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method:: (Future Volume Alternative) t i�f}xfxx»f##xf tffff#}fi}fx#»fi#ffif iff#}{,x}xxf}#r#}w»f if x»xf ifx}#x}3»xf lti#}�x ilt ." - .. Intersection #2 Calle Cedral (NS')/ Pauba"-Rd.. ,(EW) Average Delay ,(sec/veh): .. -9..5 'Worst Case Level Of Services Approach:., North Bound South Bound East Bound ''West. Bound - Movement: L- T R L- T - R L - T R L- T - `K "•. i_______________� Control: - Stop Sign ":Stop Sign Uncontrolled. Uncontrolled Rights:' Include Include Include _ Lanes:. 0 0 0 0'. 0-, 6 0- 0 0. 1" !0 1 0 0 0:` '0 0 1 0 1 -_ -- i - - it -- -------- - - - -ir----------- - - -rr----- - - - - -- i Volume Module: Base Volt 0. 0 0 0- 0 - 2 4 125 0 0 156 - 0- Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 - 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 I.10 Initial -Bse: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 138 -0 0. 172 - 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 82 0 0 71 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0. 0 0 0 0 2 4 220 0 0." 243` - 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.06 1.00 .1.00"1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00..1.00 1.00..1-..00 1.0v PHF Adj: 1..00 .1..00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00=1.00 1:00. 1.00 1.00- PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 0-: 2 4 220 0 0 -243 0• . Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 0 00 0" Final Vol.: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 220 0 0 •243 0. Critical Gap Module: -- - Critical.,Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx.xxxx 6-2. 4•:1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxoc`x�tioix"- Fo1lowUpTim:xxxxx-xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9%::32:2 xxxx xxxcx'xxx:oc .xxxx'xbocx"�4'.:.-.:_ .:.. Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxicx xxxx :243 243 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 11.".1 x Potent Cap.:: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx, xxxx 801. :1-336 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xkx goo= - Move Cap.:, xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 801 1336 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ____________I_____________________________ ______________________________� Level Of Service Module:. - Stopped.Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxs 9.5 7..7.xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx-xxx' LOS by Move: f - » # ». f A .A # -# x x ....». ... Movement: LT LTR - RT LT - LTR . --RT -LT - LTR - RT :LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. xxxxxxxx xxxzx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx•: xxxx xxxx xxxxx - Shid StpUel:xxxxx xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx :xxxx xxxXX- Shared LOST » f # f x # A- ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS•_ f A * # Traffix 7.5.11155 (c)`2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN, CROSSROADS, IRVINE . EZ-7 A CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003. 08 31:34 1 .... . �----P--- - - LDS Chu-rch•Traffic Impact Analysis -- Cumulative (2005)-Growth With Project Conditions - x Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday)'_-. - - - _____ ____________________ _ __ ______._ _______ _______ Level Of Service Computation. Report _-._:__________-___ ,. 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method(Future Volume Alternative)..- xixx»�t»»ix»+rxixixxxx+#»x#xx#t>fi+a'#�xxx##y:x#x#x»,i':�xxxxt»vf x#f wf»ft+f »'4fiix�xx#.3 . Intersection k3 Camino-Romo (NS)/ Rancho Vista.�Rd. (E4f)- f»x#ix»xx»f#x»x#fxxxf iff+#xxfff»#xaxff if#fi#ff##.##x:if#is#•»ff###f x#)#x####i.#�x# -�'$ Average Delay (sec/veh): •10.0 - Worst Case"Level Of -Service: B Zti' x#x»fx»x#f»»f»ffx+x•xi#ff�fxx#•tiff»;»xfw+#i#x:is,iff##xif •i#x#x#f iif #iaffii#'+###i':. .. Approach North Bound- South Bound East Bound `:West Bound " Movement L- T R- L - T"-R L T R !L T R , ---------- __L--------------- II--------- ______LI__-____ Control: �, Stop. Sign. -.: ..Stop .Sign :..._ Uncontrolled .`. ,___-___________�. :Uncontrolled; - Rights: Include ,. Include -. Include "- Include Lanes: 0 -1 0 0. 1 0 0 0 0 0: :0 0 '0 1--' 0 i i----------=--- ( f ----------- 0. :1 0 0 0 ' -- ----------- ---------- ( - --- - --- (( Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 21. 0 4 0 0 0 0' 63 8 5- 92 0 Growth-Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. .1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10`1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1 10 . Initial Bse: .23: 0 4' 0 '0 0 0- 69 9 6` 101 0._... Added Vol: 11. 0 0 0 .0 0 0 .34 '12 0 34 0' PasserByVol: 0 0 0 -.. 0 0 0 0- 0 0- " 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 34 0 - 4 0 0 0 0-. 103 21 6 135 "- 0' User Adj: _ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00;1.00 1•.00 '�1.00 1.00 1.00` - PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00-.1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.06�1.00 1.00 - - PHF Volume: 34 0 4 0, 0- 0 0,10321- 6-:: 135 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 -. 0 0 0 '- 0. 0_ 0 Final Vol.: 34.. �0 4 0 0 0 0 103 21. 61- 135 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical. Gp:-.6;4 xxxx -6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxo Xxxx xxxxx -4-. 7ooci[ xinoFx - - FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx, ..,3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx"xxxx;. xxxxx - - - - - - - I - - - = - - - -----.--- ------------II ----- ----------I�--'- 2.2 xxxX. xxxxx .. '. ----------� ,. -- - - - - Capacity Module: - - - Cnflict Vol: 260 xxxx 114 xxxx xxxx xxxxx ':xxxx xxxx-xxxxx 124 xXXX X-Xi ?" Potent Cap..: 733 xxxx 944 -xxxx. xxxx_xxxxx :xxxx xxxx XXXXX '1475 xXxx Xxxxx Move Cap.: , 731 xxxx 944 .xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx Xxxxx --------------- ((._______________(. 1475 xxxx,xxxxx , ------------ ------- _------- (1--------------- Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:XXXXX xxxx 8.8 xxxxx X�= xxxxx xxxxx .xxxx' xXXxX 7•,�4 xxxx''xxxxx - LOS by Move: - f x .p # x # f # » A .# Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT -- LTR - RT -.:LT - LTR'- RT Shared Cap.: -731 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx .xxxxXxxxk xxxx xxxx.xxxxx Y' Shrd StpDel: 10.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx-_ 'T-.4 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:. B. # # f # + # # #- p ApproachDel: 10.0 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx : - ApproachLOSpB ett 3 Traf f ix 7[5.1115 (c)'2001 Dowling. Assoc. Licensed= to URBAN:'CROSSROADS; IRVINE VZ 3 ( i CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0 + P) Thu Jul 24; 2003 08 il:34 - Page 7-1 LDS Church Traffic"Impact Analysis." Cumulative "(2005) Growth With Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) Level Of Service Computation Report... 2000 HCM Unsignal zedMethod(Future Volume Altemative) . Intersection #4 Camino..RomO (NS),/ Corte Vill6sa,.(EW) #+>xxx}vr}}#ry x}}}}x}x'+w•#4 x�.i}f:V#xf#f}#f�}i}}x}>''x'x}}i}�"�3xx}it}i}#}}}}}}}}ifx} . Average Delay ("sec/veh)"i.. 8.4Worst:Cdse Level Of Service: A }xx}x#xxf}}}xxx}}i�}}x#'11f♦}#xix>t##}x##f xif#i}xxf lix}i};j}#1 x##,}}#}x }i}}}fi}}}}ix Approach: North. Bound' South Bound East -Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L T - R- L T -' R ` L - T - R Control: -Stop Sign' Stop Sign Uncontrolled" Uncontrolled .Rights: Include - include -.Include Include Lanes: 0 .0 0 0 0 '1 0. 0 0 1 0 1 0 0.. 0- 0 0 1 0 1. . ________ ____________-___, I.I_______________II____� _____-_ Volume Module: " Base Vol: 0 0"0 1 -0 5 13 5. 0 0 1 2 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1:.30 1.16 1:10 L10 I.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 -- Initial Bse: 0 0 0 1 0 6 14 6- 0 0 1 2� Added Vol: 0 0. 0" 0- 0 12 11 0 0 0 0 0_ PasserByVol: 0 0 0 "0 - 0 0 "0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial.'Fut: 0 0 0 1 .0 18 25 6. 0 0 1 2-` User Adj-: 1..00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1'00 1-:00 1.00:1.00 "1.00 1-.06 1.00 1.oc' PHF Adj`: 1.00 1.06 1:00 1-.00"1.00 1t06 1`.00`1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 PHF Volume: - 0 0 0 1 0 18 25. 6 0 0 1- 2 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0" 0 0 0 6 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 1- 0 18 25 6 0 0 1 2 Critical Gap Module: - - Critical:,Gpcxxxxx xxxx. x5txxi6 6:4 "xx)cx 6.2. 4.1 xxioc xxxxx xxxxx xxxx: xxxxx Fo1lowUpTim:xxxxxxxxx xxxxx-3'S xxxx 3 io .3 �2:2 xxc xiocxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ---------- __J--------------- ��__________11_________-_____11_______________I Capacity Module: " Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 57 xxxx -1 3 xxxx xio= xxicx xxxx xxxxx, Potent Cap xxkk xxxx xxxxx 1955 x:kxx -1689 1632 xxfcx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx" Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xkxx 944-xxxx 1089 1632 xxxx xxxxx, xxxx zxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- .------------ --------------- _______________� Level.Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx' 8-8 xxxx 8.4 -7L2 xkc xxxxx xxxxic xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: x # }. A } A -A } } } ♦ } Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR RT LT- LTR - RT LT - LTR --RT.- Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx."xxxx xxxx xxxxx" =Ex xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxzx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.2 xxxz.xxxxz-xxxxx xxxxxxxxx' Shared LOST- } # } } } } A ApproachDel: "xxxxxx -" 8-4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * A } :. Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 - Dowling"Assoc. Licensed -to URBAN CROSSROADS,' IRVINE E2�► CUM. GROWTH MID (0 + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 08:31:34 .• - page '.871 .DAY _____________________._--___________________________ _____._ _____________ __:___� _. .LDS Church.Traffic Impact Analysis. - Cumulative (2005) Growth With,Project Conditions - Mid -Day 'Peak Hour (Sunday) --------------------- --- ----- - - ---- ---------- --------- - -Level Of Service ComputationReport --------.. 2000 HCM. Unsignaliied Method (Future Volume -Alternative) x rxxr »x » x » rx xxxxr rxx>r+rir rrxxrrri>xr�r>xxx'r>xr•x xxi:�xxxxr+rraryrfrr>:tx.++>t++.f-..- Intersection #5Corte Villosa (NS) / Pauba Rd (EW)_ ,.. - xxxrxr;:trx rxrrr errx>x>xrrrxxr>rxrxx>xrxxrxrrrxxi>rrrrxxt-e. xx,rxxix:x>»rxx xxrr rxx y Average Delay '(sec/veh):. 13.0 Worst Case. Level Of Service B r xx xxrxxxxxxrx rr iv>rxxxti i'rx-x rxx+'x;iixrxxf iixxxx xirxxxxxrrxr xxi r,x xxfr x.i xx,r;.'rxrri.- _South ' Approach: North Bound Hound ,East Bound, -West Bound .. Movement: L- T R L' T R L T R- L T R •. •' Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign. Uncontrolled Uncontrolled �U Rights Include Include Include Include Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 -0 1 0 1 0 0. 1 II___.____________II________________'I____ .:- 0- 1 0 0 1 .`;. .. - . ------------ I----------------- Volume Module: - -. _._________I - Base Vol: 12 2 4 2 -1 7 9 109 7 Growth Adj; 1.10 1.10 1.10 .1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 7 125 8 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 13 2 4 2 1 8 10 120 8 8 138 9 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 12 11 126 0 0 119 0. -: PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0- Initial Fut: 13 2 4 2 1 20 21 246 8 8 .257 9. User Adj: 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 11. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001. PHF Adjq 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 -1..00 .1.. 00 1.00 1.00. 1.60 1:00 1.00. PHF volume-: 13 2 4 2 --1 20 21 246 - 8 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2S7 9 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 13 2 4 2 1 20 21 246 8 8 257 9 Critical Gap Module: ''.. Critical Gp 7.1 6.5 6 2 7.1 6.5 6 2 -4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx.' 3 2..2 xxxx xxxx Fo1lowUpTim 3 5 4 Q 3 3 3.5, 4.0 3 x --------- I____ ____ ------ II------- -_______II____ .2xxxx xx2e= :2 ------- , Capacity Module: - Cnflict Vol: 574 568 -246 .567 567 257 265 xxxx xxxxx 254 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 432 435 798 437 436 787 1310 xxxx xxxxx, 1323 xxxx_xxXocx Move Cap... 414,.425 798, 426 426. 787 1310 xxxx xxxxx :.1323 . :.. xxxx-xxxxx .... Level Of Service Module: - - Stopped Del:Xxxxx xxxx 9.5 xxxxic xxxx 9..7 7.7 xxxx xxxxx ., xx 7.7 xx. xxxxx .. LOS by Move: .•. r A x . p A . ',. A x •. Movement:- LT - LTR - RT. LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT- LT - LTR -- RT -, - Shared Cap.: 415 xxxx xxxxx 426 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx, xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:-14.0 xxxx xxxxx 13.5 xxxx xxxxx, xxxx.xxxxx ..A 7.7 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: B.• x B, ' x : - : A . . . ApproachDel: 13.0 - 10.2 xxxxxx 200,D= ApproachLOS: B - B • •- a .. 4 Traffix 7-.3.1115 (c) 2001 -Dowling, Assoc. Licensed. to URBAN CROSSROADS,, IRVINE _ a-3 CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P), Thu Jul 24; 2003 08:31;34 - - page 9-1 LDS Church Traffic .Impact Analysis Cumulative(2005) Growth With Project Conditions .Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday). - --'-------------- -- --- - Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM.4-Way-Stop. Method (Future'Volume Alternative)- - xxxxxxxx»n xxxxxxxx x-x xxxxxxx»xxxx»xxx»x xx�xix»xxxxxrtx+tx�'+i xxxx»'x ii:ii�xxt»xi»•ix3�.. .. •. - Intersection k6 Meadows Pkwy (NS) / Rancho Vista 'Rd. f9w)- ' J '»f»xx';#»»:xxx:x sxxxxxxs�;x.x»xxx»xxxxx»xxx��x>xx•x xx rrxaf i3 x'i''i +'x yir+'�'»f�+3 x"x,i'�xxxi Cycle (sec):: 0 - Critical, Vol./Cap. (X): 0.210 - Loss Time (see): 0 (Y+R =._4 •see) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9:7 Optimal Cycle: 0 -� - .--I:eveh -Of Service: A' xxxxxixixcf;x,ix �x:xxxxxxxxxxxxx x.rx*xtxx.xxxr>x�i/>x xr xx=x x xI'xxvx-x°x ri':�rx i>;i'x x':�ffi>'x3ri' .. . Approach:.;;. North Bound;_ .- ,South Bound Ease Bound, '- ' West Bound,'- -. Movement:. L - T R '.L - -. T - R- L. T - t R L- T R Control: Stop. Sign -.Stop Sign" <Stop sign Stop Sign - Rights: Include Include. Include - Include Min. Green: �, 0::- 0 2.: 0- 0. .0 0 0 O b 0 0 0 - Lanes: _ :1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0. 1 -0 '1 -0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0- ________ p-______________II_______________II_ ________II_______________I. Volume Module: - Base Vol: r22 165 12 21 181- -is 24 -29 25 .17 41 20 - - Growth Adj:: 11�. 10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 - Initial:Bse:, 24 182 13 23.199 - 20 :'•26 - 32 28 19 45 31, - Added Vol: 9 45 11 12 47 25 25 0 9 12 0 -IV - PasserByVol: : 0. 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0- 0 0 - Initial Fut: 33 >227 24 35 246 45 51 32 37 31- 45- User Adj: 1..00.1:00 1..00 L00:1.. 0.0 1.00 1.. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00'- - - PHF Adj:.. 1.00 1.00 1"-.00 1.00 1.00--1.0'D 1-:00 1-.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 -- .- PHF Volume: 33 227. 24 -35 -246 45 51 32 37 31 45 42' Reduct Vol: .0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f Reduced Vol: ::33 227 :..i 24 35 -246 45 51 -32 37 31 45 - 92 PCE Adj,t _.1.00 1.00 .1.00. 1:: 00 1 00 1.00 I"j 00 I_ 00 1,00 1,�00 1.00 1.00 - MLF Adj:. 1:00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.. 00 1:00 1-:00- 1..00 -1.00 1,00 1.00 - Final Vol.: , 33 227 24 - 35 ;-246 145 51 `32 37 31 45 42- ------------1--------- - il--------------- If--------------- II------------- 1 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1-.00 1.0.0 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1:00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2..00 1.00 1.00 2:.00 .1.00 0.86 0.53 0.61 0.52 0.77 6.71 - Final Sat.:- .533 1156 -648 .541,1172 - 659 440 -361 -356 274 421 419 Capacity Analysis Module: - Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.20 0.04 0.06 0.21 0.07 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.11 0..11 0.10 Crit Moves: xxxx »x»x xxxx xxxx - Delay/Veh: 9.6 10.0 8.2 9.5 10.1 8.3 10.1 9.3 9.1 9.9 9.6 9.0` - Delay Adj:,. 1:00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - AdjDel/Veh: 9.6 10.0 .8.2 9.5 10.1 8.3 10.1 9.3 .9.1 9.9 9:6 9.0-; LOS by Move: A B A A B A B A A A A A- ApproachDel: .9.8 9.8 9.6 9.4 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 9.8 .4.8 9.6 .9.4 LOS by Appr:. A: ,A.: ,A.. - A xxx»x»xx+xxxxx»x»+»xxx»»xx»xxx»x»»x+xx+xxxi»xxxx>x»xxx»xxxx»»xxxxx»xxxxx»�»xx»xx Traf f ix 7.5. 1115(c)' 2001.. Dowling Assoc. Licensed to -URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE �3� " MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH MID DAYMon Jul 28, 2003 16:04:15r ________________________________________________________________________________ _ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth WithProject Conditions With. Improvements.$ - Mid -Day Peak Hour:(Sunday). ----------------- - - Level Of --- ----- -- - - ------- ------ Service Computation Report ---- - ---- �9B 2000 HCM .Operations. Method (FutureVolume•, Alternatile)�.- >»»f»»»ff xf»>»»>»»»xfxs:x»x,»*:f*:.'.1x,f*.>f**xf»fix»xxf.>f»;»xxx»»*»-»f>f>»i♦r»x+r »'f: . Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy'(NS). »f»,»f>»»»»»xff•itifffxx»»»»fx>»,;i:»»»»+t,,»x»f»isexf>.>>*>..r»x»»»'»>•»>*i:r»x> /.Rancho Vista Rd. _.(EW) _,.: ..- .. -•. %. . Cycle (sec): 0 Critical. Vol; /Cap.-(X): 0.133 4� Loss Time (sec):. 8 (Y+R. '. 5 sec). Average• Delay:(sec/veh): - .8.6 - Optimal Cycle: - 60, - - Level, Of service: - A' xx»»f>»»»»x»»»,e ♦»f»x>.fix>x**.q>;xx,>f>.;f».>3»if.>»>.»if»»»x>x.»>>f»..>i•f»�»r*'r'x"r>x . Approach:- North Bound. South Bound East .Bound '-West Bound Movement.: -L . -. T. - 7. R . L. - T - ;: R L - T - R L - -T - Fe ------------ ----------- Control: I' Permitted ___ ________ II__.__----- II Permitted ..,.Permitted ---------------- Permitted - Rights: include -Include _.-Include _ •.. .Include - Min. Green: 10 10 10 -. 10 ? 10 10 . -10 10- 10 10 .-•.--10 - - Lanes: 1 ---------`-----��--------------- 0 .2 0 1 1 0 2 0' 1 -0 -1 0 1 0 -------------- 0 �1 -----------`---� 0 1 0 ,- -------- -- Volume Module: - Base Vol: 22 165 12 21 181 18 . 24' 29 25 - 17 41 28'• Growth Adj'- 1.10 1..10 .1_10 1-.10 1..10 '1.10 1.10 '.1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 - Initial Bse: .24 -182 13 23 199 20 - 26 :.32 -28 19 45 31 Added Vol: 9 - 45 11 12- 47 25 " 25 0 9 12 0 1L PasserByVol-: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0" - Initial' Fut: 33 227 -. 24 - 35. .246 r 45 . 51 32 .- .. 37' 31 45- 42 User Adj: 1,00 1.60 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1•. o0 1.00 1-:00 1:.00 i_00 1.00 .- .A PHF Adj; 0.95 0..95 0.95 0.95 0_ 95 -0.95 '0.95'_0:95 0.95 0-.95 0:95 0.95 PHF Volume: 35- "238 25 37. - 259 47 54 34 38 . 32 47 -:44 .�' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 '- 0 0 . Reduced Vol: 35 238 25 37 ,:259 47 1 .54 34 38 ':32 47 :. 44 PCE Adj: - 1.00 1:.00 1+:00 1.00 .1'. 0.0 1.00. '1.00. 1.00 V.00 I.OD 1.:00 1.00 - MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1..00 1. 00 1.: 00 1:00 1._00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 •. Final Vol.: 35 238, 25 ,. 37 259- --47 : -54 34. 38 32 47 44' Saturation Flow Module:-- Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700. 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700- 1700�.. Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 0.94 '0.94 1.60 0.94 0_94 1.00 0.94- 0.94 1.0.0 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 2.00- 1-.00 1.00 2.00. 1.00 0.87 0.51 0.62 0.5.3 0=74- 0.73 - Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1606 3400 1600 1395 866: 990 -855 -1256 1164 ____ ____ -I__________ Capacity Analysis Module: --------------- --__ -_____ _ - - -` - _--___-__� - - Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.02 0-.08 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 .- Crit Moves: - ***» »xff .Green/Cycle: 0.57 0.57 0.51 -0.57 0.57 0.57 0.29 0.29 0:29 0.29 0.29 0.29 - Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.12 0.03 0.04 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13' _ • Delay/Veh: 5:6 5.9 5.5 5.6 5.9 5.6 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 {3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.o0 1.0o 1.o0 1.00 1.00 1.o0 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 5.6 5.9 5.5 5.6 5.9 5.6 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 -15.7 - DesignQueue: 0 3 0 1 4 11 { Traffix 7.5.1115 (c)-.2001 Dowling .Assoc:;.Licensed to'URBAN CROSSROADS; IRVINE CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Thu Jul 24, 2003 08:31:34: page 10-1------------------- - _____________________ LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour ,(Sunday) ___ _ __ Level Of Service, Computation Report - 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop. Method (Future Volume Alternative); - xx»xx»».x»xxxx»x»x xxxx»xxxx+:»x:xxxxx_x,xxi»»xtxx.�i»;r»:�tf ».e.ix x:>xxf fixxxxix�x x�vtk+ .... .. Intersection#7 Meadows Pkwy .(NS)/ Pauba Rd. (EW)' x»xxxxtix»»xxxx•xxxxta»»xx,x xti xx»>xxix�f xx,x»'xix xxxx s ��x x.xx.xxf».ia»xxxxi.f xxxxxf}xxxxA - .. cycle (sec),: 0 Critical-Vol./Cap. (X): 0.246, -` Loss Time.(Sec): 0 (Y+R.= 4 sec). Average Delay..(sec/Veh):-r I10.- Optimal Cycle: 0 Level.Of Service: - 6 x xxxxxxxxxxxxx+»xxxxx:xxx»xxxxx»xx'x xxxxxxyx xff»x»xf xix.x,f •»a�.iix. x,xfxixxxxx �a�aixx . Approach: North Bound South Bound East -.West 'Bound Movement L T - R L - T - R L- T - ,.R L' __________ _________, ____>___ fl_____ Control: Stop Sign. Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign - Rights: Include - Include Include Include _ Min. Green: - 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: - 1 0 2 0 1 �1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 .1 : 1 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: _40 -147 25 7 '164 30 27 53 37 26 15 Growth Adj: 1.10 i57 ..10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1:10 1.10 3.57 1:10 Initial Bye: 44 162 28 -8 186 33 30 - 58 41 29 63 17 - Added Vol: - 12 11 0 9 12 47. 46 68 13 0 60 9 PasserByVbl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0: 0. - 0- 0 Initial Fut. 56 173 28 17 192 80 76 125 54 29. 123 25 cz,A _ User Adj: - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..06 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OQ ''1 :_00 PHF Adj;, 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.�00 1:00 1.06 1.00 1.06 1.00 PHP Volume: 56 173 28 17 .192. 80 76 :126 54 29 123 25 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0. 0 0 0 0 Reduced V%ol: 56 .173 28 17 192 80 :76.-126 , 54 ..29 123 25 PCE Adj: 1.00 1-.00 1._00 1-00 1,06 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1:;00 1:00. 1:00 MLF Adj:_ 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1_00 1.00 100 `.00 1.Final --- Vol.:. 56 173 28 17 192 80 76 126 54 ..29 �123 25 ------------ I--------------- II--------------- LI-------------- _1I_________.______ ( .. Saturation Flow Module: _ Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.,00 1.00 1.b0 1.00 1.. 00 1.00 1:00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00. 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1:00 1:00 Final Sat.: .480 1031 570 483 1042 579 -479 515 569 463498 597 ------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.17 0.05. 0.03 0.18 0.14 0.16 0.25 0.09. 0.06 0.25, 6:05 Crit Moves: ♦xxx »»»x »xx+. xi.xx. ' Delay/Veh: 10.7 10.5 8.9 -10.0 10.6 9.4 11.1 11.3 9.2 10.4 11.5 9:.1 - Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 I.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00. 1-.00• AdjDel/Veh: 10.7 10.5 8.9 10.0 10.6 9_4 11.1 11.3 9.2 10.4 11.5, .9,1 -LOS by Move: B B A A B A B B A B B A ApproachDel: 10.4 . 10.2 10.8 11.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1,Op - - ApprAdjDeL 10.4 - 10.2 10.8- 11.0 LOS by Appr:. B_ B g - xxxxxx»xxxxxxx+»xxxxx3»xx+xxxxxxxx»»xxx»xxxxx>xxx»xxxx»»x»»xxxxxx»xxxx»Bxriixx;xx . Traf fix 7..5.1115 (c). 2001, Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE: - MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH MID DAYMon Jul 28, 2003 16:04:29 - Page 1-1 -�. ________________________________________._____________ :___________________- LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - - - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions With Improvements _ . Mid -Day Peak Hour. (Sunday) ______________________._____ _______ _______ ______ Level Of Service Computationn-Report __________ ____ _________ 2000 HCM Operations method (Future Volume Alternative) . Intersection #7 Meadows Pkwy (NS)/ Pauba Rd (EW)'.. -, - ##x#####x#xxx#{.###�##•x#########rxr######i######f rir##xxr`i i#####ii:i i####xii#### . Cycle (sec) :• 0 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.159 Loss Time (sec): 8 (Y+R =' 5 sec), Average Deray:(sec/veh): 10.8� Optimal Cycle: 60 ,Level' Of Service: A.1 . ####:x#####x####xa###x#x#i####x##♦xx#i#t####x##•ii'>"�y•####.#####>xiiix###iiiii:## Approach-.. North.Bound South Bound • East Bound: West Bound Movement: L - T - . R L - T - - R .L , - T - R- L - T - R ---------' I --- Control: ------- II Permitted -------`--- II- :-Permitted ------------ Permitted it ------------ -I Permitted . Rights: - - -Include - Include Include ...Include - Min. Green: 10 10 = 10 10 10 10 10 30 10 10 10 10'- Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 II---------- .i 0 2 0 1.1 ". ---- 11-------------- 1 '6 1 0 1 11-----.----------I 1 0 1 0 1 ------ ---1--------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: :40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15 - Growth Adj. 1:10 1,16 1.10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10'. 1,10 Initial Bse: 44 .162 --28 8 180 33 30 58 41 29 63 17 Added Vol: -�-12 :� 11 0 9 12 "47 46 . 68 - 13 0 60 9 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 Initial-Fut: 56 173- - 28 17 �192 80 76 126 54 29 123 .25 -- User Adj: 1.00 1:00 .1.0o 1.00-r.0o 1-:00 1.o0 1.00 1-:00 1.00 1.60 1.00 PHF Adj: -. 0-.9.5 0;95 O495 0_95 0.9.5 0.95,. W.95, 0': 95 6-.95.. 0.95 0:95 0.951, - PHF Volume: 59 182 -29 18 203 84 80. 133 57 .. 30 129 27. - _ '. .I Reduct Vol -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Reduced Vol: - 59 182 29 18 203 - 84. 80 133 57 30 129 ` 27• -. PCE Adj: 1,00. 1:00 1,00 1:06 1.00 - 1':00 i:. 00 i.00 1:00 1i00 1.00 1.00. ' MLF Adjo 1:00 -1.00 1.00 .. 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00- 1.00 1.00 1.00: Final Vol.:-. 59 *182 29. 18 203 84 -II--------------- - 80 133 57, II 30 ---------------I 129 27 - ---------- I ------------11------------ Saturation Flow Module: -- Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00- 0.94 0.94 1:00 0.94 0.94. 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 Lanes: T-.00 2::00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.'00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 - Final Sat.: 16Q0 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600 11--------------- 1600 1700 1600 p1_.-___ 1600 1700 -------- 1600. ------------ I ---------------- Capacity Analysis II--------------- Module- Vol/Sat: 0.'04 0.05 0.02 0:01 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.62 0.08 0.02' - Crit Moves:. Green/Cycle:�0:37 0.37 0:37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 - Volume/Cap: 0.10 0:14 0.05 0.03 0.16 0.14 0.10 0.16 0.07 0.04 0.15 0.03 Delay/Veh: 12.5 12.6 12.1 12.0 12.7 12.9 8.4 8.8 8.2 8.0 8.8 8.0::� User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 Ya AdjDel/Veh: 12.5 12.6 12.1 12.0 12.7 12.9- 8.4 8.8 8.2 8.0 8.8 8.0 - DesignQueue: 1. 4 .1 0. 4 2 1 2 .1 1 2 0 xxx#xx####xxxxxx#x+xx#xxxxx#x#x#x####xxxxx##xxxxxxxyxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx#xxxxx#x#xx Traf f ix. 7:5-.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed`to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE - MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH MID DAYThu Jul 24, 2003 09 22d14, Page I = 1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis... Cumulative (2005)'. Growth With Project Conditions Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- bevel Of Service Computation -Report - 2000 HCM,Unsignalized Method (Future.Volume Alternative) -:. - Intersection #14 Westerly Access Dwy;.(NS) / ,Pauba.Rd.,:(EW). +ii+xx+#++xf#+#+#+##+».»»x».++#+v»»»+x.».♦x»+»+♦v»+:�+»i#x'#f.++f.»a++#.#.#x�i ix+x#x»•+iti-.- Average Delay (sec/veh).i. 11_3- Worst Case Level Of'�Service: B, »+»xx#+#+++x#xw#++#++.##»x####+;•»»»»»x,»v»a».x:+#xf».+.+xf»,i xxi»+xxxi»-»»»»»#.�i:#x�i.x+#f ... Approach: North Bound . South Bound - East Bound,. West Bound , Movement: L -. T - R L T -- R L - _T -- R L - T- R Control: . Stop Sign _Stop. SignUncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: - Include .Include IncludeInclude .. Lanes: 0 0 .0 0 00 0- .1! 0 0. 0 1 10 0 0 .0 0 0 1 0 -Volume Module.: - _- Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 125 0 O 144 b, - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.: 10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 -- Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 158 0', Added Vol: 0 0 0 34 0. 17 _ 18 64 0 0 54 35:.. PasserByVol: 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 -, Initial Put: :. - 0 0. 0 34 _ 0 17 18 202 0 - 0- 212 - 35 - User Adj: 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.. 1.00: PHF Adj: 1..00 1.00. -1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - PHF Volume: 0 0 0 34 0 17 18 202 0 0 212 -35 - - Reduct Vol: 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' O - - Final Vol.: 0 0 0 34 0 17 18 202 0 0 212 35 Critical Gap Module: , Critical, Gp:6.4-xxxx 6..2 4.1 xxxx . xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx . - FollowUpTimixxxxx-xxxx xxxxx, .3.:5 xxxx _3.3 2..2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xk ooc' .s,`, ___________I_______________ __________________________ _________I Capacity Module: Cnflict.Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 467 xxxx 230 247 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx - Potent cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx. 558:xxxx .814 1330 xxxxxxxxx, xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.,: xxxx xxxx xxxxx -.552 xxxx 814. 133.0 xxxx.xxxxx xiocx xxxx -xxxxx - - ------------- _1_-------------- I1_---------- _______c____________________._4. Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx. -.7.7 xxxx--xxxxx xxxxk xxxx•kxxxx' - LOS by Move: » x f + _ # + A Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT -LT - LTR - RT IT LTR - RT.-`- Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxk xxxxx xxxx 618 xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.3 xxxxx 7.7-xxxx. xxxxx xxxxx:xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • * • » B x A » • + • *,' - ApproachDel: xxxxxx 11.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: » B • - x - - Traffix 7.5.1115 (n)- 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed,to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE F'35 MITIG8 - CUM GROWTH MID DAYThu Jul 24, 2003 09:22:41 -page---.- - ...q,,.. LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis, . Cumulative (2005) Growth. With -Project Conditions - Mid -Day Peak Hour .(Sunday) ---- -- ---- -- ----' --=--` Level Of Service Computation Report - `---------------- - -- ' 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative).• Intersection 415 Easterly Access, Dwy_ (NS)/ Pauba.Rd.' (EW) r. . - .. x++++xi+»++ix+}++.+++xY:axf+l+++++x#+Y+f#x+Yx+++,Y+Yt+++lY Average Delay -(sec/veh):- 12.3. ,Worst Case Level Of 'Service: B ` .- +x+++xx+x++wxxxxxff xxxxxxs++++•++r�-+x»`x xfxx-x�xxxrx`xx++fi`+fxxxxx x»++xfvfix'f xf'+++�+, .. ... Approach: North Bound. South Bound-,: --East Bound --West Bound Movement: L T R L - T - R L T -R L T- R - _____ ______I____.______-_ _ - ___.______I�____ ________ 'I__-_ Control- Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled _.____ - 'Uncontrolled .. . Rights: Include Include Include - Includey:.. Lanes: 0 -'0 0 0 0, 0 0 11 0- 0 '0 1 0 0- 0 0 0 0 1 0 - - ---------�-_-_--------`----------------- ---- -`------ -`----- Volume Module: ---- --------- - Base Vol: 0 0 .0 - 0 0 0 0 125 0 0- 144: 0 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 '1.16 1.10 1.10 1.10 - Initial Bse: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 138 .0 0 158 0 Added Vol:. 0 0 0 51 0 11 12 86 0 0 78 53.' PasserByvold 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0, 0 0 51 0. 11 12 224 0 .0. 236 - 53 User Adj.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1:00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adjr. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 i.00 1:00 PHF Volume: - 0 0 0 51 0 11 12 -224 0 0 236 53 Reduct Vol: 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0- - Final Vol.: 0 0 0 51 0 11 12 224 0 0 236 53- Critical Gap Module: - -- t- Critical Gp-xxxxx xxxx-xxxxx• 6.4 xxxx 6.2 41 xxxx'xxxxx xxxxlc xxioc-xkx FOIIOWUPTam xxxxx xxxx xxxx)c 3.5 xxxx 3.3 2-:2 xxxx x3Ax xxxxx I --------------- 11-------------- __11_____--_____.__11_______________� kxxx jc x ": --• - ------------ Capacity Module: Cnflict-:'.Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 510 xxxx 263 289 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 527 xxxx 781. 1284 xxxx x -' xxxx xxxx xxkxx -•" Move Cap. xxxx xxxx xxxxx S23 xxxx '781 1284 xxxx_xxxxx: kxxx:-xxxx-xxianc - "•" Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del.-xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7-. 8. xxicx- xxxxX; xxxxx xxxx'xxXxx - . LOS by Move: x + + +- +. + A Movement:. LT - LTR -RT -LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT = LTR'-- RT Shared Cap:: xxxx xxxx xxxSoc xxxx 555.xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12.3 xxxxx 7.8 xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxic xxxxx - .. Shared LOS: x + + + B - + A+ ApproachDel: xxxxxx 12.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx -- ApproachLOS: • B • i I' f-. Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE`. I ..a CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O ♦_P) Wed Jul 30, 2003. 17:0436 _ _ Page 2-1 LDS -Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth With Proj ectConditions (w/Stake'Conf.), Mid -Day Peak -Hour (Sunday)' _ - ---------------------------------------------------------- -------- Level Of Service Computation -Report - - - 2000.HCM Unsignalized Method`.(Future VolumdAlternative) Intersection' 41 Green Tree -Rd (NS)/ 'Pauha Rd. (EW)• x*x.x xxxxx+x•+x+»+»*x*x+:�xxx+x+»ii++++xx+#. xxxx#'xi'i�':�e'#+x�:l ;i'i'+#xx xaiistixx++i:�x :�x+x .. - . Aver'age.Delay (sec/Veh) 9.7 - Worst Case Level Of Service A »+»»++x++x*x+xxx*x�ix+�xx»i*xx+*.xxf#ix»x-+xi+4+++x+x+x»+++ii+xax+rirrx '+iv i.+xax#ix+x - Approach:- ` North Bound South Bound - East Bound West. Round ` Movement: -L - T-- R L' -'T - R L -' "T - R, I; - R ____________ --------------- ________------------ Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign- Uncontrolled - Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include. -Include - Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0. 10 1 0 0 00 0 1 0-.0 Volume Module: - Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 130 0 0 149 D Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: - 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 143 0 0 164 0. Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 113 0 PasserByVol: - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 265 0 0 277 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 .1.00 -1.00 1.00. 1:00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00.1 0.0.. Y.'00 PHF VolumeE' 0 0 0 6 6 2 4 265 0 . 277 0 Reduct.Vol: 0 0 O 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0, 0 0 0 2 4 265 O 0 277 6 7ritical• Gap Module: ',. ,Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx. 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx .. FollowUpTim xxxxx-xxxx xxxxx'xxxxx. xxxx 3.3 2.2xxxx xxxxx xxxxx-:xxxx xiootx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 277 -277 xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx x:aaoc, Potent Cap:': xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx.xxxx 767 1298 xxxx kxxxx xxxx'"xxxx_:xxxxx_ Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 767 1298 xxxx xxxxic xxxxxxxx-xxxxx`'" Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.7 7.8 xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxzxx.xxxxx ' LOSS -by Move: * + + * +. A. - A:. Movement: LT - LTR RT LT - LTR.- RT LT - LTR.,- RT LT - LTR.- RT shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd=StpDe1-:xxxxx xxxx-xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: + » + » + x A » +.. .** .. * . ApproachDel: xxxxxx 9.7 xxxxxx xxxxxx -- ApproachLOS: * A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE CUM GROWTH AID DAY (0 + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17::64-36. Page 3-1 ------------------------------------------------- ------- ------- -------- IDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis. Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions Iditions (W/Stake Conf.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) --------------------------------- �7 ---------------------------- Level Of Service C6mput ---------------- ation eport. 2000 HCM.Unsig al#qd M6th6d jFutjAre VoIupme Alternatiye), Intersection #2 Calle Cedral (NS).j ,PaubaiAd,,(EK), Average Delay (sec/veh): 9. . 8 Worst. Case Level Of, Service:, Approach: "North sound. South Bound East.Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L. T R L. - T R. L - T - R - - - - - - - - - - - 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Control: Stop Sign 'stop Sign - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - Uncontrolled '.Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 0 1 0 1D, 6 o, o 0 1 o I ------------ --------------- --------- Volume Module: ------------ ---------------- Base Vol: 0 0 0 0, 0 2 4 125 - 0 0 156 0 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.1.0 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16, Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 .0 2 4 138 0 0 172 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 122 0 0 113 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 Initial Put: 0 0 0 Q. 0 .2 4 260 0 0 285 0 User Adj- 1.60 1.00 1.00" 1 0.0 1.00 1.06 1. 00. 1.00. 1.00 1.00.1..00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.06 1.00 1.60 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1-00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 260 0 0 285 0 Reduct Vol: 0. 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 260 0 0 285 0 critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xkxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx Y:xxx 6.2 4.1. FollowUpTim:xzxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 30= 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx -xxxx Capacity Module:.. Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 285 285 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap_: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. 759 1289 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx Xx759 1289 xxxx xxxxx xxxx XX2= ------------ I --------------- --------------- Level Of Service Module: --------------- --------------- Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. xxxx 9.8 7.8,xxxx xxxxX xxxxx xxxx )ULCKX f LOS by Move: > > # # # A A . * # > > #1 .1 Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT LTR - RT LT -LTR -, RT LT.,- LTR RT Shared Cap. xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Y_cxx XY_=_ Shrd Stpl)el:xxxxxxxxx xx5= xxxxx xkxx xY---bc 7.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxicx xxxx $hired LOS: A . * ApproachDel: xx_-Icxxx 9.8 xxxx ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE CUM GROWTH MID DAY .(0.+ P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:04,36 Page-4-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis.. - Cumulative (2005) Growth With•Project Conditions (W/Stake Conf.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday)' - - --------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report .2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future -Volume Aleerriatide). •:�.•.�ei�tas+•3,�f•�ei♦��f tii,}b*:x:i♦♦�••i•x,wii:�:�keaia*♦xfa,tx i:�:+i.ai3+a',t ri:�ax ea.�; Intersection q3-Camino Romo°•(NS)/ Rancho V39ta Rd. I(EW) --` - •x+�+���>�++r:�:�:iiitiiw>:�:+t++ia>3.3:ai�:�r,a �x�ft��ki#:>�::ik'i::ta:t�x'i i«�a3'saiwi;w ' Average=Delay'(sec/veh)! --10:2 'Wor`$Y'Cd$d �'Lddel' Of SerYlCei H aif••�3i:a�xi:��t�sir+�>���+::.i�i�i3+:[wi�i>+efiit++:+y+iiv +is,i:f++x+.a+:�rxt i.s':ts+ea Approach: North Sound - South,Bound* -East Bound" West Bound - Movement: L [T -R L -T Rc.._.L T ._g..._:.L _.. T' R Control: Stop Sign - Stop Sign. - Uncontrolled Uncontrolled - Rights: Include - .Include •.Include ,. Include - Lanes: .. 0: 1 0 0 1 •.0 0 0 0_ 0 '0 0 0 1 0 - 0_ 1 00 0 ------------ i -- - - -------- - -ii --------------ir---------------ir------ -_ - - - i Volume Module: - - Base Vol: 21 0 4 0.- 0 0 0 63 8 5 92 0 - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1:.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.-10 1.10 1.10 1.10 - Initial Bse: 23 0 4 00 '.0 0 -6'9 9 6 101 0 - Added Vol: 28 0 0 0. 0 0 0 34 28 0 34 -0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 O 0 0 Initial Put: 51 0 4 0 0 0 0 103- 37 6. 135 0'' User Adj: 1.00 1.100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00` - PHF Adj: - 1.00 1-00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-06 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume:. 51 0. .4 0 0 0 0 103 31 6 IT5 0 - - ReductVol:0 0 0 0 :0 0 0 00 0 0 0- Final Vol.: 51 0 4 0 ` 0 0 0 103 37 6 135 -0 Critical Gap Module: - - - Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xcxxxxioix - FollowUpTim 3..5. xxxx: 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx-xxxx.xxxxx --2. 2iocxx_xxxiix Capacity Module: - Cnflict Vol: 268 xxxx 122 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 140 xxxx xiocxz Potent Cap.:. 726. xxxx. 935 -.xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx'xxxx xxxxx-•1456 xxxx-xxxxx Move Cap.: 724 xxxx-. 93& _xxxx xxxx x�oixz xxxx-xxxx`-xxxxx "-.456 xxxx xxxxx.- ---------- __,4--------------- 4,------------- __II----------- -___L�__z_________-__�. Level Of Service Module: - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 8.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx ma= 7.5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: a .• A.. s • - • • '• ., ♦: A •- Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT' LT- LTR - RT Shared Cap.: 724 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxic-xxxxx- xxxx xxxx:xxxxx'- xxxx-xxxx xxxxx. . Shrd StpDel: 10.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx-xxxmc': xxxxx xxxx: xxxxx -7.5 xxxx xxxxx- Shared LOST: - B • * i • +.. + • p + - ApproachDel: 10.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx x�ocxxx - ApproachLOS: B • + Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling ASSOC. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE E5 1 CUM GROWTH MID DAY(0+ P).Wed Jul 30, -2003 17:04:36 Page 5-1 ---------------- _-------------- ____ ______ _______ __.___._______ .' LDS.Church Traffic .Impact:Analysis. . Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions:.(W/,Stake Conf:j Mid -Day Peak Hourr-(Sunday) - - ------------------------ - ---- ----- -- ----------------------- Level Of• Service Computation; Report::.:: 2000 HCM Unsignalized �Method (Future Volume Alternative) } x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx+isis x�xxaa�,x,��xi+#x,t:ax:xxxxaixa:��xwixxxxxxxxxxxxt:txxrxxxx - . Intersection 44.:Camino Roma (NSh /:Corte Villosa 1 (EW) .a- - xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxi#f xxxxxx•axxxxxxx+.•xxxxxxx •,xxxx:xxixxxxxxxxxxxxxxs,xxxxxrix�xxxf♦ Average .Delay tsecbveh): i8.4.= •Worst Case Level:Of -Service: A,. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxt,xx+•xxxxi�xxxtit�iiif:;xxiixixftxxxxsxixx�x�xixxxxxx3xxxxxxxxxxxxx ., . Approach: North Bound., South Bound- East Bound West Sound ..`, Movement: L - T R Z- T R L - T , R L T 7 R - Control: Stop Sign, .;Stop Sign .:Uncontrolled --:Uncontrolled - Rights: -Include - Include .Include - Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0- 0 1 0 0 0 1. 0 1 0 0. 0 0 O 1. 0 1- . ----------- II---------- ____=II--------------- II__________-_ Volume Module:- h .. _..,. .. .. .. Base Vol: 0 0 0 1 0: 5 13 5 0 0 1 2- Growth Adj-: 1.10 1.10 1...10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1,10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 0 0 0. 1 0 6 -14 6 0 0 1 2 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 28 28 0 0 0 0 0` PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial. Fut: 0 0 0 1 0 r 34 42 6 0 0 1 2' User Adj: 1.00 1.00 -1.0o 1.00 1.00 _1.00 1:00 a ..00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 _ PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - PHF Volume: 0 001 0 .34 42 6- 0 0 1 2- Reduct Vol: - 0 0 0 - 0_ 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 Final Vol.:. 0 -0 0 1 0 34 42 6 0 0 1 2 Critical Gap Module: .,. Critical Gp xxxxx xxxx-xxxxX 6.4.: xxxx 6.2 4-.1. xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx x-cxxx FollowUpTim xxxxx-xxxxxxxxx 3Sxxxx 3.3 2;2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx „ - - - - - �----------------------- - II --------------- II Capacity Module: . I � - - --------= --�. - Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxxxxxxx- 91 xxxx 1 3xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ? Potent Cap..: xxxx xxxx xxxxx,. 914 xxxx,. 10.89-. 1632.xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxJocx_ 895 xxxx 1089 1632 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx ____________I_______________ --------------- 11--------------- Level Of Service- Module: ___________-___� - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx -9.0 xxxx 8.4 7.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx' LOS by Move: x *- _ x- A x, A A Movement: IT - LTR _- RT.. LT.- LTR;- RT: LT.- LTR - RT. LT - LTR - RT ..._ - Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx;. ..xxxx. xxxx xxxxx ,xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx.. .-. Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.3 xxxx.xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ��'� Shared LOS: x x x - x x x A ApproachDel: xxxxxx 8.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: x A _ M1� Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2061 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE 's CF- Lf CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:04:36 Page '6-1 LDS Church Traffic ImpactAnalysis Cumulative (2005) Growth. With Project Conditions "(W/StakeConE.:) Mid=bay- Peak )lour (Sunday), -- -- ------ ---------------- ---- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Pu[urevolume Alternatide)_. Intersection #51 Corte Villosa (ti5). / Pauba. Rd (EW) Average Delay ('s'ec/veh):' 17.1._Case Level Of Service: C »x»»»»»„###,»xi»s»»,#„#x###xxx•i3ix»####`f,x»x»!»ixx,#x»#,x»„xii##»» „#;,xi»,x . Approach: North Bound ''`South Bound East Bound West Bound -- Movement: --L - T - R L.. - T � R L. - T R L, _ - T, -! ' R ________-_ ______ _______ ___-___ ___,__ Control: Stop Sign. Stop,Sign Uncontrolled.- Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include,. Include Include Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 6 1 - 0 1 0 0`. 1 I____________II__________________ _ _______IL_______________ _________I Volume Module: - Base Vol:. 12 2 -4 2 1 7 - 9 109 7. 7 125 8 Growth Adj: 1.10 1.101.10 1.10 -1.10 1.10 1.10 .1.10< 1.10 1.10 1.10 L 10' Initial Bse: 13 2 4 2 1 -.8 10 120 8 8 138 9 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 28 28 234 0 0 225 0- PasserByVol: 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 6 0 .0 0.. InitialFut: 13 2 4 2 1 36 38 354 8 8 363 9' User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00. 1-.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 13 2 4 2 1 36 38 354 8 8 363 9. Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 6 Final Vol.: 13 2 4 2 l 36 38 354 0 8 363 9 Critical Gap Module:. Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7 ' 1 6.5 6.2 4.1 )O= xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3..5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2_2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II________------- II -------- _------- -II _____________ I Capacity Module: - Cnflict Vol: 830 816- 354 815 815 363" 371 xxxx xxxxx 362 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap:': 291 314- 694 299 314 687 1198 xxxx xxxxx 1208 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 267 301 694 286 302 687 1198 xxxx xxxxx_1208 xxxxxxxxx '. ----------- I --------------- II---------------II------------Il-------.------L Level Of Service Module: - Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 10.2 xxxxx-xxxx 10.5 8.0 xxx xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx . LOS by Move: y * - B + » - B - A , i A. Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT_ SharedCap.: 272 xxxx xxxxx 291 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxXYYY xxxxx Shrd. StpDel: 19.0 xxxx xxxxx 17.5 xxxx xxxxx 8-1 xxxx xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: C C » # A » , A ApproachDel: 17.1 - 11.1 xxxxxx 'xxxl_x ApproachLOS-: C B # Traffix 7.5.1115 (C) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed. to URBAN CROSSROADS,. IRVINE e it CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O t P) Wed Jul 30, 2003. 17 0436 �_' .. Pagel-1 LDS ChurchTraffic-ImpactAnalysis Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions (Yt/St'ake Conf.)� - Mid -Day Peak"Hour.. (Sunday) " ----------------------- ---- ----------------------------------------- .Level- Of $eryice Computatlon,Report. 2000-HCM 4�Way Stop Method (Future Volume,Alternative):,. ... Intersection #6 Meadows Pkwy (Ng) / Ranghq:Vista, Rd.. (EW).. Cycle (sec): 0 Crikioal :qol,_/Cap (.%) -, 0.262 :il. Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R -4 sec) Average Rely_ (sec/veh).., 10.4 . Optimal Cycle: - 0 '5.. - �LeveT Of Service: - ,-B - Approach:- North Bound ..South Bound East Bound West.Bcund Movement: L _....T -. R L. .. .._. ,<T -, R. _ ------------ I------------ :__11 ___ ______ II _____ _____ ---------------- Control: Stop Sign 'Stop Sign. Stop Sign,. Stop Sign. Rights: Include Include Include' Include _ Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 .0 ..0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. Lanes: - 1 0. 2 0 1 1,-. 0, 2 0 1 - 0 1 0- 1 0 - 0 1 0 1 0 ,. -- --- ----I-----------11 -.------II---------------II--------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: - 22 165 12 21 181 16 24 29 25 17 41 28' Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10. 1.10 1,10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10, Initial B9e: 24. 182 13 23 199 20 26 32 28. 19 45 31 Added Vol �9 95 28 12 96 25 25 6 9 28 0 11' PasserByVol: 0 0 0- 0, 0 0-- 6 6 0 0 0 0 . Initial Fut: 33 277 41 35 295 45 51 32 - 37 47 45 42 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0o 1.00 1.00. 1.00. PHF Volume: 33 277 41 35 295 45 51 32 37- 47- 45 42 Reduct Vol: 6 0 0 0` 'O 0. 0 ..0 0 0 0. '0 Reduced Vol: 33 '277 41 35� 295 - 45 51 32 37 47 45 42 PCE Adj:1.06 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1..00.- 1.00" MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00.. Final Vol d 33 271 ` 41 -35 295 -45. 51 32 37. 47- 45 42. ----------- I ______>___-___11______ ________11______ - Saturation Flow Module; Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1-00: Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.86 0.53 0.61 0.70 6.67, 0..63. Final Sat.: 516 1118 623 521 1127 629 418 285 336 346 357 347 .. ------------ I ---------------- II--------------- ----------- ___-11------ _ ___-_-_i . Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.25 0.07 0.09 0.26, 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.11. 0.13. 0.13 0.12 Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 9.8 10.8 8.6 9.8 10.9 8.5 10.5 9.8 9.5 10.5 10.0 9.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' AdjDel/Veh: 9.8 10.8 8.6 9.8 10.9 8.5 10.5 9.8 9.5 10.5 10.0 9.5 LOS by Move: A B A A B A B A A B A A ApproachDel: 10.5 10.5 10.0 10.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 10.5 10.5 10.0 10.0 LOS by Appr: B B B B xxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Traffix 7.5.1115-(c) 2001 Dowling Assoc.:- Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE ,EqZ CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:05:11 . Page 4-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis - Cumulative (2005) Growth W/Project Conditions W/Improvements-'(Stake Conf.). - Mid -Day BeakHour (Sunday)' ; - -- - Lever Of Service- Computation Report - 2000 HCM Operations Method -(Future Volume Alternative)., xt+-»xxxxxxxxxx+x+xxxx;%#ixx.x.x'fx.xfxf+i•+e•.♦xxf+ttxk'x t•+iv»ix+.i+iixa++x»i i•x xxxvx .. Intersection #6'Meadows'Pkwy '(NS) / Ran)6h6 Vista 'Rd...(N} - +++•:ixxxxxxxxx+»»+xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxi4++a+,Yx+x4x+s;++xxsixiyx:+ii:�i'i x:r+it+iirxx» - z i Cycle ' (sec) 2 - . - 0. Loss Time (sec): 8 (YaR`= 5--'sec) Average Delay: (sec/veh): 8.3 - Optimal Cycle: 60 - - Levei Of Service: xxx+xxxxxx+fxxxxxxxxx++xxxxx+xx+xxx rx�»xxv3x+x++xxxx++xx+xxixxx ++'rxxx+.+xxxi#x++ ••. Approach: - .-North Bound`." South` Bound -East. Bound. - West_ Bound Movement: - L-` - T R L - T - R L T - R L T - R ------------ I--------------- II---------------- _II_____- I�________ _____ Control:- Permitted Permitted. Permitted - -Permitted - Rights; Include -`Include Include -Include Min. Green: -•10 10 10 10' 10. 10 10' 10 . 10 10-: 10 10 _ Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0- 1 -0 1 0- 0' 1 0 1 ---------- __1----- _ II -------------'-II--------- I __0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 22 165 12 21 181 18 24 29 25 17 41 28 - Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.16 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 24 -182 13 23 199 20 26- 32 28 .19 45 31 Added Vol.:, 95 28 12 96 25 25 0 9 28 0. 11 - PasserByVol: 0 0 0 -0 0 0. 0 0 0 -0 0 q Initial Fut: 33 277 41 35 295 45 51 32 37 47. 45 42 User Adj: 1.00-1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0o 1.00 1.00 1.00 .PHF Adj: 0.950.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 '0.95 '0.95 PHF Volume: 35' 291 - 43. 37 311 47 54 34 38 49 47 44- �:educt Vol: 0 0 0- 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 "Reduced Vol: 35 291 43 37 311 47 54 34 38 `49 47 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1. 00:1.00 1:00 1..`00 1.00� 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..0o 1.001:00 1:00 Final Vol. r 35. 291 43 37 311 47- 54 34 38 49.� 47- 44, __________ I--------------- II____----------- II--------------- II--------------- � 'Saturation Flow Module: - -Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1100' Adjustment: 0.94' 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.o0 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 - Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.60 1.00 0.87 0.51 0.62 0.71 0.65 0.64 - Final Sat.: 1600 3400 -1600 1600 '3400 1600 1395 866 996 1141 1102. 1021` ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II------ _________i Capacity. Analysis Module: - Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Crit Moves: xxxx - 3x xx - Green/Cycle: 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28- 0.28 Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.15' 0.05 0.04 0.16 0.05 0.14 0.14 0.14 0..16 0.16 0.16 Delay/Veh: 5.2 5.6 5.2 5.2 5.6 5.2 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 User DelAdj: 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 5.2 5.6 5.2 5.2 5.6 5.2 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 DesignQueue: 0 4 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xxxxxxxxxxxx+xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxx»xxxxxx*xxxxxxxxx+xxxxxxxxxxxx - Traffix 7.5-.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, I,RVINE CUM GROWTH MID DAY'(0 + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17: 04:36 s. Page 8-1 -------------------------------- I � --------------- 1 7 -------- ------------------ LDS Church.Traffic Impact.Ana lysis. Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions (W/Stake Coni.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday)_ ---------------------------------------- I , --------- 77--7 ------ -------------------- Level of Service. Computqtion. Report 2000.HCMA7W4Y Stop Method (Future Volume Alternativ6) Intersection #7,,Meadows Pkwy (NS) Pauba Izd(EW) Cycle (sec): 0 Critical-Vol./Cap. (X,) 0.322- Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4,sec) Average Delay (sec/veh). 11,9 Optimal Cycle: .0 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound. South Bound East Bound Hound West Movement: L - T - L - T - R L - T - R L - T -' R� ------------ I I --------------- ------------ --------- ---- 77 ------- Control; Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 _____-______I_______________ ------------ --------------- --------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 40 147 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 IS: Growth Adj: 1.10 1.10 1.10 IAO 1.16 1-10 1-16 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10" Initial Bse: 44 10 ja 8 186 33 30. 58 41 29 63 17 Added Vol: 29 ii 0 9 12 112 112 92 30 0 84 9 Passersyvol- 0 o 0 0 0, 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 Initial Fut: 73 173 28 17 192 145 142 156 71 29 147 25 user Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 I._00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 l.00 1 oo' 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 73 173 28 17 192 145 142 150 71 29 147 25 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 73 173 28 17 192 145 142 150 71. 29 147, 25 PCE Adj. 1.06 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1700 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.66 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 73 173 28 17 192 145 142 150 71 29 147 25 ------------ --------------- 11 ------- ------- --------------- _______________� Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.oa 1.00 1-00 1:00- 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 437 930. 509 445 956 529 454 485 531 424 456 493 ------------ 1 7 ------- 11 --------------- --------------- _______________� Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.19 0.05 0.04 0.20 0-27 0.31 0.31 0.13 0.07 0.32 0.05 Crit Moves: Delay/Veh: 11.9 11.5 9.6 10.6 11.5 11.4 13.4 12.7 10-0 11.2 13.3 9.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.9 11.5 9.6 10.6 11.5 11.4 13.4 12.7 10.0 11.2 13.3 9.8 LOS by Move: B B A B B B B B A B B A; ApproachDel: 11.4 11.4 12.5 12.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11-4 ll.4. 12.5 12.6. LOS by Appr: B B B Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE M N I i ! 19 CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0 + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:05:11 .. -Page 5-1 LDS Church Traf f ic. Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth W/Project Conditions W/Improvements (Stake Conf.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) - - ------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation. -Report . 2000,HCM Operations: Method (Future Volume Alternativa)� ., .. x xxxrx»x»»»xix»xxxxx»»x+xx»»xx»x»»xx»x:�xxi�4xxxxf.»iaxxxxxxx:xxx;xxxx xx#»xxx x.x»xx ... . Intersection,#7,Meadows_Pkwy (NS)./. ,Bauba Rd- .(EW)., xxx»xxxxx»+xxxx»»xxxxx x:�x»»xxxxxx:ixxxxxxxxxtxxxxxxx»xxxxxxsxxxxxxtxxif xx�x.xxfx.;x - - Cycle (sec): 0. .Critical Vol.-/Cag:.-.(X)_ Loss Time (sec):. 8 (Y+R 5 sec), Average Delay, (Sec/veh) ._.10. 8 Optimal Cycle: 60 - Level Of Service: g - xxxxxx»»»»xxxxxxx»xxxx»»xx:>x»xxx�ixxxxxxxxx»xexx»xxxxxisxxxixx xx rx»»x•x�xxxi» Approach: North Bound .South.Bound, .;East.Bound West,. Bound. „-, Movement: -L - - T - R L - T - R L .---T � - R L � -.-T - R `�� - _______ _______ II_______ ______II .___. _.______II___ -------- Control: Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted. Rights: Include Include Include Include.,.. _ Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1010 10 10 10 _ Lanes: 1,.0 2 0 1 1 0 ,2 0- 1 1 0. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 i __________��--------------- ��___,_____ _______ ___ I____ ______ ________ Volume Module: Base Vol:, 40 19.7- 25 7 164 30 27 53 37 26 57 15 Growth Adj:,1.10 1.10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1:10. 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 44 162 28 8 180 33 30 .58 41- 29 63: 17 Added Vol: 29 11 - 0. _9 12 112- 112 92- 30 0 -84, 9 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0- Initial Fut: 73 173 28 11 192 145 142 150 71 29 147 25 - User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.m 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 77 102 29 18. 203 153 , 149 158 74 30;- 151,., ...27 Reduct Vol 0 0 _-0; 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 7 ' ... Reduced Vol: '77 182_ 29 18 203 153 149. _158 74 30.. 154.', 27 PCE Adj:- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00;; MLF Adj: - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 .1.00,.1.00.:1.00. 1.00 Final Vol.: 77 182 29. 18 203 153. 149 ,___158 74. 30 154, , 27 ____ _______I_______ --------- _ LI___________-___ _ II___________IL_____,__________I. Saturation Flow Module: - - Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1,00 0.94. 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1,00-�0.991. . Lanes: 1.00 2.00. 1.00 1.00 2.00' 1.00- 1.06 1.00- 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Final Sat.: 1600 3400 1600 1600 3400 1600. 1600 1700 1600..1600.1700 1600- ------------ I _____________ --------------- 11___________,_ Capacity Analysis Module: ---- 'Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.10 0.09 0.09 0,05 0.02 O.OB 0.02 Crit Moves: xx»» »x»» Green/Cycle: 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.43.0.43 0.43 0.43.0.43 0.43 Volume/Cap: 0.11 0.12 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.11 0.04 0.21 0.04 Delay/Veh: 10.2 10.2 9.7 9.6 10.2 11.2 11.6 11.5 10.6 10.1 11.5 10.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 10.2 10.2 9.7 9.6 10.2 11.2 11.6 11.5 10.6 10.1 11.5 10.1 DesignQueue: -1 3 1 0 4 3 3 3 1 1 3 1 »xxx»»»»»xx».xx>»xxx»xxx»»»»xxx»»»»»xxx»»♦xxxx»»x»xx»x»»xxxx»xx»»xxxx»».x x»»xxxx»» Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS,IRVINE - Ems CUM GROWTH MID DAY (0 + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:04:36 Page 9-1 ---------------------------------------------------------- -- _______ _____-___-- .LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditi6fis (W%Stake Conf.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ --------------- Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume AlternziEive), Intersection #14.West6tly Acces6� Dwy. (NS) Pauba `Rd. (kW) Average Delay(.qed/Vd_h)":'. -1 1.6. -WordE Case Level Of.'Service: . Approach: North Bound South Bound.; East:BoundWest Bound Movement: T - R L - T R L - T- R L T R� ------------ -------- ------- Control: Stop7 Sign StopSign Uncontrolled Unc6ntiolled Rights: include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 it 0 0 .0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1: 0 ------- --------------- -------- ------------ ------ ------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 o: 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 144 Growth Adj: 1: 10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1-10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.1.0 I.-io i.lo Initial Bse& 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 158 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 84 0 42 42 80 0 0 71 .84'' PasserByVol: 0 0: 0 0 0 a 0 0 or 0 d 0 initial.Put: 0 0 0 84 0 42 42' 21T 0 0 229 84 User Adj: 1.00'1.00' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.0,01.00 1.66 i.oO'% PHF Adj: 1.0b i.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1. . go .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 84 0 42 42 21:7 0 `O 229 84 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 01 0 elm .0-. 2 42 217 0 0 229 84 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 84 0 42 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxxxxxx 6.4 xxxx' 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx.. FollowUpTirn;xxxxic xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xx-,xx xxxx xxxxx. ------ -------- ------ ------------- I --- ----- ----- ------ --------- Capacity Module:, Cnflict Vol- x 573 xxxx 271 313 xxxxx xxxx xxxx . xxx . .Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 484 xxxx 772 1258 xxxx xxxxic xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx )0= 472 xxxx 772 1258 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx- -----___-___I_______________ --------------- --------------- _______._______� Level!Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx Yxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT LTR- RT LT - LTR RT LT - LTR.- RT LT LTR - RT Shared Cap-: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 542 xxxxx xxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 13.6 xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxx Xxxxx Shared LOS: B »A LA ApproachDel; xxxxxx 13.6 Xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: » B Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE 0" k10 CUM GROWTH MID DAY (O + P) Wed Jul 30, 2003 17:04:36 Page 10-1 LDS Church Traffic Impact Analysis _ Cumulative (2005) Growth With Project Conditions (W/Stake Conf.) Mid -Day Peak Hour (Sunday) ________________________________________________________________________________ Level Of Service Computation Report. 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) . »xxxxx»xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:xxxxxxxxxxx:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx»xxxxxx»xx»»xxx»»xxx»xxxx»»xxx:. Intersection #15 Easterly Access Dwy: NS () / Pauba Rd- (EW) xxxxx»»xxx»»xx»xxxxxxxxxx»»»xxxxxxxxx»xxx»xxxxxxxxxx»xxx»»xxxxxxx»xxxxxs,xxixxxx#'_ Average Delay (sec/veh):.. 17.3. Worst Case Level Of Service: C xx»x'x xxxxxxxxx�xxxx:xxxxx»»xxxxxxxxxxx xx x»xx»xxxxx»xxxxxxxxxx»x»»xxxxxx»xx xxxxx x' Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include - Lanes-: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0------------ I---------------- II___ ------------ �I--------------- I_______________I' Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 144 0 Growth Adj: 1-10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1,10 1.10 1,10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Initial Bse: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 158 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 126 0 28 28 136 0 0 127 126 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 0 0 126 0 28 28 274 0 0 285 126 User Adj 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' - PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 126 0 28 28 274 0 0 285 126 'R'educt Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 126 0 28 28 274 0 0 285 126 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6-4 xxxx 6.2 4-1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ,- 'FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx, Capacity Module: _ "-'-------------------------- Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 678 xxxx 348 411 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx:- Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 421 xxxx 699 1158 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 413 xxxx 699 1158 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx- LOS-by Move: + » x x x » A x » x x x Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT. shared Cap.: xxxx .xxxx xxxxx xxxx 446 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. ShrdStpDel:xxxxx xxxx-xxxxx xxxxx 17.3 xxxxx 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: x • x x C * A x x x x » ApproachDel: xxxxxx 17.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: + C x xxxxxx x Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc- Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE ATTACHMENT NO. 8 ADDITIONAL PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE RAC U P=03\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC Appl Stf Report.doc 12 Pat Comerchero From: Web Master cc: Council Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 7:47 PM Planning Commission To: Web Master G. Thornhill Subject: City of Temecula Feedback B. Curley S. Nelson *****R********RR*RR*****R**R****RRRRR***R*#*R*RR**#**RR**********************RR Feedback: Feedback Username: Susan Reed UserEmail: csreed®adelphia.net UserTel: 909.302.6794 ContactRequested: ContactRequested CQpr Remote Name: 68.234.249.193 Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98) Date: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 Time: 07:47 PM Comments: To All City Council Members and Manager's and Mayor..This E-mail is in regards to the descision of the Building Council to approve the building of the Mormon Church on Paupa.I attended this meeting,and Im at a loss for words, with the City Attorneys allowing Ms.Mary Jane Olhasso to sit on this council, knowning she is a member of the Mormon Church, and has a special interest in the growth of her Church, in any other business this would be concidered a Special Interest,(I wonder where your Attorney went to School?) Second is the size of this building, it will be 25,000 sq.feet,It is a HUGE Building, and it will accomidate over 1500 people, no one seamed to concider this a problem, (well you would if you lived in the lovely area of Temecula, you say in your own Bio,Temecula's residents experience a strong sense of community & serene life style -Not for Us who have begged not to have this Monster Building placed in our neighborhood) When our people spoke the council listened, but when the Mormon spokesperson spoke, they asked questions, Never saying IF you build, but WHEN you build. To me thats shows so much bias. If I had knowen when I purchased this home, that a year later this Mega Church would be built in my back yard,I wouldn't be here,I bought before the law was passed, and before it was mandated (2000, 2003),You all Lied, and contune to help only special interest groups,that have Tons of money, We surely don't, most of us are retired, or make a Moderate income, we can't afford to fight this in court, but the Mormon Church can, they are a very Rich church.I wouldn't care what type of church wanted to build there, any building that large :in a residental area, is TOO LARGE. When your own Council member asked the Morman spokesman why they didn't build on the N.General Kerney site, No answere, just slience. I beleive the city never intended to hear our pleas.. cc: Council (each got one) Shawn Nelson Planning - for file 27 July 2004 Douglas A. Sevy 45654 Masters Drive Temecula, CA 92592 RE: Support of LDS building on Pauba Road Honorable councilman Jeff Stone 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Stone; I have been a citizen of Temecula for many years and have enjoyed being able to raise my family during that time. I have seen this valley grow both in commerce and in population. It is only natural that when families move into a new area, they either begin or continue spiritual associations and the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints are no exception. We are in need of this new proposed building on Pauba Road to fill the spiritual and ecclesiastical needs of the people in the Temecula Valley. This is not something unique to our community as there are buildings similar to this serving the needs in many of our surrounding communities. The members of the church are good neighbors and this facility will be used both for the needs of its members and for community events as well. I request your supporting vote in allowing this new building to become part of our community. Very truly yours, &Of apt Douglas A. Sevy IL1.)l cc: Council D. Ubnoske JUL 3 20NMayor Pro Tem Jeff Comerchero, I am a citizen and registerbd voter -of Temecula =This-lbtter is do to my concern of The proposed Church of Jesus Christ of tatter Day Saints Stake Center on Pauba Rd. This building will definitely be an asset to our community. We have high standards and an excellent Youth Program. We believe to obeying the laws of the land and upholding the constitution our forefathers have set up for us. This building will be a benefit to many people in our community and help keep youth off the streets. I would like to request your support on this project. Sincerely, RECEIVED) ez� roc �4 4 e JUL 2 9 2004 CITY MAPIAGER'g i OFFICE n Mayor Mike Naggar, 5 r N=; L !I Ili �S h' J JUL 3 C, 2C 4 I,! 9/ cc: Council D. Ubnoske I am a citizen and registered voter of Temecula. This letter is do to my concern of The proposed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Stake Center on Pauba Rd. This building will definitely be an asset to our community. We have high standards and an excellent Youth program. We believe in obeying the laws of the land and upholding the constitution our forefathers have set up for us. This building will be a benefit to many people m our community and help keep youth off the streets. I would like to request your support on this project. RECEIVED Sin JUL 2 9 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE e JoAnn Lyman 30727 Loma Linda Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 July 18, 2004 Councilman Chuck Washington 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman: cc; Council D. Ubnoske RecelvEl) JUL 2 8 2004 1JlI �' y r CITYryIA�R LI Jui Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings (LaPaz and No. General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. I, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. Sincerely, JoAnn Lyman RECEIVED 27 July 2004 Jessica Bahen 31179 Lahontan St. Temecula, CA 92592 Mayor Mike Naggar 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Mayor Mike Naggar: cc: Council D. Ubnoske r� / C U LT J(1(. 2 JUL - 0 2004 CITY WANtAGER'E OFFIC:F I have been a citizen of Temecula for over fourteen years and am a registered voter. Temecula has been a wonderful place to live and would be even better with the approval of the church building on Pauba Road. Having the church approved would mean providing a place of worship for individuals who are honest, caring, and who uphold noteworthy morals and standards. A community should have a strong foundation of people who are devout in their beliefs and in improving the city. Churches gather such individuals and facilitate the rearing of loving citizens who provide service to the community and their fellowman. This church would do the same. Please support the building of the church on Pauba Road. Many Thanks, Jessica Bahen Edward A� Temecula, Rancho 9259California Rd. #271 mow. �ws�a� ^'c�.n. Temea,la, CA 92591 cc: Council RECEIVED D. Ubnoske July 20,2004 JU! 2 JUL 2 7 2004 �J a CITY MANAGER': 43200 Business Park'Drive_— ___ _ OFFICE PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mayor Mike Nagger. I am a citizen and registered voter of Temecula. I write to you concerning the proposed Stake Center on Pauba Road for the Latter -Day Saint (LDS) community. I request that you support the project The new building will improve the quality of life for the citizens of Temecula in many ways. First, the new building will allow thousands of members of the LDS church here in Temecula to gather and worship together. Second, the church maintains the highest level of landscaping beautification & maintenance. The Stake Center will provide beauty to surrounding areas, often upgrading these areas and increasing home values. Third, the building will serve as a center where holidays such as Memorial Day and the Fourth of July can be celebrated. Fourth, the building is often used for civic activities such as Christmas Culture Events, High School choir concerts, Boy Scout events, public affairs, etc. Other uses include literacy programs for adults, crafts and home skills for women & sporting events for people of all ages. Last, the building is open to the public for those interested in researching their family histories. The building will improve the quality of life for the citizens of Temecula. Please support the proposed Stake Center. Sincerely, Eric E. Aragon Citizen & registered voter of Temecula cc: Council D. Ubnoske RECEIVED JUL 21 2004 CITY MANAGER'S 7OFFICE 1 Kirstie Denos 28465 Felix Valdez #201 I' Temecula, CA 92590 i 951-704-3173 t Dear Major Pro Tem Jeff Comerchero, I am writing in regards to the proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on Pauba Rd. I am asking you to approve this proposal as a citizen and registered voter of Temecula. I am saddened that I have to write this letter. I have personally witnessed the good that can come to the community and to its citizens. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day promotes good morals, such as being honest, working hard, and in doing good to all men. It teaches its members to serve the community and organizations and persons in need of help. The church stresses the value of education and encourages youth to excel in school. I am a young mother who wants to provide the best for my two kids. I would love for my kids to be able to participate in many of the programs I was able to. But the membership of the church as grown in this area and the current facilities are not sufficient for the demand. This decision will have a significant impact on my family. I am asking you as a mother, wife, citizen of Temecula, and member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to support this project. Thank you for your time and willingness to consider all sides of this proposal. Sincerely, Kirstie Denos Jake Lynn Aragon 29495 Rancho California Rd. #271 Temecula, CA 92591 cc: 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 JUG July 20, 2004 Dear Councilman Jeff Stone: Council D.Obnoske RECEIVE© JUL 2 7 2004 CITY IWANAGER's I am a citizen and registered voter of Temecula. I write to you concerning the proposed Stake Center on Pauba Road for the Latter -Day Saint (LDS) community. I request that you support the project The new building will improve the quality of life for the citizens of Temecula in many ways. First, the new building will allow thousands of members of the LDS church here in Temecula to gather and worship together. Second, the church maintains the highest level of landscaping beautification & maintenance. The Stake Center will provide beauty to surrounding areas, often upgrading these areas and increasing home values. Third, the building will serve as a center where holidays such as Memorial Day and the Fourth of July can be celebrated. Fourth, the building is often used for civic activities such as Christmas Culture Events, High School chair concerts, Boy Scout events, public affairs, etc. Other uses include literacy programs for adults, naffs and fame skills for women & sporting events for people of all ages. Last, the building is open to the public for #lose interested in researching their family histories. The building will improve the quality of life for the d&e s of Temecula. Please support the proposed Stake Center. Sincerely �j Jai .Aragon Citizen & registered voter of Temecula cc: Council D. Ubnoske RECEIVE© r �_ - JUL �; 17 2004 CITY IVIAPJAGER,S !VJ` JLQ 2 OFFICE 28352 Tierra Vista Road Temecula, California 92592 25 July 2004 Dear Councilman Chuck Washington: As residents of Temecula since 1995, we have observed a tremendous growth of this beautiful, unique city. Needless to say, additional buildings for city goverment are required, and are now underway. Simultaneously, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has grown very rapidly, and now it has need for an additional building to house its members. Therefore, we request your support(vote) to meet these needs. Also, we would like to thank the City Council for its excellent management of the city in the past, and wish you well for the fixture. *Sinrely, GLeo Kd r� RECEIVED Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Comerchero 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 August 5, 2004 Dear Mr. Mayor, 4Ju`.' - 2004 f ;CITY MANAGER'S PFI FILE 2504 !cc: D. Ubnoske Icy As a citizen, taxpayer, and registered voter of Temecula, I am writing to request that you support the construction of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints church building on Pauba road. This building is needed by the many LDS people in this community, It will alleviate the overcrowding of the other LDS church buildings in Temecula. It will be a great asset to the community. All LDS buildings as you may know, regardless of location, harmonize with the surrounding neighborhood. They are always well maintained and well cared for. Again, please support this worthwhile project. Very truly yours, Raymond Turnbull 45010 Putting Green Court .._ Temecula CA 92592 Raymond Turnbu cct .Council,,.D. Ubnoske Dear Councilman Ron Roberts, Date: 7/24/04 I am a citizen and registered Voter of Temecula and have two businesses within Temecula. I am writing you in regards to the proposed building of the Stake Center that is to be built on Pauba Road for the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints. It saddens me that it has had to come to this point. I know that there is much good that comes from the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints. They instill in its members the importance of the family unit and involvement of the community, loving your neighbor as yourself I have seen the work that has come from individuals within the Church and the benefit it has made for others and there community. I respectively request that you support this project as a concerned citizen. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and for the work you do to help this wonderful community. Sincerely, William Denos 2Sgg4r 1,X /2syez?o/ AUG 0 2 2004 CITY MA AGER'& OFFICE SH RECEIVED vGS Au Ca7Y n,; cc: Council D. Ubnoske July 30, 2004 Dear Councilman Roberts, It has been brought to my attention that a church building for the LDS church on Pauba Rd. that has been approved by the city council is under appeal because of a few disgruntled citizens. I am very sorry to hear that a small minority may subvert a welcome addition to the Temecula Valley. I am a business owner here in Temecula and while I do not have a vote here, I am very much affected by the decisions that are made by the city council. Welcoming people to the Temecula Valley that have the high principles such as those of the LDS church can only help Temecula and the surrounding area. Churches typically bring a higher caliber of citizen to the area and the crime rate declines as well as attracting people that are interested in building and improving their community. I hope that you will take the positive influence of not only the people but the LDS church itself as you consider this matter. I am strongly in favor of this church building being approved here in Temecula and would hope that ANY church request would receive a high priority in getting approved because of the quality of people that church service attracts. Sincerely, Merle Mayfield Manager 27452 Jefferson Ave., Ste. 7A, Temecula, CA 92590 951.699.3399 951.699.5959 fax Councilman Chuck Washington 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Washington, ! JAL 2 2 2004 cc: D. Ubnoske RECEIVIZO JUL -' -1 t.,ijO4 CITY A •,UVAGES',,; OFFICE As a resident of Temecula and a registered voter I would like to ask for your support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's new building on Pauba. It seems to me that with the growth that is occurring in Temecula the council will continually be faced with request to build new churches or the need to expand existing ones. The only way to curb that would be to stop the growth. That seems unlikely. The variety of faiths represented in Temecula is part of its strength. The need for more church buildings, a hospital and schools is a sign that Temecula will continue to be family friendly town. I have been affected by this growth; our home backs up to the property that is being developed by the Rancho Community Church. I have never protested or resisted their desire to expand even though my view will be obstructed, there will be noise from the school and traffic could be affected. Why? Because Churches Make Good Neighbors! Once again please support the construction of this church building. Thank you, ?ohn Dan 30451 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92592 cc: D. Ubnoske Mayor Mike Naggar 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Mayor, As a resident of Temecula and a registered voter I would like to ask for your support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's new building on Pauba. It seems to me that with the growth that is occurring in Temecula the council will continually be faced with request to build new churches or the need to expand existing ones. The only way to curb that would be to stop the growth. That seems unlikely. The variety of faiths represented in Temecula is part of its strength. The need for more church buildings, a hospital and schools is a sign that Temecula will continue to be family friendly town. I have been affected by this growth; our home backs up to the property that is being developed by the Rancho CommunityChurch. I have never protested or resisted their desire to expand even though my view will be obstructed, there will be noise from the school and traffic could be affected. Why? -Because Churches Make Good Neighbors! Once again please support the construction of this church building T yo D1 30451 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92592 cc: D. Ubnoske Councilman Ron Roberts 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Ron Roberts As a resident of Temecula and a registered voter I would like to ask for your support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's new building on Pauba. It seems to me that with the growth that is occurring in Temecula the council will continually be faced with request to build new churches or the need to expand existing ones. The only way to curb that would be to stop the growth. That seems unlikely. The variety of faiths represented in Temecula is part of its strength. The need for more church buildings, a hospital and schools is a sign that Temecula will continue to be family friendly town. I have been affected by this growth; our home backs up to the property that is being developed by the Rancho Community Church. I have never protested or resisted their desire to expand even though my view will be obstructed, there will be noise from the school and traffic could be affected. Why? Because Churches Make Good Neighbors! Once again please support the construction of this church building. Thank you, ,�&� A& JWn Dulin 30451 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92592 Councilman Jeff Stone 43200 Business Park Drive cc: D. Ubnoske PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Stone, As a resident of Temecula and a registered voter I would like to ask for your support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's new building on Pauba. It seems to me that with the growth that is occurring in Temecula the council will continually be faced with request to build new churches or the need to expand existing ones. The only way to curb that would be to stop the growth. That seems unlikely. The variety of faiths represented in Temecula is part of its strength. The need for more church buildings, a hospital and schools is a sign that Temecula will continue to be family friendly town. I have been affected by this growth; our home backs up to the property that is being developed by the Rancho Community Church. I have never protested or resisted their desire to expand even though my view will be obstructed, there will be noise from the school and traffic could be affected. Why? Because Churches Make Good Neighbors! Once again please support the construction of this church building. '7:/ �klQyMou�AL A& Dulin 30451 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92592 RECvIVIEu Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Comerchereo 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Mayor Pro Tern Comerchereo cc: D. Ubnoske JUL 2 1 2W4 CITY MAW, q,S OFFic, I would like to ask you to support the construction of the church building on Pauba by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This building means a lot to my family and me. It will give us the opportunity to gather with other members of our faith. Currently we are all cramped into two smaller buildings, which causes us great inconvenience and discomfort. Our home backs up to the Rancho Community Church site. We recognize that as the city grows so must the churches, schools and stores. So even though the Rancho project is much more than a church we have not protested it. People need a place to worship as they wish. As a resident and registered voter I ask you to please support the building on Pauba. Linda Dulin 30451 De Portola RD. Temecula CA 92592 Councilman Jeff Stone cc: D. Ubnoske 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Stone, I would like to ask you to support the construction of the church building on Pauba by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This building means a lot to my family and me. It will give us the opportunity to gather with other members of our faith. Currently we are all cramped into two smaller buildings, which causes us great inconvenience and discomfort. Our home backs up to the Rancho Community Church site. We recognize that as the city grows so must the churches, schools and stores. So even though the Rancho project is much more than a church we have not protested it. People need a place to worship as they wish. As a resident and registered voter I ask you to please support the building on Pauba. Linda Dulin 30451 De Portola RD. Temecula CA 92592 Mayor Mike Naggar 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Mayor, cc: D. Ubnoske I would like to ask you to support the construction of the church building on Pauba by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This building means a lot to my family and me. It will give us the opportunity to gather with other members of our faith. Currently we are all cramped into two smaller buildings, which causes us great inconvenience and discomfort. Our home backs up to the Rancho Community Church site. We recognize that as the city grows so must the churches, schools and stores. So even though the Rancho project is much more than a church we have not protested it. People need a place to worship as they wish. As a resident and registered voter I ask you to please support the building on Pauba. Linda Dulin 30451 De Portola RD, Temecula CA 92592 Councilman Ron Roberts 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Roberts cc: D. Ubnoske I would like to ask you to support the construction of the church building on Pauba by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This building means a lot to my family and me. It will give us the opportunity to gather with other members of our faith. Currently we are all cramped into two smaller buildings, which causes us great inconvenience and discomfort. Our home backs up to the Rancho Community Church site. We recognize that as the city grows so must the churches, schools and stores. So even though the Rancho project is much more than a church we have not protested it. People need a place to worship as they wish. As a resident and registered voter I ask you to please support the building on Pauba. Thank you, Linda Dulin 30451 De Portola RD, Temecula CA 92592 Councilman Chuck Washington 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 cc: D. Ubnoske Temecula CA 92589-9033 Councilman Washington I would like to ask you to support the construction of the church building on Pauba by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This building means a lot to my family and me. It will give us the opportunity to gather with other members of our faith. Currently we are all cramped into two smaller buildings, which causes us great inconvenience and discomfort. Our home backs up to the Rancho Community Church site. We recognize that as the city grows so must the churches, schools and stores. So even though the Rancho project is much more than a church we have not protested it. People need a place to worship as they wish. As a resident and registered voter I ask you to please support the building on Pauba. Thank you Linda Dulin 30451 De Portola RD. Temecula CA 92592 Harry Eugene Lyman 30727 Loma Linda Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 July 18, 2004 Councilman Chuck Washington 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman: cc: D. Ubnoske RECEIVr-U JUL 1 ° �j4 OFFICE Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings (LaPaz and No. General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. I, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. Sincerely, Harry Harry Eugene Lyman 30727 Loma Linda Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 July 18, 2004 Councilman Ron Roberts 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman: cc: D. Ubnoske Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings Waz and No. General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. I, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. Sincerely, I; Harry Eugene L an Harry Eugene Lyman 30727 Loma Linda Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 July 18, 2004 Councilman Jeff Stone 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman: cc: D. Ubnoske Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings (LaPaz and No. General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. I, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. Sincerely, Harry Eugene an f ;A cc: Council RECEIVED D. Ubnoske Honorable Councilman Stone, JUL 2 7 , JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE As a citizen of Temecula I am writing this to encourage you to support the building of the new LDS church building on Pauba Road. For about four years I served as the president of the LDS women's organization in the Temecula area. The women's organization performs many acts of service that directly benefit the community. Having enough buildings is essential to our being able to serve the community. We hold blood drives twice a year in our building for the whole community. Our smaller buildings are not large enough to accommodate the full potential of the blood drive. Having this new building would allow us to process over 200 people in the four hours of the blood drive, which would net about 160 pints of blood, making our LDS blood drives one of the blood banks largest. We make each year hundred of kits for the children at Rancho Damacitas. We need the building space in order to do this. We put together hygiene kits and make quilts that we give to Temecula's Western Eagle Foundation. We assemble these kits and set up these quilts in our buildings. We hold book drives in our buildings and the books are donated to our local school libraries. I could go on and on but I am sure you get the point. We so love to serve our beautiful Temecula community and depend upon you to allow us the buildings in which to operate. Again, as a registered voter in Temecula I urge you to support the new building on Pauba Road for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Sincerely, Valerie Sevy 45654 Masters Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 nct:;LN'Ei3 cc: Council D. Ubnoske Honorable Councilman Roberts, JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFRCIE As a citizen of Temecula I am writing this to encourage you to support the building of the new LDS church building on Pauba Road. For about four years I served as the president of the LDS women's organization in the Temecula area. The women's organization performs many acts of service that directly benefit the community. Having enough buildings is essential to our being able to serve the community. We hold blood drives twice a year in our building for the whole community. Our smaller buildings are not large enough to accommodate the full potential of the blood drive. Having this new building would allow us to process over 200 people in the four hours of the blood drive, which would net about 160 pints of blood, making our LDS blood drives one of the blood banks largest. We make each year hundred of kits for the children at Rancho Damacitas. We need the building space in order to do this. We put together hygiene kits and make quilts that we give to Temecula's Western Eagle Foundation We assemble these kits and set up these quilts in our buildings. We hold book drives in our buildings and the books are donated to our local school libraries. I could go on and on but I am sure you get the point. We so love to serve our beautiful Temecula community and depend upon you to allow us the buildings in which to operate. Again, as a registered voter in Temecula I urge you to support the new building on Pauba Road for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Sincerely, Valerie Sevy 45654 Masters Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 f cc: Council D. Ubnoske Sherrie Schmidt 31179 Lahontan St. Temecula, CA 92592 Mayor ProTem Jeff Comerchero 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mayor ProTem Jeff Comerchero, RECEIVED JUL 2 G 2004 I am writing on behalf of the church building proposed on Pauba Rd. for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a registered voter and citizen of Temecula I wanted to take just a moment to say how much this building will benefit the church members, but also the community as a whole. High moral values and good character traits are what we value as a community and as a church body. The presence of this church will allow more children, teenagers, and adult, to participate in activities that promote this. Thus the quality of life for all citizens of Temecula will be improved. I am reminded of days when the church was the most prominent building in town and usually the first common building to be built by the community. These church buildings provided a place for school, town meetings, and social gatherings in addition to church meetings. The church was the focal point of a town. How much better to have several churches in one community. I would request that you vote to support the building of this church. Churches tend to produce kind, caring, and active citizens who value their community. Thank you for your time and consideration on this project of extreme importance. Sincerely, Sherrie Schmidt cc: Council D. Ubnoske REOEI`JEG? Sherrie Schmidt 31179 Lahontan St. Temecula, CA 92592 Councilman Jeff Stone 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MA";AGER'S OFFICE Dear Councilman Jeff Stone, I am writing on behalf of the church building proposed on Pauba Rd. for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a registered voter and citizen of Temecula I wanted to take just a moment to say how much this building will benefit the church members, but also the community as a whole. High moral values and good character traits are what we value as a community and as a church body. The presence of this church will allow more children, teenagers, and adults to participate in activities that promote this. Thus the quality of life for all citizens of Temecula will be improved. I am reminded of days when the church was the most prominent building in town and usually the first common building to be built by the community. These church buildings provided a place for school, town meetings, and social gatherings in addition to church meetings. The church was the focal point of a town. How much better to have several churches in one community. I would request that you vote to support the building of this church. Churches tend to produce kind, caring, and active citizens who value then community. Thank you for your time and consideration on this project of extreme importance. Sincerely, Sherrie Schmidt cc: Council D. Ubnoske fRE:OcmviEu Sherrie Schmidt JUL 2 & 2004 31179 Lahontan St. Temecula, CA 92592 CITY OFFIC ES;. OFFi�E Councilman Chuck Washington 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman Chuck Washington, I am writing on behalf of the church building proposed on Pauba Rd. for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a registered voter and citizen of Temecula I wanted to take just a moment to say how much this building will benefit the church members, but also the community as a whole. High moral values and good character traits are what we value as a community and as a church body. The presence of this church will allow more children, teenagers, and adults to participate in activities that promote this. Thus the quality of life for all citizens of Temecula will be improved. I am reminded of days when the church was the most prominent building in town and usually the first common building to be built by the community. These church buildings provided a place for school, town meetings, and social gatherings in addition to church meetings. The church was the focal point of a town. How much better to have several churches in one community. I would request that you vote to support the building of this church. Churches tend to produce kind, caring, and active citizens who value their community. Thank you for your time and consideration on this project of extreme importance. Sincerely, Sherrie Schmidt cc: Council JUL 2 L. 2004 D. Ubnoske CITY MANAGER'S OFMCE 7/22/04 Mayor Mike Naggar Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dana Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members the needs of the community. As a mother of grown children there was always a place my children could go on a Saturday evening to dance and be with there friends that was a drug and alcohol free environment. They had a lot of nonmember friends who also attended. This new building will help met the needs of myself, grandchildren and the youth of this community. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. Dana K.Black Dana Black 43980 Mahlon Vail Cir. PMB 801 Temecula, Cal. 92592 RECEIVED JUL 2 E1 2004 cc: Council CITY MANAGER'S D. Ubnoske G'FRCE 7/22/04 Councilman Chuck Washington Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dana Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members the needs of the community. As a mother of grown children there was always a place my children could go on a Saturday evening to dance and be with there friends that was a drug and alcohol free environment. They had a lot of nonmember friends who also attended. This new building will help met the needs of myself, grandchildren and the youth of this community. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. Dana K.Black Dana Black 43980 Mahlon Vail Cir. 'I PUB 801 Temecula, Cal. 92592 cc: Council D. Ubnoske 7/22/04 Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Comerchero Re: L.D.S. Church Building Approval RECEIVED JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE My Name is Dana Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members the needs of the community. As a mother of grown children there was always a place my children could go on a Saturday evening to dance and be with there friends that was a drug and alcohol free environment. They had a lot of nonmember friends who also attended. This new building will help met the needs of myself, grandchildren and the youth of this community. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. Dana K.Black Dana. Black 43980 Mahlon Vail Cir PMB 801 Temecula, Cal. 92592 cc: Council RECEIVED D. Ubnoske JUL 2 6 2004 CITY IWXNAGER1. OFFICE 7/22/04 Councilman Jeff Stone Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dana Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members the needs of the community. As a mother of grown children there was always a place my children could go on a Saturday evening to dance and be with there friends that was a drug and alcohol free environment. They had a lot of nonmember friends who also attended. This new building will help met the needs of myself, grandchildren and the youth of this community. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. Dana K.Black Dana Black 43980 Mahlon Vail Cir. PUB 801 Temecula, Cal. 92592 JUL � 6 2ti�4 cc: Council CITY pFS7.�� D. Ubnoske 7/22/04 Councilman Ron Roberts Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dana Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members the needs of the community. As a mother of grown children there was always a place my children could go on a Saturday evening to dance and be with there friends that was a drug and alcohol free environment. They had a lot of nonmember friends who also attended. This new building will help met the needs of myself, grandchildren and the youth of this community. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. It . Dana Black 43980 Mahlon Vail Cir. PMB 801 I Temecula, Cal. 92592 RECEIVER JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE cc: Council 7/22/04 D. Ubnoske Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Comerchero Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dave Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in emecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members like me. Please support this proj�ct so that my children and grandchildren can go to church and be in the chapel and not in the over -flow area. Thank You fRr your consideration in this very important matter. Daivd G. Black DGB Construction 39685 Calle Anita Temecula, Cal. 92592 7/22/04 Mayor Mike Naggar Re: L.D.S. Church Building Approval ECEli/ED JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE cc: Council D. Ubnoske My Nam is Dave Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in �emecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members like me. Please support this project so that my children and grandchildren can go to church and be in the chapel and not in foe over -flow area. Thank You fq your consideration in this very important matter. Daivd G. Black DGB Construction 39685 Calle Anita Temecula, Cal. 92592 RECEIVED JUL 2 6 2004 CITY MAilAGER',''+ OFFICE cc: Council D. Ubnoske 7/22/04 Councilman Jeff Stone Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dave Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members like me. Please support this project so that my children and grandchildren can go to church and be in the chapel and not i�the over -flow area. Thank You )' r your consideration in this very important matter. Daivd G. Black DGB Constriction 39685 Calle Anita Temecula, Cal. 92592 RECEIVEZr JUL 2 6 2004 CITY IWANAGER'g OFFICE cc: Council D. Ubnoske 7/22/04 Councilman Chuck Washington Re: L.D.S. Church Building Approval My Name is Dave Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members like me. Please support this project so that my children and grandchildren can go to church and be in the chapel and not in the over -flow area. You for your consideration in this very important matter. Daivd G. Black QG n 3 5 Calle Anita Temecula, Cal. 92592 E@Bo�.S.trucioli 7/22/04 Councilman Ron Roberts Re: L.D. S. Church Building Approval RECEwEol JUL 2 6 20% CITY MA! LAGER'S OFFICE cc: Council. D. Ubncske My Name is Dave Black and I am a register voter of Temecula. Having a new church bldg. in Temecula will help meet the needs of the LDS members like me. Please support this project so that my children and grandchildren can go to church and be in the chapel and not in the over -flow area. Thank You for your consideration in this very important matter. Daivd G. Black DGB Construction 39685 Calle Anita Temecula, Cal. 92592 JUL 2 6 �J Honorable Mayor 62E�EIVE® JUL 2 3 2004 CITY OFFICES R As a citizen of Temecula I am writing this to encourage you to support the building of the new LDS church building on Pauba Road. For about four years I served as the president of the LDS women's organization in the Temecula area. The women's organization performs many acts of service that directly benefit the community. Having enough buildings is essential to our being able to serve the community. We hold blood drives twice a year in our building for the whole community. Our smaller buildings are not large enough to accommodate the full potential of the blood drive. Having this new building would allow us to process over 200 people in the four hours of the blood drive, which would net about 160 pints of blood, making our LDS blood drives one of the blood banks largest. We make each year hundred of kits for the children at Rancho Damacitas. We need the building space in order to do this. We put together hygiene kits and make quilts that we give to Temecula's Western Eagle Foundation. We assemble these kits and set up these quilts in our buildings. We hold book drives in our buildings and the books are donated to our local school libraries. I could go on and on but I am sure you get the point. We so love to serve our beautiful Temecula community and depend upon you to allow us the buildings in which to operate. Again, as a registered voter in Temecula I urge you to support the new building on Pauba Road for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Sincerely, Valerie Sevy 45654 Masters Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 Sherrie Schmidt Re- cra /ED 31179 Lahontan St. JUL 2 3 2004 Temecula, CA 92592 CITY MANAGE R'S Mayor Mike Naggar 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mayor Naggar, I am writing on behalf of the church building proposed on Pauba Rd. for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a registered voter and citizen of Temecula I wanted to take just a moment to say how much this building will benefit the church members, but also the community as a whole. High moral values and good character traits are what we value as a community and as a church body. The presence of this church will allow more children, teenagers, and adults to participate in activities that promote this. Thus the quality of life for all citizens of Temecula will be improved. I am reminded of days when the church was the most prominent building in town and usually the first common building to be built by the community. These church buildings provided a place for school, town meetings, and social gatherings in addition to church meetings. The church was the focal point of a town. How much better to have several churches in one community. I would request that you vote to support the building of this church. Churches tend to produce kind, caring, and active citizens who value their community. Thank you for your time and consideration on this project of extreme importance. Sincerely, Sherrie Schmidt Sherrie Schmidt RECEIVED 31179 Lahontan St. JUL 2 3 2004 Temecula, CA 92592 CITY MANAGER'S Councilman Ron Roberts OFFICE 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Councilman Ron Roberts, I am writing on behalf of the church building proposed on Pauba Rd. for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a registered voter and citizen of Temecula I wanted to take just a moment to say how much this building will benefit the church members, but also the community as a whole. High moral values and good character traits are what we value as a community and as a church body. The presence of this church will allow more children, teenagers, and adults to participate in activities that promote this. Thus the quality of life for all citizens of Temecula will be improved. I am reminded of days when the church was the most prominent building in town and usually the first common building to be built by the community. These church buildings provided a place for school, town meetings, and social gatherings in addition to church meetings. The church was the focal point of a town. How much better to have several churches in one community. I would request that you vote to support the building of this church. Churches tend to produce kind, caring, and active citizens who value their community. Thank you for your time and consideration on this project of extreme importance. Sincerely, Sherrie Schmidt Honorable Councilman Washington, RECEIVED IUL 2 3 2004 As a citizen of Temecula I am writing this to encourag os upport the building of the new LDS church building on Pauba Road. For about four years I served as the president of the LDS women's organization in the Temecula area. The women's organization performs many acts of service that directly benefit the community. Having enough buildings is essential to our being able to serve the community. We hold blood drives twice a year in our building for the whole community. Our smaller buildings are not large enough to accommodate the full potential of the blood drive. Having this new building would allow us to process over 200 people in the four hours of the blood drive, which would net about 160 pints of blood, making our LDS blood drives one of the blood banks largest. We make each year hundred of kits for the children at Rancho Damacitas. We need the building space in order to do this. We put together hygiene kits and make quilts that we give to Temecula's Western Eagle Foundation. We assemble these kits and set up these quilts in our buildings. We hold book drives in our buildings and the books are donated to our local school libraries. I could go on and on but I am sure you get the point. We so love to serve our beautiful Temecula community and depend upon you to allow us the buildings in which to operate. Again, as a registered voter in Temecula I urge you to support the new building on Pauba Road for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Sincerely, Valerie Sevy 45654 Masters Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 RECEIVED Honorable Mayor Pro Tem. Comerchero, JUL 2 3 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE As a citizen of Temecula I am writing this to encourage you to support the building of the new LDS church building on Pauba Road. For about four years I served as the president of the LDS women's organization in the Temecula area. The women's organization performs many acts of service that directly benefit the community. Having enough buildings is essential to our being able to serve the community. We hold blood drives twice a year in our building for the whole community. Our smaller buildings are not large enough to accommodate the full potential of the blood drive. Having this new building would allow us to process over 200 people in the four hours of the blood drive, which would net about 160 pints of blood, making our LDS blood drives one of the blood banks largest. We make each year hundred of kits for the children at Rancho Damacitas. We need the building space in order to do this. We put together hygiene kits and make quilts that we give to Temecula's Western Eagle Foundation. We assemble these kits and set up these quilts in our buildings. We hold book drives in our buildings and the books are donated to our local school libraries. I could go on and on but I am sure you get the point. We so love to serve our beautiful Temecula community and depend upon you to allow us the buildings in which to operate. Again, as a registered voter in Temecula I urge you to support the new building on Pauba Road for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Sincerely, Valerie Sevy 45654 Masters Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 1 RECEIVE© JUL 2 2 2004 Harry Eugene Lyman CITY MANAGER'S 30727 Loma Linda Rd. OFFICE Temecula, CA 92592 \� July 18, 2004 cc: D. Ubnoske Mayor Mike Nagger 43200 Business Park Drive ' P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road Dear Mayor: I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings Waz and No. General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. 1, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. Sincerely, Harry Eugene Lyman RECEIVED Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Comerchereo 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 Mayor Pro Tem Comerchereo JUL 2 2 2004 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE cc: D. Ubnoske As a resident of Temecula and a registered voter I would like to ask for your support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's new building on Pauba. It seems to me that with the growth that is occurring in Temecula the council will continually be faced with request to build new churches or the need to expand existing ones. The only way to curb that would be to stop the growth. That seems unlikely. The variety of faiths represented in Temecula is part of its strength. The need for more church buildings, a hospital and schools is a sign that Temecula will continue to be family friendly town. I have been affected by this growth; our home backs up to the property that is being developed by the Rancho Community Church. I have never protested or resisted their desire to expand even though my view will be obstructed, there will be noise from the school and traffic could be affected. Why? Because Churches Make Good Neighbors! Once again please support the construction of this church building. Thank you, ALL' Dul 30451 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92592 Harry Eugene Lyman 30727 Loma Linda Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 July 18, 2004 Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Comerchero 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mayor Pro Tem: RECEIVE© JUL 2 2 2004 CITY MANAGER'$` OFFICE cc: D. Ubnoske Re: Proposed Stake Center for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints To be located on Pauba Road I have been a citizen and registered voter in the City of Temecula for the past four years. The growth of our congregation in the Temecula area includes some 2000+ adult members and a greater number of youth and children. We are crowded with three units in each of two buildings (LaPaz and No, General Kearney). We desperately need this additional building to accommodate and serve a growing congregation. The Planning Commission has already given approval for the project. I, therefore, respectfully request your support for final approval of this much -needed building. I thank you in advance for your support of this project and your continuing service to Temecula and its citizens. JSincerely, Harry Eugene Lyman ITEM 11 Supplemental Material for Council Business Item No. 11 APPROVAL CITYATTORNEY _ DIR.OF FINANCE _ CITY MANAGER_ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney DATE: September 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Interim Zoning Ordinance regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt an interim zoning ordinance entitled: URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04-09 AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY BACKGROUND: On or about July 30, 2004 the business known as "Compassionate Caregivers" inquired about the City of Temecula's zoning and regulatory standards applicable to the commencement of a medical marijuana dispensary. (See Attachment 1) The City currently has no standards that apply to the location or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary and, further, has not determined if the use should be permitted or prohibited under the City's police powers. There may be secondary impacts stemming from such a use that would render it an undesirable and detrimental use for the City and thus may be prohibited from commencement. The City must carefully, prudently and thoroughly review the applicable law (State and Federal) as well as the locational and operational needs of such a land use before it can reasonably and competently act upon this issue. Action by the City Council absent objective factual analysis may be subject to legal challenge on the grounds that it is both arbitrary and capricious. Despite assertions to the contrary, this office has concluded that there are no express statutes or decided cases that command that medical marijuana dispensaries be permitted as authorized land uses. At this time the law is not precise, as reflected in the varying legal reactions of California cities and counties. Some have adopted regulatory and zoning standards allowing such dispensaries under controlled conditions; at least one (City of Rocklin) has prohibited this land use and several cities have adopted interim zoning ordinances prohibiting such use pending study and analysis of the issue. This is the course this office has recommended to the City Council at this time. This City Council always strives to make the correct decision for the City, based upon facts and analysis rather than upon guesswork. In accord with that policy, the City Council could direct staff to use the time and resources being accorded in the current General Plan update to also have the land use R:/Agenda Reports/Zoning Ord re Marijuana Dispensiaries 9 28 issues and secondary impacts associated with medical marijuana dispensaries reviewed and evaluated, with a subsequent report being made back to this City Council. This Council may then, after deliberation, act to further the best interests of the City. An interim zoning ordinance to allow for such review is authorized by California Government Code Section 65858. It has an initial term of 45 days and may be extended for up to three years, in one year increments. A proposed urgency interim ordinance, with findings, is attached as Attachment 2, should the City Council choose to adopt it. Alternatively the options available to the City Council are: A. Take no action; this would allow such uses to establish themselves on a basis consistent with similar land uses. This would mean that they would, most likely, be viewed as retail pharmacies, and so could locate, without regulation, wherever retail pharmacies are permitted. They may be categorized as other land uses which would simply mean their regulatory standards would be consistent with whichever use they were deemed similar to in nature; or B. Adopt an urgency ordinance either allowing each use and applying locational and operational standards or prohibiting their establishment. Staff could be directed to prepare such standards for adoption. To avoid the establishment of this use pending such permanent standards this office recommends that the proposed interim zoning ordinance be adopted. This office recommends the adoption of the interim zoning ordinance on an urgency basis, with direction to staff to commence the analysis of the issues and criteria applicable to the establishment of, and if recommended to be a permitted land use, the locational and operational characteristics that should be applied to ensure that such use is beneficial to the City. This action in no way limits the right of patients and caregivers to cultivate, possess and use marijuana for medical purposes as authorized by California State Law. This office will be represented at the City Council meeting should you have questions. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: 1) Compassionate Caregivers letter, received July 30, 2004 2) Urgency Ordinance No. 04-09 R:/Agenda Reports/Zoning Ord re Marijuana Dispensiaries 9 28 0 COMPASSIONATE CAREGIVERS --- Open 7 Days Per Week " I 364 Days Per Year JUL 3 ` �npQ 8 am to 8 pm JI J:: Who Are We? Compassionate Caregivers op r ed�n-february of 2061, making it one of the longest running legally operated cannabis clubs in Oakland. We are a cannabis dispensary providing safe access to medical cannabis for qualified patients under Proposition 215. We are headquartered in Oakland and have three (3) satellite dispensaries. Our satellite offices are for dispensing medical cannabis only. We do not cultivate. Compassionate Caregivers has 142 employees working at Its four (4) locations: Oakland, San Francisco, Ukiah and Los Angeles. A majority of our employees live In Oakland (over 80%) and work at our Oakland dispensary. • Our starting wage for any position Is $12 per hour with merit increases to $16.88 after 90 days and $18.75 after 180 days dependent on performance review. • Employees are entitled to full medical and dental coverage after 30 days of employment through Blue Shield of California. Compassionate Caregivers pays 50% of their premium. • Employees receive 1 week of paid vacation annually after one year of employment. • Employees also have additional perks including corporate rates for gym memberships (24 Hour Fitness), employee luncheons and cell phones (Nextel). What type of security do you have in place? Compassionate Caregivers has a minimum of 2 security guards on duty at all locations during all hours of operation. i All locations are tied Into a professional security company with audible alarms and personnel notification. We have live video capture cameras at all locations with a minimum of one (10) weeks worth of capture time. We provide security escorts for our patients and employees upon request. How many patients do you serve? Compassionate Caregivers has over 7,000 current members and screens each and every member using the exact same standards and procedures in practice at the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative (OCBC). Compassionate Caregivers services over 20,000 patients statewide from as far away as San Diego. What is your current zoning? We are currently zoned as commercial/retall In all of our locations. 1740 Telegraph Ave Oakland, CA 94612 510-839-2217 (voice) 510-839-2112 (Bus. Office) 510-839-6038 (fax) Page 1 of 2 © COMPASSIONATE CAREGIVERS Open 7 Days Per Week 364 Days Per Year 8amto8pm How do' you do what you do legally? We are committed to staying within the boundaries set not only within Proposition 215 and SB 420 but also comply with any requirements required by the cities where we do business. We require that any patient meet the following requirements before they are allowed to purchase their medicine: ❑ 18 years or older ❑ Valid California ID or Driver's License ❑ Valid Physician's Recommendation Any patient that does not meet these eligibility requirements is refused entry into our facilities. Where are you located? What is the makeup of your staff during a typical day? Compassionate Caregivers Corporate Headquarters ,+ 0 Management (Oakland) Shift Supervisors Telegraph Ave ++ Security Staff 4 Counter Personnel Oaklakl Oand, CA 94612 510-839-2217 (voice) d+ Maintenance/Janitorial Staff 510-839-6038 (fax) 510-839-2112 (Bus. Office) What is a typical day at CCG? Mission Street Caregivers 1. Management Staff opens (San Francisco) 2• Personnel Prepare Dispensary 1760 Mission Street 3. Patient Arrives at Door San Francisco, CA 41 s-553-nao 4. Patient is Screened for the following: O Valid California ID/License Compassionate Caregivers y Current Physicians Recommendation (West Hollywood) 1209 North La Brea Avenue a 18 Years of Age or Older (Between Santa Monica & Fountain) 5. Patient Proceeds to Purchasing Area West Hollywood, CA 323-850-9121 6. Patient Advised Based on Medical Condition which Medicine to Purchase Compassionate Caregivers 7. Patient Selects Medicine (Ukiah) 8. Patient Pays for Medicine 892 North State Street 9. Patient Secures Medicine for Transport (Cross Street Low Gap) Ukiah, CA to. Patient Leaves Fertility 707-462.6529 1740 Telegraph Ave Oakland, CA 94612 510-839-2217 (voice) 510-839-2112 (Bus. Office) 510-839-6038 (fax) Page 2 of 2 SB 420 Taken from www.canormi.org SB 420 Establishes New Prop 215 Guidelines, Voluntary Patient Identification Card System Patients Allowed 6 Mature or 12 Immature Plants + 1/2 Pound of Processed cannabis A new bill establishing statewide guidelines for Prop. 215 enforcement takes effect on 3anuary 1, 2004. The bill, SB 420 by Sen. John Vasconcellos, was signed by outgoing Gov. Gray Davis just days after he lost the recall election. SB 420, which reflects a compromise between patients' advocates and law enforcement, includes controversial new state guidelines regarding how much marijuana patients may grow and possess without being subject to arrest. It also includes a voluntary patient identification card system and other provisions to protect patients and their caregivers from arrest. The guidelines, which were hotly disputed by California NORML and other patients' advocates, allow patients up to 6 mature or 12 immature plants and up to one-half pound of dried, processed marijuana. Patient advocates had pushed for more liberal guidelines, such as those adopted by Sonoma County, which allow up to 99 plants in a 100 square foot growing area plus 3 pounds of marijuana_ The final guidelines were decided in a last-minute legislative deal by Attorney General Lockyer and Sen. Vasconcellos in order to get the bill passed. Exceptions to Guidelines In recognition of the fact that the guidelines are inadequate for many very ill patients, SB 42ci allows patients to be exempted from them If they obtain a physician's statement that they need more. In deference to local autonomy, SB 420 also allows counties and cities to establish higher - but now lower - guidelines if they so choose. As a result, the new law will not overtum liberal guidelines that are now in effect in Sonoma and elsewhere. However, it should force more restrictive counties, such as San Bernardino and Fresno, which have heretofore had "zero tolerance" policies, to honor the new statewide minimum standard. Medical marijuana activist; are lobbying other counties and cities that currently lack guidelines to override those in SB 420. Limits Not Legally Binding on Guilt Strictly speaking, the guidelines do not constitute hard and fast limits on how much patients may legally have. This is bemuse Prop. 215 specifically allows patients whatever amount of marijuana they need for their own medical use, and Prop. 215 cannot be overridden by the legislature. Rather, the guidelines are supposed to protect patients from arrest, something that is nowhere guaranteed in Prop. 215 Itself. Therefore, even though patients who exceed the limits are subject to arrest, they should still be able to defend themselves in court under Prop. 215. Nonetheless, defense attorneys are fearful that some courts will misinterpret the new law as an absolute limit and wrongfully convict patients for exceeding it They fully expect that further litigation will be needed to settle the matter in the higher courts. SB 420 authorizes the Attorney General to recommend modifications to the guidelines pursuant to public consultation and comment no later than Dec. 1, 2005. California NORML and other patients' support groups intend to call on the Attorney General. to recommend new guidelines. Medical Marijuana Raids Are Unconstitutional, Appeals Court Rules Stop to Federal Prosecution of Patients and their Providers Ordered In a decision with far-reaching implications, a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case of Ftalch v. Ashcroft back to the district court for the issuing of an injunction against any further arrests or prosecutions of medical marijuana patients and their providers. The ruling declares that the Controlled Substances Act - the 1970 federal law that makes marijuana illegal In all circumstances - is unconstitutional as applied to medical marijuana because the federal ban relies On the presence of interstate commerce to override state laws, such as California's, that expressly legalize medical use. The judges said that personal medicinal use of marijuana on the advice of a physician, when it happens within one state and does not involve money changing hands, is conduct federal law cannot reach. The case under consideration involved the local production and consumption of marijuana In accordance with California state law. Americans who use medical marijuana aren't breaking federal law, John Ashcroft Is. He's been violating the Constitution,' said Steph Sherer, Executive Director of Americans for Safe Access, the nation's leading organization on medical marijuana. "This is an enormous victory for patients who rely on marijuana for relief from their suffering.' URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04-09 AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY The City Council of the City of Temecula, California, hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. Legislative Body Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula, as the legislative body of the City, makes the following findings in support of the immediate adoption and application of this interim zoning ordinance as an urgency ordinance regulating land use within the City of Temecula. A. The City Council is adopting this interim ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately, prohibiting the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, as defined hereafter, in any zoning district of the City of Temecula pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858. B. The decision to authorize the establishment of marijuana dispensaries within the City, and, if permitted, the zoning district and related development standards has not been commenced or completed by the City because no request to initiate or locate a marijuana dispensary has been previously received by the City. The City has now received an inquiry from a business entity which seeks identification of the regulatory and zoning standards which the City of Temecula will apply to the establishment of marijuana dispensaries for medical benefit purposes. The City currently has not established any express criteria regarding the establishment, location or scope of operations for marijuana dispensary uses. The City is presently in the process of revising its General Plan. The General Plan serves as the foundation of the City's development and land use criteria, as thereafter implemented by the City's zoning and regulatory ordinances. This City Council hereby determines that it lacks sufficient information regarding the permissibility of marijuana dispensaries as permittable and beneficial land uses. Further, this City Council lacks sufficient information to determine the proper General Plan land use and locational criteria for marijuana dispensaries, if such are permitted. Finally, this City Council lacks sufficient information to develop and impose regulatory, land use and operational criteria for and upon marijuana dispensaries. The City Council does not want to act without adequate information as such would be acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Adoption of criteria in such circumstances would negatively affect the general health, safety and welfare of the City as presently developed and negatively impact further development in the City. Alternatively, allowing marijuana dispensaries without having appropriately studied the land use and its consequence would also be a failure to adequately govern and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the City of Temecula. C. This City Council hereby expands the scope of the revisions to the General Plan of the City of Temecula to include analysis of the issues regarding the permissibility of, and if permitted, the location of, the scope of and the operational criteria that should be imposed upon marijuana dispensaries and further, the structuring of zoning and other necessary regulatory controls to cause such land uses to be beneficial land uses rather than uses that are detrimental to or cause blight to occur within the City of Temecula. RJOrds 2004/Ords 04-09 D. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858(a), this urgency interim ordinance shall be adopted by not less than a four -fifths vote of this City Council and shall be in effect for forty-five days from its adoption. The City Council may consider extension of this interim ordinance, pursuant to all legal requirements, if necessary. Section 2. Ordinance. A. INCORPORATION OF FINDINGS. The findings set forth in Section 1 above, in all respects, are incorporated into this interim ordinance. B. INTERIM PROHIBITION ON MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES. No marijuana dispensary, intended to provide marijuana for medicinal or any related purpose, shall locate, commence, obtain license for or be entitled by the City, in any zone, or any parcel, or at any place, public or private within the City. For purposes of this interim ordinance the term "marijuana dispensary" shall be broadly and liberally interpreted to mean and include :any location, structure, facility, vehicle or that similar to the same used, in full or part, as a place at or in which marijuana is sold, traded, exchanged, bartered for in any way, made available, located, stored, placed, or cultivated. C. NO CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. This interim ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code. D. CEQA COMPLIANCE. It can be seen with certainty that this urgency ordinance has no likelihood of causing a significant negative effect on the environment and accordingly both the City Council's action of adopting this ordinance and the effects derivative from that adoption are found to be exempt from the application of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 CCR. 15061.(b)(3).) This finding is premised on the fact that the adoption of this urgency interim ordinance will maintain the current environmental conditions arising from the current land use regulatory structure as adopted by the City without change or alteration. E. PLANNING STUDIES. The City staff shall promptly commence the studies they may deem necessary and appropriate to make recommendation to this City Council regarding the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, and the regulatory criteria that are recommended should such land use be permitted. F. EXTENSION OF TIME. The Planning Manager and the City Clerk's office shall undertake all actions legally necessary to extend this interim ordinance in the event the studies and reports desired by this City Council will not be concluded on or before the forty-fifth day subsequent to the adoption of this interim ordinance. G. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. R:/Ords 2004/Ords 04-09 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 141" day of September, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-09 was duly adopted and passed as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of September, 2004 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk RJOrds 2004/Orris 04-09 3 AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY The City Council of the City of Temecula, California, hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. Legislative Body Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula, as the legislative body of the City, makes the following findings in support of the immediate adoption and application of this interim zoning ordinance as an urgency ordinance regulating land use within the City of Temecula. A. The City Council is adopting this interim ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately, prohibiting the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, as defined hereafter, in any zoning district of the City of Temecula pursuant to the authority set forth in California Government Code Section 65858. B. The decision to authorize the establishment of marijuana dispensaries within the City, and, if permitted, the zoning district and related development standards has not been commenced or completed by the City because no request to initiate or locate a marijuana dispensary has been previously received by the City. The City has now received an inquiry from a business entity which seeks identification of the regulatory and zoning standards which the City of Temecula will apply to the establishment of marijuana dispensaries for medical benefit purposes. The City currently has not established any express criteria regarding the establishment, location or scope of operations for marijuana dispensary uses. The City is presently in the process of revising its General Plan. The General Plan serves as the foundation of the City's development and land use criteria, as thereafter implemented by the City's zoning and regulatory ordinances. This City Council hereby determines that it lacks sufficient information regarding the permissibility of marijuana dispensaries as permittable and beneficial land uses. Further, this City Council lacks sufficient information to determine the proper General Plan land use and locational criteria for marijuana dispensaries, if such are permitted. Finally, this City Council lacks sufficient information to develop and impose regulatory, land use and operational criteria for and upon marijuana dispensaries. The City Council does not want to act without adequate information as such would be acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Adoption of criteria in such circumstances would negatively affect the general health, safety and welfare of the City as presently developed and negatively impact further development in the City. Alternatively, allowing marijuana dispensaries without having appropriately studied the land use and its consequence would also be a failure to adequately govern and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the City of Temecula. C. This City Council hereby expands the scope of the revisions to the General Plan of the City of Temecula to include analysis of the issues regarding the permissibility of, and if permitted, the location of, the scope of and the operational criteria lhat should be imposed upon marijuana dispensaries and further, the structuring of zoning and other necessary regulatory controls to cause such land uses to be beneficial land uses rather than uses that are detrimental to or cause blight to occur within the City of Temecula. RJOrds 2004/Ords 04-09 D. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858(a), this urgency interim ordinance shall be adopted by not less than a four -fifths vote of this City Council and shall be in effect for forty-five days from its adoption. The City Council may consider extension of this interim ordinance, pursuant to all legal requirements, if necessary. Section 2. Ordinance. A. INCORPORATION OF FINDINGS. The findings set forth in Section 1 above, in all respects, are incorporated into this interim ordinance. B. INTERIM PROHIBITION ON MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES. No marijuana dispensary, intended to provide marijuana for medicinal or any related purpose, shall locate, commence, obtain license for or be entitled by the City, in any zone, or any parcel, or at any place, public or private within the City. For purposes of this interim ordinance the term "marijuana dispensary" shall be broadly and liberally interpreted to mean and include any location, structure, facility, vehicle or that similar to the same used, in full or part, as a place at or in which marijuana is sold, traded, exchanged, bartered for in any way, made available, located, stored, placed, or cultivated. C. NO CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. This interim ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code. D. CEQA COMPLIANCE. It can be seen with certainty that this urgency ordinance has no likelihood of causing a significant negative effect on the environment and accordingly both the City Council's action of adopting this ordinance and the effects derivative from that adoption are found to be exempt from the application of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 CCR. 15061.(b)(3).) This finding is premised on the fact that the adoption of this urgency interim ordinance will maintain the current environmental conditions arising from the current land use regulatory structure as adopted by the City without change or alteration. E. PLANNING STUDIES. The City staff shall promptly commence the studies they may deem necessary and appropriate to make recommendation to this City Council regarding the establishment of marijuana dispensaries, and the regulatory criteria that are recommended should such land use be permitted. F. EXTENSION OF TIME. The Planning Manager and the City Clerk's office shall undertake all actions legally necessary to extend this interim ordinance in the event the studies and reports desired by this City Council will not be concluded on or before the forty-fifth day subsequent to the adoption of this interim ordinance. G. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. RJOrds 2004/Ords 04-09 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of September, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-09 was duly adopted and passed as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 141h day of September, 2004 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Ords 2004/0rds 04-09 3 REQUESTS TO SPEAK REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You, Date S(-P% /I � I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against Subject: Address:.,( / � City/State/Zip: -r //V s CC) I -A If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date / / 'w/ 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item N . For Against Subject: II MU < < 0 ne: (,:� Address: City/State/Zip:iYl��✓ If you are representing an organization or group,;`please give the name: 6 The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. (` Date —/ T y 2 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item CU� For Against ' `P� �� t4k)- 1� �HW ,. ray" S Name. � State/Zip , iK�CJ ('a \fd If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date �- � yO y I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. C�� For Against Subject (n� Address: — '�+ If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 9 - 1 q9� for Subject: �_ ry (4-sL Name: a NNA' hi H-t4e n rn6r-"es Address: I wish to speak on Agenda Item No nL Against q �n � - 7/z,,6 to City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against '✓ Subject: LI) J cj�& Name: Phone: -� City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: lI A f t The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 114 o I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against V Subject: Na If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: U The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You.. ��11 Date �- 14-0T 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. :Tr - For � Against L L6s nMk Subject: CA YDI--IP_6tc 1hJL' 7 Name: t z-:rti1 U-0- I o J Phone- Address: City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date —(�,-PT .2 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. % O For > Against Subject: /-?i 1 i/ 0'0 7rf itJc3uJ C� ir2 c� Name: k///.) �s�t���� Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: titccr��,o If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date t4 51✓F'T- 04 1 wish to speak on Agenda ItNo. 0- For APPLt CANT- Against Subject: L..05 ct4uP-CW - Fc:)C2 -1-71t& PRo.IGcT— Name: 14Et`I l CORN WA.l-(_ Phone: 6?,( 7- State/Zip: PA5ADEt- rA , 2110 ( If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: CC)TZrtLJ.dLL. AJSOC. AP-C*'k-t1L- The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. 1 (J For J� Against Subject: Name: R'oCA4 l fir.( IaF_2 Phone: (� Address: ?� City/State/Zip:t-arc FL5irlg4ic 6. 2S�Z� If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: L b5 QAU1-CH The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 7� �� y I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against Subject: IJ1 Aa — / La.11t4'. 1c Name: I /C V I'd K) J ti )I Phone: Address: . )J) State/Zip: %rhe�cu/,, If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 14 d I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For jK Against Subject: 6LAsT LDS CVW1CO .. w► . '. Address: � City/State/Zip: CA If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date c/ l `T — d �- 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. / For Against Subject: P Name: \5'� S td /( et- L( n7T- Phone: Address: ` City/State/Zip: TAM r f= U L N If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: O 1 The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. \ / �\ Date & o I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against i Subject: A FA Name: City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date C' - / 9 - 0 C I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. J 0 For Against Subject: 6a "e nn � i Name: -+o k K wds � i l e Phone: 3 32C,? State/Zip: -7�Mecu /o, Lk"L 55 F— If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date �i � 114 M For Subject: /-A ,,,_ ` I wish to speak on Agenda Item No Against _ ID Name:_ '}. � 15rm OCD4NO Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: 18A. �'d592 If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date Ylg14 '-zPQ41 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. /o For Against Subject: / ) I . /,+ 1 ' Address:� � City/State/Zip�f-� LLJ-»- If you are representing an opr(ganization or group, please give the name: I The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Da e • i -AC0 I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. to For Against ✓ Subject: w N� 41J Name:c-i�tc s! Phone: , . City/State/Zfp.��O� -2 If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date N - m - n V For Subject: /!�1 l:nnG� i� 10+10! I wish to speak on Agenda Item No Against V F Name: c IIYn \nhnSiO,_,� Phone: Address: _ City/State/Zip: 09 f 2 t' f Z If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date / AGby For Subject: wish to speak on Agenda Item No. %L' Against Name: \",3 )--, 4 o--i,, L / Pho S City/State/Zi If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA /After ,cLompleting, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against . Subject: / e ( _� /eac " Phona- City/State/Zip:/BmeC.-JC� If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date - For Subject: I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. /0 Against iW Name: �[ l��i� _ City/State/Zip: —� ec U1G . G gZSyZ If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date d ' ��p 0 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. %O For Against Subject: G,P.s Ch`y.2 '0V AAl,i44 Name: 2/G��`�/f /�1 /�� Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: �_ If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA /After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date q/iy /e) V I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. % O For X Against Subject: Los C` � � CQ Name: Ttifl� , lhll ' ,O Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: 7Ten22c fl (q- C-14 If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date C I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.�� For Against Subject: ►IT o If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date 9- 1111—d-all For lcfiC l AP-1,Ttl/fry I wish to speak on Agenda Item No Against_ 11f&FvSf /5-; Name: L9nrly /GVA✓//�ti Phone: Address: I C"IZOOV4 C-t City/State/Zip: LLA If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: �f / �Pv•-)t,96R X, �-'1,�I� f�'n 0/o1Pfr1///+�PhCib Ab"/h GelIy(//an %ISfU</G//Aid The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date '`%- D`f I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For _�� �j" Against lwoa/ Address: City/State/Zip: -/-&;/x� 0/9- If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date C;dvz:y O y I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. // For Against Subject: Name:111 Phone: p: /Ps-weec,,4 e,.z If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD The Hidden Wineries of M ,Southern California Iv6D«„a Wl�k Do„o.l� D�61n6invTM - Te.J.. � °"•' DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 0 It MARIJ •NA ANTI -PROHIBITION PROJECT A g AMERICAN HARM REDUCTION ASSOCIATION �I p Compassion and Common Sense PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263-0739 p Phone — 760-799-2055 www.mariivananews.orq — email to mapanow(cDhotmail.com Temecula City Council Urgency Ordinance No. 04-09 DEVELOPING POLICIES THAT ALLOW MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW Presented by Lanny Swerdlow Director My name is Lanny Swerdlow and I am director of the Marijuana Anti - Prohibition Project and the American Harm Reduction Association. In your consideration of any issue surrounding medical marijuana you need to consider the concerns of the citizens of Temcula who are legal medical marijuana patients under California state law. In regards to the issue of dispensaries, I would like to point out that medical marijuana dispensaries are profit -making businesses just like pharmacies and can hire their own lawyers to fight for their business rights. I am an advocate for medical marijuana patients, not dispensaries. The fact is that most medical marijuana dispensaries charge very high prices for the medicine that they dispense because their costs are very high. Pharmacies also charge very high prices for the medicine they dispense because the prices they pay to the giant pharmaceutical companies are also very very high. However, I have a feeling if a giant high priced pharmaceutical company wanted to open a plant and contacted your city for regulatory information, I highly doubt if you would be considering an urgent ordinance to ban the establishment of a giant pharmaceutical manufacturing plant. The question that needs to be addressed along with the dispensary issue, is how are Temecula citizens, who are medical marijuana patients, going to obtain their medicine. For many of your citizens, they must drive up to two hours or more to obtain their medicine through one of the three dispensaries located in Los Angeles County. There are other ways, however, that medical Continued on next page TEMECULA CITY UOUNCIL • STATEMENT BY LANNY SWERDLOW URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04-09 September 14, 2004 Page 2 marijuana patients can obtain their medicine and your ordinance recognizes this as it clearly states "This interim ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code." I am heartened that the city of Temecula recognizes the right of its citizens to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes. If your recognize this as their right, then it is your responsibility to help foster a climate in which medical marijuana patients can obtain their medicine through methods that, unlike dispensaries, are specifically sanctioned under SB 420 and Health and Safety Code 11362.5. In the packet of materials I have given you, there is a copy of SB 420. I refer you to Section 11362.775, which specifically sanctions patients to form collectives or coops for the purposes of cultivating marijuana for medicinal purposes. Along with the issue of dispensaries, the city of Temecula needs to address this issue and create city policy which will allow medical marijuana patients and law enforcement in Temecula to comply with state law. In the 45 day period that this issue is to be studied, I believe a citizen's task force should be formed to not only provide the city with citizen input on the issue of dispensaries, but to help the city of Temecula foster the ability of medical marijuana patients to obtain their medicine in ways specifically sanctioned by state law. In addition to medical marijuana patients and advocates, the Task Force should have representatives from law enforcement, the city attorney's office, the planning commission, county health department, health professionals and others so as to best develop efficient and fair means to obtain these ends. In this way, the Temecula City Council would be encouraging citizen involvement in the decision making process, would provide a forum for expressing and resolving divergent opinions and goals and demonstrate for the rest of southern California how this issue can be addressed in a rational process and provide results and benefits for everyone. Overview and analysis of SB 420 SB 420 clears up some of the issues surrounding implementation of Prop 215 (HS11362.5) and formulates a voluntary system to protect patients from arrest. It empowers communities to adopt scientific local medical marijuana guidelines, but also sets biased and unrealistic standards as the default baseline for protection. SB 420 negative characteristics: • SB420 creates a voluntary card system that may become a "de facto" mandatory system by legitimizing some patients at a higher level than others (i.e., if you have a card you get more respect) • It sets a wholly inadequate limit of 8 ounces of dry bud and 6 mature OR 12 immature plants, which is not scientific or reasonable. While it allows counties to increase these amounts, again these may become "de facto" limits that counties adopt or even roll back their guidelines to match. While both of these problems are hypothetical, they are very risky. SB 420 positive characteristics: • SB 420 was the result of much input from patients and reformers • It recognizes all patient's rights as embodied in Prop 215 as summarized in SB420 Section 1(a)(1) • Participation in the voluntary ID program is not a requirement for full protection under Prop 215 11362.71(f) • It asserts medical marijuana as a matter of states rights 420 (1)(e) • It extends the power of recommendation/approval to osteopaths 11362.7(a) • It allows agencies to provide medical marijuana to qualified patients 11362.7(d)(2) • It allows caregivers to have more than one patient in the same county 11362.7(d)(3) • It allows caregivers to have one out -of -county patient 11362.7(d)(3) • It creates a completely voluntary and protective 1-year photo ID program for participating patients and/or caregivers. 11362.71(a)(1) • It provides "around the clock" validation of participation in the program when police confront a patient or caregiver 11362.71(a)(2) • It allows non -governmental agencies to process the cards 11362.71(c) • It promises confidentiality of records 11362.71(d)(1) • It stops arrests -- not just prosecutions -- of qualified individuals for possession, transportation, delivery or cultivation up to a very minimal level of 8 oz and 6 plants per patient (that could arguably be hash or hash oil, which would be equivalent to more; I'm not sure what it does about tinctures, which have a lot of liquid weight) 11362.71(e) • It includes the right for an individual to appeal if rejected for a patient ID card 1136214 (b) • It gives Medi-Cal patients a 50% fee discount 11362.755(a) • It allows transportation and processing (HS 11360) 11362.765 (b) • It reduces the risk of a patient being charged with intent to sell (11359) maintaining a place where cannabis is produced, provided or used (HS11366, 11366.5, 11570 ) 11362.765(b) • It allows reimbursement for •regiver's material and labor 11362.765(c)0 • It empowers physicians to grant exemptions for quantities 11362.77 (b) • It allows communities to adopt more realistic amounts but does not allow them to go below the "floor" amounts 11362.77(c) • It codifies the medical use of dried cannabis flowers rather than leaf 11362.77(d) • It opens the door for us to work with the AG to amend these levels upward 11362.77(e) • It recognizes collectives and coop gardens, without regard to county boundaries 11362.775 • It requires police to comply with these provisions 11362.78 • It recognizes that inmates can use medical marijuana 11362.785(c) • It exempts patients in their homes from the penalties associated with using cannabis within 1000 feet of a school 11362.79(b) • It enables parolees, defendants and probates to retain full access to MMJ 11362.795 • It criminalizes breach of confidentiality (eg., gives patient info to the feds) 11362.81(b)(4) These benefits are not hypothetical, they are the law. Legislative Intent Regarding SB 420 September 10, 2003 The Honorable John Burton President pro Tempre of the Senate State Capitol, Room 205, Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Legislative Intent Regarding SB 420 (as amended September 4, 2003) JOHN -- In order to clarify the Legislature's intent in enacting Senate Bill 420, 1 respectfully request that this letter be published in the Senate Daily Journal. Fully recognizing that Proposition 215 cannot be amended by the Legislature, we have resisted all efforts to make the new identification card system created by SB 420 mandatory &endash, and at least two times SB 420 contains specific language declaring our intent that this program is wholly voluntary. In addition, the guidelines in SB 420 establish permissible amounts that are intended to be the threshold, and not a ceiling. Furthermore, SB 420 specifically allows localities with higher possession or cultivation amounts to retain them, and other local jurisdictions to establish new guidelines to exceed what has been set forth in this bill. No jurisdiction may establish amounts lower than those set forth in SB 420. Altogether, we believe that our final version of SB 420 is the very best we could hope to get enacted into law and that it provides (pursuant to the California voters' will in enacting Proposition 215) broad protection to tens of thousands of ill Californians without jeopardizing any ill Californians. Thank you for allowing us to clarify our legislative intent regarding SB 420. Sincerely, JOHN VASCONCELLOS / MARK LEND Senator, 13th District / Assemblyman, 131h District 0 BILL NUMBER: SB 420 BILL TEXT INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 20, 2003 BY Senator Vasconcellos PASSED SENATE SEPTEMBER 11, 2003 PASSED ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Leno. Coauthors: Assembly Members Goldberg, Hancock, and Koretz) An act to add Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to controlled substances. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 420, Vasconcellos. Medical marijuana. Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, prohibits any physician from being punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes. The act prohibits the provisions of law making unlawful the possession or cultivation of marijuana from applying to a patient, or to a patient' s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician. This bill would require the State Department of Health Services to establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients and would establish procedures under which a qualified patient with an identification card may use marijuana for medical purposes. The bill would specify the department's duties in this regard, including developing related protocols and forms, and establishing application and renewal fees for the program. The bill would impose various duties upon county health departments relating to the issuance of identification cards, thus creating a slate -mandated local program. The bill would create various crimes related to the identification card program, thus imposing a state - mandated local program. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to set forth and clarify details concerning possession and cultivation limits, and other regulations, as specified. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General to recommend modifications to the possession or cultivation limits set forth in the bill. The bill would require the Attorney General to develop and adopt guidelines to ensure the security and nondiversion of marijuana grown for medical use, as specified. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed $1,000,000, This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (1) On November 6, 1996, the people of the State of California enacted the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (hereafter the act), codified in Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code, in order to allow seriously ill residents of the state, who have the oral or written approval or recommendation of a physician, to use marijuana for medical purposes without fear of criminal liability under Sections 11357 and 11358 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) However, reports from across the state have revealed problems and uncertainties in the act that have impeded the ability of law enforcement officers to enforce its provisions as the voters intended and, therefore, have prevented qualified patiSnts and designated primary caregivers from obtaining the protections afforded by the act. (3) Furthermore, the enactment of this law, as well as other recent legislation dealing with pain control, demonstrates that more information is needed to assess the number of individuals across the state who are suffering from serious medical conditions that are not being adequately alleviated through the use of conventional medications. (4) In addition, the act called upon the state and the federal government to develop a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need thereof. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature, therefore, to do all of the following: (1) Clarify the scope of the application of the act and facilitate the prompt identification of qualified patients and their designated primary caregivers in order to avoid unnecessary arrest and prosecution of these individuals and provide needed guidance to law enforcement officers. (2) Promote uniform and consistent application of the act among the counties within the state. (3) Enhance the access of patients and caregivers to medical marijuana through collective, cooperative cultivation projects. (c) It is also the intent of the Legislature to address additional issues that were not included within the act, and that must be resolved in order to promote the fair and orderly implementation of the act. (d) The Legislature further finds and declares both of the following: (1) A slate identification card program will further the goals outlined in this section. (2) With respect to individuals, the identification system established pursuant to this act must be wholly voluntary, and a patient entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code need not possess an identification card in order to claim the protections afforded by that section. (e) The Legislature further finds and declares that it enacts this act pursuant to the powers reserved to the State of California and its people under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. SEC. 2. Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) is added to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, to read: Article 2.5. Medical Marijuana Program 11362.7. For purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Attending physician" means an individual who possesses a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy issued by the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and who has taken responsibility for an aspect of the medical care, treatment, diagnosis, counseling, or referral of a patient and who has conducted a medical examination of that patient before recording in the patient's medical record the physician's assessment of whether the patient has a serious medical condition and whether the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (b) "Department" means the State Department of Health Services. (c) "Person with an identification card" means an individual who is a qualified patient who has applied for and received a valid identification card pursuant to this article. (d) "Primary caregiver" means the individual, designated by a qualified patient or by a person with an identification card, who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that patient or person, and may include any of the following: 11 (1) In any case in which a qualified patient or person with an identification card receives medical care or supportive services, or both, from a clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1200) of Division 2, a health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250) of Division 2, a residential care facility for persons with chronic life -threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 (commencing with Section 1568.01) of Division 2, a residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 1569) of Division 2, a hospice, or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 1725) of Division 2, the owner or operator, or no more than three employees who are designated by the owner or operator, of the clinic, facility, hospice, or home health agency, if designated as a primary caregiver by that qualified patient or person with an identification card. (2) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by more than one qualified patient or person with an identification card, if every qualified patient or person with an identification card who has designated that individual as a primary caregiver resides in the same city or county as the primary caregiver. (3) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by a qualified patient or person with an identification card who resides in a city or county other than that of the primary caregiver, if the individual has not been designated as a primary caregiver by any other qualified patient or person with an identification card. (e) A primary caregiver shall be at least 18 years of age, unless the primary caregiver is the parent of a minor child who is a qualified patient or a person with an identification card or the primary caregiver is a person otherwise entitled to make medical decisions under state law pursuant to Sections 6922, 7002, 7050, or 7120 of the Family Code. (f) "Qualified patient" means a person who is entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5, but who does not have an identification card issued pursuant to this article. (g) "Identification card" means a document issued by the State Department of Health Services that document identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. (h) "Serious medical condition" means all of the following medical conditions (1) Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). (2) Anorexia. (3) Arthritis. (4) Cachexia. (5) Cancer. (6) Chronic pain. (7) Glaucoma. (8) Migraine. (9) Persistent muscle spasms, including, but not limited to, spasms associated with multiple sclerosis. (10) Seizures, including, but not limited to, seizures associated with epilepsy. (11) Severe nausea. (12) Any other chronic or persistent medical symptom that either: (A) Substantially limits the ability of the person to conduct one or more major life activities as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336). (B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient's safety or physical or mental health. (i) "Written documentation" means accurate reproductions of those portions of a patient's medical records that have been created by the attending physician, that contain the information required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.715, and that the patient may submit to a county health department or the county's designee as part of an application for an identification card. 11362.71. (a) (1) The department shall establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients who satisfy the requirements of this article and voluntarily apply to the identification card program. (2) The department shall establish and maintain a 24-hour, toll -free telephone number that will enable state and local law enforcement officers to have immediate access to information necessary to verify the validity of an identification card issued by the department, until a cost-effective Internet Web -based system can be developed for this purpose. (b) Every county health department, or the county's designee, shall do all of the following: (1) Provide applications upon request to individuals seeking to join the identification card program. (2) Receive and process completed applications in accordance with Section 11362.72. (3) Maintain records of identification card programs. (4) Utilize protocols developed by the department pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). (5) Issue identification cards developed by the department to approved applicants and designated primary caregivers. (c) The county board of supervisors may designate another health -related governmental or nongovernmental entity or organization to perform the functions described in subdivision (b), except for an entity or organization that cultivates or distributes marijuana. (d) The department shall develop all of the following: (1) Protocols that shall be used by a county health department or the county's designee to implement the responsibilities described in subdivision (b), including, but not limited to, protocols to confirm the accuracy of information contained in an application and to protect the confidentiality of program records. (2) Application forms that shall be issued to requesting applicants. (3) An identification card that identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and an identification card that identifies the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. The two identification cards developed pursuant to this paragraph shall be easily distinguishable from each other. (e) No person or designated primary caregiver in possession of a valid identification card shall be subject to arrest for possession, transportation, delivery, or cultivation of medical marijuana in an amount established pursuant to this article, unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the information contained in the card is false or falsified, the card has been obtained by means of fraud, or the person is otherwise in violation of the provisions of this article. (f) It shall not be necessary for a person to obtain an identification card in order to claim the protections of Section 11362.5. 11362.715. (a) A person who seeks an identification card shall pay the fee, as provided in Section 11362.755, and provide all of the following to the county health department or the county's designee on a form developed and provided by the department: (1) The name of the person, and proof of his or her residency within e county. (2) Written documentation by the attending physician in the person' s medical records stating that the person has been diagnosed with a serious medical condition and that the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (3) The name, office address, office telephone number, and California medical license number of the person's attending physician. (4) The name and the duties of the primary caregiver. (5) A government -issued photo identification card of the person and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. If the applicant is a person under 18 years of age, a certified copy of a birth certificate shall be deemed sufficient proof of identity. (b) If the person applying for an identification card lacks the capacity to make medical decisions, the application may be made by the person's legal representative, including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) A conservator with authority to make medical decisions. (2) An attorney -in -fact under a durable power of attorney for health care or surrogate decisionmaker authorized under another advanced health care directive. (3) Any other individual authorized by statutory or decisional law to make medical decisions for the person. (c) The legal representative described in subdivision (b) may also designate in the application an individual, including himself or herself, to serve as a primary caregiver for the person, provided that the individual meets the definition of a primary caregiver. (d) The person or legal representative submitting the written information and documentation described in subdivision (a) shall retain a copy thereof. 11362.72. (a) Within 30 days of receipt of an application for an identification card, a county health department or the county's designee shall do all of the following: (1) For purposes of processing the application, verify that the information contained in the application is accurate. If the person is less than 18 years of age, the county health department or its designee shall also contact the parent with legal authority to make medical decisions, legal guardian, or other person or entity with legal authority to make medical decisions, to verify the information. (2) Verify with the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California that the attending physician has a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy in the state. (3) Contact the attending physician by facsimile, telephone, or mail to confirm that the medical records submitted by the patient are a true and correct copy of those contained in the physician's office records. When contacted by a county health department or the county' s designee, the attending physician shall confirm or deny that the contents of the medical records are accurate. (4) Take a photograph or otherwise obtain an electronically transmissible image of the applicant and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. (5) Approve or deny the application. If an applicant who meets the requirements of Section 11362.715 can establish that an identification card is needed on an emergency basis, the county or its designee shall issue a temporary identification card that shall be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance. The county, or its designee, may extend the temporary identification card for no more than 30 days at a time, so long as the applicant continues to meet the requirements of this paragraph. (b) If the county healt•partment or the county's designee approvos the application, it shall, within 24 hours, or by the end of the next working day of approving the application, electronically transmit the following information to the department: (1) A unique user identification number of the applicant. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or the county's designee that has approved the application. (c) The county health department or the county's designee shall issue an identification card to the applicant and to his or her designated primary caregiver, if any, within five working days of approving the application. (d) In any case involving an incomplete application, the applicant shall assume responsibility for rectifying the deficiency. The county shall have 14 days from the receipt of information from the applicant pursuant to this subdivision to approve or deny the application. 11362.735. (a) An identification card issued by the county health department shall be serially numbered and shall contain all of the following: (1) A unique user identification number of the cardholder. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or the county's designee that has approved the application. (4) A 24-hour, toll -free telephone number, to be maintained by the department, that will enable state and local law enforcement officers to have immediate access to information necessary to verify the validity of the card. (5) Photo identification of the cardholder. (b) A separate identification card shall be issued to the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, and shall include a photo identification of the caregiver. 11362.74. (a) The county health department or the county's designee may deny an application only for any of the following reasons: (1) The applicant did not provide the information required by Section 11362.715, and upon notice of the deficiency pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 11362.72, did not provide the information within 30 days. (2) The county health department or the county's designee determines that the information provided was false. (3) The applicant does not meet the criteria set forth in this article. (b) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may not reapply for six months from the date of denial unless otherwise authorized by the county health department or the county's designee or by a court of competent jurisdiction. (c) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may appeal that decision to the department. The county health department or the county's designee shall make available a telephone number or address to which the denied applicant can direct an appeal. 11362.745. (a) An identification card shall be valid for a period of one year. (b) Upon annual renewal of an identification card, the county health department or its designee shall verify all new information and may verify any other information that has not changed. (c) The • my health department or the county's designee shall transmit its determination of approval or denial of a renewal to the department. 11362.755. (a) The department shall establish application and renewal fees for persons seeking to obtain or renew identification cards that are sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the department, including the startup cost, the cost of reduced fees for Medi- Cal beneficiaries in accordance with subdivision (b), the cost of identifying and developing a cost-effective Internet Web -based system, and the cost of maintaining the 24-hour toll -free telephone number. Each county health department or the county's designee may charge an additional fee for all costs incurred by the county or the county's designee for administering the program pursuant to this article. (b) Upon satisfactory proof of participation and eligibility in the Medi-Cal program, a Medi- Cal beneficiary shall receive a 50 percent reduction in the fees established pursuant to this section. 11362.76. (a) A person who possesses an identification card shall: (1) Within seven days, notify the county health department or the county's designee of any change in the person's attending physician or designated primary caregiver, if any. (2) Annually submit to the county health department or the county' s designee the following: (A) Updated written documentation of the person's serious medical condition. (B) The name and duties of the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, for the forthcoming year. (b) If a person who possesses an identification card fails to comply with this section, the card shall be deemed expired. If an identification card expires, the identification card of any designated primary caregiver of the person shall also expire. (c) If the designated primary caregiver has been changed, the previous primary caregiver shall return his or her identification card to the department or to the county health department or the county's designee. (d) If the owner or operator or an employee of the owner or operator of a provider has been designated as a primary caregiver pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 11362.7, of the qualified patient or person with an identification card, the owner or operator shall notify the county health department or the county's designee, pursuant to Section 11362.715, if a change in the designated primary caregiver has occurred. 11362.765. (a) Subject to the requirements of this article, the individuals specified in subdivision (b) shall not be subject, on that sole basis, to criminal liability under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570. However, nothing in this section shall authorize the individual to smoke or otherwise consume marijuana unless otherwise authorized by this article, nor shall anything in this section authorize any individual or group to cultivate or distribute marijuana for profit. (b) Subdivision (a) shall apply to all of the following: (1) A qualified patient or a person with an identification card who transports or processes marijuana for his or her own personal medical use. (2) A designated primary caregiver who transports, processes, administers, delivers, or gives away marijuana for medical purposes, in amounts not exceeding those established in subdivision (a) of Section 11362.77, only to the qualified patient of the primary caregiver, or to the person with an identification card who has designated the individual as a primary caregiver. (3) Any individual who provides assistance to a qualified parent or a person with an identification card, or his or her designated primary caregiver, in administering medical marijuana to the qualified patient or person or acquiring the skills necessary to cultivate or administer marijuana for medical purposes to the qualified patient or person. (c) A primary caregiver who receives compensation for actual expenses, including reasonable compensation incurred for services provided to an eligible qualified patient or person with an identification card to enable that person to use marijuana under this article, or for payment for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in providing those services, or both, shall not, on the sole basis of that fact, be subject to prosecution or punishment under Section 11359 or 11360. 11362.77. (a) A qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess no more than eight ounces of dried marijuana per qualified patient. In addition, a qualified patient or primary caregiver may also maintain no more than six mature or 12 immature marijuana plants per qualified patient. (b) If a qualified patient or primary caregiver has a doctor's recommendation that this quantity does not meet the qualified patient' s medical needs, the qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess an amount of marijuana consistent with the patient's needs. (c) Counties and cities may retain or enact medical marijuana guidelines allowing qualified patients or primary caregivers to exceed the state limits set forth in subdivision (a). (d) Only the dried mature processed flowers of female cannabis plant or the plant conversion shall be considered when determining allowable quantities of marijuana under this section. (e) The Attorney General may recommend modifications to the possession or cultivation limits set forth in this section. These recommendations, if any, shall be made to the Legislature no later than December 1, 2005, and may be made only after public comment and consultation with interested organizations, including, but not limited to, patients, health care professionals, researchers, law enforcement, and local governments. Any recommended modification shall be consistent with the intent of this article and shall be based on currently available scientific research. (f) A qualified patient or a person holding a valid identification card, or the designated primary caregiver of that qualified patient or person, may possess amounts of marijuana consistent with this article. 11362.775. Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely on the basis of that fact be subject to state criminal sanctions under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570, 11362.7& A state or local law enforcement agency or officer shall not refuse to accept an identification card issued by the department unless the state or local law enforcement agency or officer has reasonable cause to believe that the information contained in the card is false or fraudulent, or the card is being used fraudulently. 11362.785. (a) Nothing in this article shall require any accommodation of any medical use of marijuana on the property or premises of any place of employment or during the hours of employment or on the property or premises of any jail, correctional facility, or other type of penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a person shall not be prohibited or prevented from obtaining and submitting the written information and documentation necessary to apply for an identification card on the basis that the person is incarcerated in a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (c) Nothing in this article shall prohibit a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained, from permitting a prisoner or a person under arrest who has an identification card, to use marijuana for medical purposes under circumstances that will not endanger the health or safety of other prisoners or the security of the facility. (d) Nothing in this article shall require a governmental, private, or any other health insurance provider or health care service plan to be liable for any claim for reimbursement for the medical use of marijuana. 11362.79. Nothing in this article shall authorize a qualified patient or person with an identification card to engage in the smoking of medical marijuana under any of the following circumstances: (a) In any place where smoking is prohibited by law. (b) In or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school, recreation center, or youth center, unless the medical use occurs within a residence. (c) On a schoolbus. (d) While in a motor vehicle that is being operated. (e) While operating a boat. 11362.795. (a) (1) Any criminal defendant who is eligible to use marijuana pursuant to Section 11362.5 may request that the court confirm that he or she is allowed to use medical marijuana while he or she is on probation or released on bail. (2) The court's decision and the reasons for the decision shall be stated on the record and an entry stating those reasons shall be made in the minutes of the court. (3) During the period of probation or release on bail, if a physician recommends that the probationer or defendant use medical marijuana, the probationer or defendant may request a modification of the conditions of probation or bail to authorize the use of medical marijuana. (4) The court's consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. (b) (1) Any person who is to be released on parole from a jail, state prison, school, road camp, or other state or local institution of confinement and who is eligible to use medical marijuana pursuant to Section 11362.5 may request that he or she be allowed to use medical marijuana during the period he or she is released on parole. A parolee's written conditions of parole shall reflect whether or not a request for a modification of the conditions of his or her parole to use medical marijuana was made, and whether the request was granted or denied. (2) During the period of the parole, where a physician recommends that the parolee use medical marijuana, the parolee may request a modification of conditions of the parole to authorize the tTse of medical marijuana. (3) Any parolee whose request to use medical marijuana while on parole was denied may pursue an administrative appeal of the decision. Any decision on the appeal shall be in writing and shall reflect the reasons for the decision. (4) The administrative consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. 11362.8. No professional licensing board may impose a civil penalty or take other disciplinary action against a licensee based solely on the fact that the licensee has performed acts that are necessary or appropriate to carry out the licensee's role as a designated primary caregiver to a person who is a qualified patient or who possesses a lawful identification card issued pursuant to Section 11362.72. However, this section shall not apply to acts performed by a physician relating to the discussion or recommendation of the medical use of marijuana to a patient. These discussions or recommendations, or both, shall be governed by Section 11362.5. 11362.81. (a) A person specified in subdivision (b) shall be subject to the following penalties: (1) For the first offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than six months or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (2) For a second or subsequent offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than one year, or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (b) Subdivision (a) applies to any of the following: (1) A person who fraudulently represents a medical condition or fraudulently provides any material misinformation to a physician, county health department or the county's designee, or state or local law enforcement agency or officer, for the purpose of falsely obtaining an identification card. (2) A person who steals or fraudulently uses any person's identification card in order to acquire, possess, cultivate, transport, use, produce, or distribute marijuana. (3) A person who counterfeits, tampers with, or fraudulently produces an identification card. (4) A person who breaches the confidentiality requirements of this article to information provided to, or contained in the records of, the department or of a county health department or the county's designee pertaining to an identification card program. (c) In addition to the penalties prescribed in subdivision (a), any person described in subdivision (b) may be precluded from attempting to obtain, or obtaining or using, an identification card for a period of up to six months at the discretion of the court. (d) In addition to the requirements of this article, the Attorney General shall develop and adopt appropriate guidelines to ensure the security and nondiversion of marijuana grown for medical use by patients qualified under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. 11362.82. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this article is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. 11362.83. Nothing in Ihis article shall prevent a city or other local•erning body from adopting and enforcing laws consistent with this article. SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because in that regard this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. In addition, no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for other costs mandated by the state because this act includes additional revenue that is specifically intended to fund the costs of the stale mandate in an amount sufficient to fund the cost of the state mandate, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. * Footnotes to the above: 11366. Every person who opens or maintains any place for the purpose of unlawfully selling, giving away, or using any controlled substance which is (1) specified in subdivision (b), (c), or (e), or paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 11054, specified in paragraph (13), (14), (15), or (20) of subdivision (d) of Section 11054, or specified in subdivision (b), (c), paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (d), or paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 11055, or (2) which is a narcotic drug classified in Schedule III, IV, or V, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one year or the state prison. 11366.5. (a) Any person who has under his or her management or control any building, room, space, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, who knowingly rents, leases, or makes available for use, with or without compensation, the building, room, space, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, or distributing any controlled substance for sale or distribution shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or in the state prison, (b) Any person who has under his or her management or control any building, room, space, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, who knowingly allows the building, room, space, or enclosure to be fortified to suppress law enforcement entry in order to further the sale of any amount of cocaine base as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 11054, cocaine as specified in paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 11055, heroin, phencyclidine, amphetamine, methamphetamine, or lysergic acid diethylamide and who obtains excessive profits from the use of the building, room, space, or enclosure shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years. (c) Any person who violates subdivision (a) after previously being convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years. (d) For the purposes of this section, "excessive profits" means the receipt of consideration of a value substantially higher than fair market value. 11570. Every building or place used for the purpose of unlawfully selling, serving, storing, keeping, manufacturing, or giving away any controlled substance, precursor, or analog specified in this division, and every building or place wherein or upon which those acts take place, is a nuisance which shall be enjoined, abated, and prevented, and for which damages may be recovered, whether it is a public or private nuisance. The info below is from NORML. SACRAMENTO, Oct. 12, 2003. Gov. Davis signed Sen. Vasconcellos' medical marijuana task force bill, SB 420, which would establish state Prop. 215 enforcement guidelines. The bill was marred by a flurry• controversy over a last-minute amendmenTsetling Prop. 215 cultivation guidelines of 6 mature or 12 immature plants plus one-half pound of processed cannabis per patient. The guidelines would not be legally binding limits for the purposes of determining guilt or innocence, but are intended to provide guidance for when police can make arrests. SB 420 would establish a voluntary identification card system to protect patients and caregivers from arrest throughout the slate. The card, which is modeled on the San Francisco ID system in order to protect patient privacy, would protect against arrest for not only possession and cultivation, but also transportation and other related charges for persons adhering to specified guidelines. As originally proposed, SB 420 would have had the guidelines set by the State Dept. of Health Services pursuant to public hearings. However, this idea was opposed by the Davis administration on the grounds it would be too costly and burdensome on DHS. In order to save the bill, Sen. Vasconcellos negotiated a last-minute compromise with Attorney General Bill Lockyer, setting guidelines of 112 pound of marijuana and up to 6 mature or 12 immature plants. Medical marijauana advocates strongly opposed the guidelines as arbitrary and inadequate for many patients. Instead, they pushed for more liberal guidelines like those adopted in Sonoma County, which allow up to 3 pounds and 99 plants within 100 square feet. However supporters of SB 420 argue that the guidelines are not a ceiling on what patients can have, but rather a floor beneath which they will be protected from arrest. They point out that SB 420 does not and cannot limit the amount of medicine patients may legally have or grow, since Prop. 215 gives them the right to as much as they need for their personal medical use. Under SB 420, patients with state cards who adhered to the guidelines would be protected from arrest, which they are not under current law. On the other hand, patients who exceeded the guidelines would be subject to arrest, but would still retain their full Prop. 215 rights in court. As additional protections, SB 420 specifies that patients can exceed the guidelines if their physician says that is necessary, and permits local jurisdictions to enact more liberal guidelines if they wish. In other provisions, SB 420 ❑ Recognizes the right of patients to cultivate collectively or cooperatively, though not for profit. 0 Does not allow marijuana smoking in no smoking zones, within 1000 feet of a school, on schoolbuses, in operating vehicles, or while steering a boat. 0 Allows "primary caregivers' to have multiple patients within the same city or county, but just one patient outside. 0 Allows reasonable compensation for caregivers. 0 Allows prisoners and probationers to have medical marijuana cards and request its use in appropriate circumstances. `aMe concluded that thfflare some limited circumstances which we recommend smoking marijuana for medical uses." — from Principal Investigator Dr. John Benson's opening remarks at IOM's 3/17/99 news conference Questions about medical marijuana answered by the Institute of Medicine's report Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base' Excerpts compiled by the Marijuana Policy Project What conditions can marijuana treat? "The accumulated data indicate a potential thera- peutic value for cannabinoid drugs, particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation." [p. 31 "[Blasic biology indicates a role for cannabinoids in pain and control of movement, which is consistent with a possible therapeutic role in these areas. The evidence is relatively strong for the treatment of pain and, intriguing although less well established, for movement disorders." [p. 701 "For patients such as those with AIDS or who are under- going chemotherapy and who suffer simultaneously from severe pain, nausea, and appetite loss, cannabinoid drugs might offer broad-spectrum relief not found in any other single medication. The data are weaker for mus- cle spasticity but moderately promising." [p. 1771 "The most encouraging clinical data on the effects of cannabinoids on chronic pain are from three studies of cancer pain." [p. 1421 Why can't patients use medicines that are already legal? "[T]here will likely always be a subpopulation of patients who do not respond well to other medica- tions." [Pp. 3, 41 'Me critical issue is not whether marijuana or cannabinoid drugs might be superior to the new drugs, but whether some group of patients might obtain added or better relief from marijuana or cannabinoid drugs." [p. 1531 "The profile of cannabinoid drug effects suggests that they are promising for treating wasting syndrome in AIDS patients. Nausea, appetite loss, pain, and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana. Although some medica- tions are more effective than marijuana for these problems, they are not equally effective in all patients." [p. 1591 What about Marinol®, the major active ingredient in marijuana in pill form? "It is well recognized that Marinol's oral route of administration hampers its effectiveness because of slow absorption and patients' desire for more con- trol over dosing." [Pp. 205, 206] Why not wait for more research before making marijuana legally available as a medicine? "[Rlesearch funds are limited, and there is a daunting thicket of regulations to be negotiated at the federal level (those of the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA) and state levels." [p. 1371 "Some drugs, such as marijuana, are labeled Schedule I in the Controlled Substance Act, and this adds considerable complexity and expense to their clinical evaluation." [p. 1941 "[O]nly about one in five drugs initially tested in humans successfully secures FDA approval for mar- keting through a new drug application." [p. 195] "From a scientific point of view, research is difficult because of the rigors of obtaining an adequate supply of legal, standardized marijuana for study." [p. 2171 'Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences (ISBN 0-309-07155-0) Printed and distributed In the Coachella Valley for public education purposes by MARIJUANA ANTI -PROHIBITION PROJECT PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263 — 760-799-2055 On the web at www.marijuananews.org — email to: MAPPNOW@hotmaii.com "In short, development of the m&ana plant is beset by substantial scientific, regulatory, and com- mercial obstacles and uncertainties." [p. 2181 "[Djespite the legal, social, and health problems asso- ciated with smoking marijuana, it is widely used by certain patient groups." [p. 71 Do the existing laws really hurt patients? "G.S. spoke at the IOM workshop in Louisiana about his use of marijuana first to combat AIDS wasting syndrome and later for relief from the side effects of AIDS medications.... [He said,] 'Every day I risk arrest, property forfeiture, fines, and imprisonment.'" [Pp. 27, 281 Why shouldn't we wait for new drugs based on marijuana's components to be developed, rather than allowing patients to eat or smoke natural marijuana right now? "Although most scientists who study cannabinoids agree that the pathways to cannabinoid drug devel- opment are clearly marked, there is no guarantee that the fruits of scientific research will be made available to the public for medical use." [p. 41 "[Ijt will likely be many years before a safe and effec- tive cannabincid delivery system, such as an inhaler, is available for patients. In the meantime there are patients with debilitating symptoms for whom smoked marijuana might provide relief." [p. 71 "[Mhat seems to be clear from the dearth of products in development and the small size of the companies sponsoring them is that cannabinoid development is seen as especially risky." [Pp. 211, 2121 f IOM kaer notes d= it could take more than five years and cost $200-300 million to get new rmtnabinoid dings appm ed—if ever.I "Cannabinoids in the plant are automatically placed in the most restrictive schedule of the Controlled Substances Act, and this is a substantial deterrent to development." [p. 2191 Isn't marijuana too dangerous to be used as a medicine? "[Ejxcept for the harms associated with smoking, the adverse effects of marijuana use are within the range of effects tolerated for other medications." [p. 51 "Until the development of rapid onset antiemetic drug delivery systems, there will likely remain a sub - population of patients for whom standard antiemetic therapy is ineffective and who suffer from debilitat- ing emesis. It is possible that the hamuful effects of smoking marijuana for a limited period of time might be outw by the antiemetic benefits of marijuana at le for patients for whom standard antiemetic therapy is ineffective and who suffer from debilitating emesis. Such patients should be evaluat- ed on a rase -by -case basis and treated under close medical supervision." [p. 1541 "Terminal cancer patients pose different issues. For those patients the medical harm associated with smoking is of little consequence. For terminal patients suffering debilitating pain or nausea and for whom all indicated medications have failed to pro- vide relief, the medical benefits of smoked marijuana might outweigh the harm." [p. 1591 What should be done to help the patients who already benefit from medial marijuana, prior to the development of new drugs and delivery devices? "Patients who are currently suffering from debilitating conditions unrelieved by legally available drugs, and who might find relief with smoked marijuana, will find little comfort in a promise of a better drug 10 years from now. In terms of good medicine, marijuana should rarely be recommended unless all reasonable options have been eliminated. But then what? It is conceivable that the medical and scientif- ic opinion might find itself in conflict with drug reg- ulations. This presents a policy issue that must weigh --at least temporarily —the needs of individual patients against broader social issues. Our assessment of the scientific data on the medical value of marijuana and its constituent cannabinoids is but one component of attaining that balance." 1p. 1781 "Also, although a drug is normally approved for medical use only on proof of its'safety and efficacy,' patients with life -threatening conditions are some- times (under protocols for 'compassionate use') allowed access to unapproved dings whose benefits and risks are uncertain." Ip. 141 "Until a nonsmoked rapid -onset cannabinoid drug delivery system becomes available, we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting. One possible approach is to treat patients as n-of-1 clinical trials (single -patient trials), in which patients are fully informed of their status as experi- mental subjects using a harmful drug delivery system and in which their condition is closely monitored and documented under medical supervision...." [p. 81 [The federal government's "compassimare use" program, uAh ch currently provides marijuana to seven tvtrimrc nnrinnuride is an eramhla of an n.rrf I MJfN I the ION report doesn't explicorse state bills and initiatives to simply reffl5ve criminal penalties for bona fide medical marijuana users. Does that mean that we should keep the laws exactly as they are and keep arresting patients? "This report analyzes science, not the law. As in any policy debate, the value of scientific analysis is that it can provide a foundation for further discussion. Distilling scientific evidence does not in itself solve a policy problem." [p. 141 If patients were allowed to use medical marijuana, wouldn't overall use increase? "Finally, there is a broad social concern that sanc- tioning the medical use of marijuana might increase its use among the general population. At this point there are no convincing data to support this con- cern. The existing data are consistent with the idea that this would not be a problem if the medical use of marijuana were as closely regulated as other med- icarions with abuse potential.... [ This question is beyond the issues normally considered for medical uses of drugs and should not be a factor in evaluat- ing the therapeutic potential of marijuana or cannabinoids." [Pp. 6, 71 "No evidence suggests that the use of opiates or cocaine for medical purposes has increased the perception that their illicit use is safe or acceptable." Ip. 1021 "Thus, there is little evidence that decriminalization of marijuana use necessarily leads to a substantial increase in marijuana use." [p. 1041 [Decrimmalization is defined as the removal of criminal penalties for all uses, even recreational.] Doesn't the medical marijuana debate send children the wrong message about marijuana? "[Tjhe perceived risk of marijuana use did not change among California youth between 1996 and 1997. In summary, there is no evidence that the medical marijuana debate has altered adolescents' perceptions of the risks associated with marijuana use." [p. 1041 "Even if there were evidence that the medical use of marijuana would decrease the perception that it can be a harmful substance, this is beyond the scope of laws regulating the approval of therapeutic drugs. Those laws concern scientific data related to the safety and efficacy of drugs for individual use; they do not address perceptions or beliefs of the general population." [p. 1261 Isn't marijuana •addictive to be used as a medicine? "Some controlled substances that are approved med- ications produce dependence after long-term use; this, however, is a normal part of patient manage- ment and does not generally present undue risk to the patient." [p. 981 "Animal research has shown that the potential for catmabinoid dependence exists, and cannabinoid withdrawal symptoms can be observed. However, both appear to be mild compared to dependence and withdrawal seen with other drugs." [p. 351 "A distinctive marijuana and THC withdrawal syn- drome has been identified, but it is mild and subtle compared with the profound physical syndrome of alcohol or heroin withdrawal." [Pp. 89, 901 Pmportim Of Uses That Ding Category Ever Became Dependent (%) Alcohol 15 Marijuana (including hashish) [P. 951 "Compared to most other drugs ... dependence among marijuana users is relatively rare." [p. 941 "In summary, although few marijuana users develop dependence, some do. But they appear to be less likely to do so than users of other drugs (including alcohol and nicotine), and marijuana dependence appears to be less severe than dependence on other drugs." [p. 981 Doesn't the use of marijuana cause people to use more dangerous drugs? "[Ijt does not appear to be a gateway drug to the extent that it is the cause or even that it is the most signifi- cant predictor of serious drug abuse; that is, care must be taken not to attribute cause to association." [p.1011 "There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a step- ping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect." [p. 991 "Instead, the legal status of marijuana makes it a gateway drug." [p. 991 Shouldn't medical marijuana remain illegal because it is bad for the Immune system? "The short-term immunosuppressive effects are not well established; if they exist at all, they are probably not great enough to preclude a legitimate medical use. The acute side effects of marijuana use are with- in the risks tolerated for many medications." [p. 1261 Doesn't marijuana cause braintage? "Earlier studies purporting to show structural changes in the brains of heavy marijuana users have not been replicated with more sophisticated techniques." [p. 1061 Doesn't marijuana cause amotivational syndrome? "When heavy marijuana use accompanies these symptoms, the drug is often cited as the cause, but no convincing data demonstrate a causal relation- ship between marijuana smoking and these behav- ioral characteristics." [Pp. 107, 1081 Doesn't marijuana cause health problems that shorten the life span? "[Elpidemiological data indicate that in the general population marijuana use is not associated with increased mortality." [p. 1091 Isn't marijuana too dangerous for the respiratory system? "Given a cigarette of comparable weight, as much as four times the amount of tar can be deposited in the lungs of marijuana smokers as in the lungs of tobac- co smokers." [p. 1111 "However, a marijuana cigarette smoked recreational- ly typically is not packed as tightly as a tobacco ciga- rette, and the smokable substance is about half that in a tobacco cigarette. In addition, tobacco smokers generally smoke considerably more cigarettes per day than do marijuana smokers." [Pp. 111, 1121 "Mere is no conclusive evidence that marijuana caus- es cancer in humans, including cancers usually relat- ed to tobacco use.... More definitive evidence that habitual marijuana smoking leads or does not lead to respiratory cancer awaits the results of well -designed case control epidemiological studies." [p. 119] Don't the euphoric side effects diminish marijuana's value as a medicine? "The high associated with marijuana is not generally claimed to be integral to its therapeutic value. But mood enhancement, anxiety reduction, and mild sedation can be desirable qualities in medications — particularly for patients suffering pain and anxiety. Thus, although the psychological effects of marijuana are merely side effects in the treatment of some symptoms, they might contribute directly to relief of other symptoms." [p. 841 What other the*utic potential does marijuana hare? "One of the most prominent new applications of cannabinoids is for'neuroprotection,' the rescue of neurons from cell death associated with trauma, ischemia, and neurological diseases." [p. 2111 "There are numerous anecdotal reports that marijuana can relieve the spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury, and animal studies have shown that cannabinoids affect motor areas in the brain --areas that might influence spasticiry" [p. 1601 "High intraocular pressure (IOP) is a known risk fac- tor for glaucoma and can, indeed, be reduced by cannabinoids and marijuana. However, the effect is too and [sic] short lived and requires too high doses, and there are too many side effects to recommend lifelong use in the treatment of glaucoma. The potential harmful effects of chronic marijuana smok- ing outweigh its modest benefits in the treatment of glaucoma. Clinical studies on the effects of smoked marijuana are unlikely to result in improved treat- ment for glaucoma." [p. 1771 [Note that IOM found that marijuana does work for glaucoma, but was uncom - fortable with the amount that a person needs to stroke. Presumably, it would be an acceptable treattrtent for glaucoma patients to eat marijuana. Additionally, MPP believes that IOM would not support arresting patients who choose to smoke marijuana to treat gimtcarna. ] Do the American people really support legal access to medical marijuana, or were voters simply tricked into passing medical marijuana ballot initiatives? "Public support for patient access to marijuana for medical use appears substantial; public opinion polls taken during 1997 and 1998 generally report 60- 70 percent of respondents in favor of allowing med- ical uses of marijuana." [p. 181 But shouldn't we keep medial marijuana illegal because some advocates want to "legalize" marijuana for all uses? "[I]t is not relevant to scientific validity whether an argument is put forth by someone who believes that all marijuana use should be legal or by someone who believes that any marijuana use is highly damaging to individual users and to society as a whole" [p. 141 The full report by the National Academy of Sciences can be viewed on-line at http://bob.nap.edu/boc)ks/0309071550/htmV n u Long -Term Marijuana -Use Study: No Ill Health Effects http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread I0533.shtml By Peter Gorman, Special To HighWitness News Source: High Times In the first study of its kind, four recipients of federally provided medical marijuana were examined for the health effects of their long-term cannabis use -and none showed any serious adverse effects. The Missoula Chronic Clinical Cannabis Use Study -headed by Montana neurologist Dr. Ethan Russo and Virginia nurse Mary Lynn Mathre, cofounder of Patients Out of Time -investigated "the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects" among patients receiving cannabis through the department of Health and Human Services' Compassionate Investigational New Drug program. That program was closed to new applicants in 1991, but continues to supply medical marijuana to seven patients. The four patients studied -one with glaucoma, one with chronic musculoskeletal pain, one with spasm and nausea, and one with spasticity from multiple sclerosis -were run through a battery of tests, including magnetic -resonance -imaging brain scans, chest X-rays, and neuropsychological, immunological and pulmonary -functions tests. The study provided the first opportunity to investigate the long-term physical effects of cannabis -smoking on patients who used a "known dosage of a standardized, heat -sterilized, quality -controlled supply of low-grade marijuana for 10-19 years." The results, which will be published in the Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics in January 2002, showed "all four patients are stable with respect to their chronic conditions, and are taking many fewer standard pharmaceuticals than previously." Mild changes in pulmonary function were found in two of the four, but no cancer cells were detected. No other negative functions were discovered. The study, conducted at St. Patrick's Hospital in Missoula, Montana, was sponsored by Patients Out of Time and funded by outside individuals. "This is a positive result using a poor -quality medicine. What could we expect using a better quality cannabis?" Al Byrne, Patients Out of Time's other cofounder, told HT. Asked whether he thought the study would result in a reopening of the Compassionate IND program, Byrne bristled. "No. I don't think it will, but it should. I think the study's effect on the government will be that they will no longer be able to say that long-term therapeutic cannabis use is bad for you. But will the federal government pay it any heed? Probably not." When asked why it took a nonprofit to organize the study rather than the government, Byrne noted that "I suppose because they suspected the result of the study would be positive and the government does not want anything positive said about cannabis use as medicine. That's the bottom line." (Note: The government says smoking pot is bad for your health, particularly in the long run. But four of the seven people it supplies have been looked at from every angle, and researchers conclude that their marijuana use hasn't hurt them a bit.) Printed and distributed in the Coachella Valley for public education purposes by MARIJUANA ANTI -PROHIBITION PROJECT PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263 - 760-799-2055 On the web at www.marijuananews.org - email to: MAPPNOW@hotmail.com i MARIJUANA & MEDICINE -- ��-- FACT: "Most of us in the medical profession believe this decision (banning medical marijuana) is politically motivated. Marijuana as medicine works." Dr. !lean I(drll, AtD, ,Cyre,li((acd Radio .Show llosi 4 4BC T6 Medical Advisor FACT: "Marijuana has been shown to be 6fe and effective, particularly for nausea, in people being treated for cancer, AIDS and other serious illnesses." David Siegel, MD; Stephen Hulley, MD; Normal Hearst, MD; Michelle Berlin, MD; Stephen Hulley, MD; - Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, Univ. of Calif. at S.F. FACT: "This medicine does no harm to the patient and is effective in relieving pain and nausea." Dr. Richard Cohen, Chief oncologist, California Pacific Hospital FACT: "The health professionals want medical marijuana." Representative henry Waxman, California, United States Congress Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington by voter initiative or legislative law allow seriously ill people to use marijuana for medicine. Scientific and Medical Research Support Medical Marijuana Numerous published studies demonstrate that marijuana has medical value in treating patients with serious illnesses such as AIDS, glaucoma, cancer. multiple sclerosis, epi- lepsy, and chronic pain. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine, in the most comprehensive study of medi- cal marijuana's efficacy, concluded that, "Nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety . . all can be mitigated by marijuana." Allow- ing patients legal access to medical mari- juana has been endorsed by numerous or- ganizations, including the AIDS Action Council, American Bar Association, Ameri- can Public Health Association, California Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, and several state nurses associations. Marinol is touted by the DEA as the legal means to obtain the benefits of marijuana. However, marinol does not deliver the same therapeutic ben- efits found in the natural herb. Marinot is a synthetic form of THC, which is only ONE of the therapeutic elements found in the cannabis plant. In isolation, THC cannot offer the same therapeutic value, and has an array of negative side effects not found with cannabis. Feds Ignore Their Own Research When it comes to federal policy on marijuana, the right hand doesn't know, or care, what the left hand is doing. For example, in 1978 the federal government cre- Gloria Stone, 76 ated the Investiga- BREAST CANCER tional New Drug (IND) compas- "I'm 76 years old. 1 found sionate access re- using marijuana stimulated search program to my appetite and calmed my allow some pa - nausea from the chemo- tients to receive therapy. It also eased my medical marijuana pain." from the govern- ment. The IND was closed in 1992 after it was flooded by applications from AIDS patients. and the re- maining patients had to sue the federal government on the basis of "medical necessity" to retain access to their medi- cine. Today, eight surviving patients still receive medical marijuana from the federal government. The most a single patient receives from the federal government is 9 pounds a year. Despite this successful medical pro- gram, marijuana is still classified as a Schedule I substance, defined as having a high potential for abuse and no medicinal value. Medical marijuana advocates have also pursued reform through the Ni courts. In 1972, a petition was submitted to the Bureau of Nar- cotics and Dangerous Drugs (now known as the Drug En- U t forcemeat Administration, or DEA) to reschedule marijuana so that it could be prescribed to � pa- tients. In 1988, the DEA's chief administrative law judge, Francis L. Young, ruled that, "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known ... x It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance ..:' Without justification, the DEA refused to implement this ruling and continues to classify marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance. Widespread Public Support; State Referenda Passed Public opinion is clearly in favor of ending the prohibition of medical marijuana. According to a CNN/Time Poll in November 2002, 80% of Americans support medical mari- juana. Since 1996, voters in eight states plus the District of Columbia have passed favorable medical marijuana bal- lot initiatives. Currently, laws that effectively remove state - level criminal penalties for growing and/or possessing medical marijuana are in place inAlaska, California. Colo- rado. Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Ten states have symbolic medical marijuana laves. daws that support medical marijuana but do not provide patients with legal protection under state law). Marijuana Anti -Prohibition Project American Harm Reduction Association A PO Box 739 N �P Palm Springs CA 92263-0739 760-799-2055 ♦i mappnow@hotmail.com DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD Marijuana Anti -Prohibition Project American Harm Reduction Association N 6MO4, i" d4d eorK.•ar Sucre PO Box 739 H 1P Palm Springs CA 92263-0739 ,e 760-799-2055 A mappnow@hotmail.com 91/-vq cc`r� MARIJUANA ANTI -PROHIBIT ON PROJECT A g AMERICAN HARM REDUCTION ASSOCIATION �I p Compassion and Common Sense PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263-0739 A p Phone — 760-799-2055 www.mariwuananews.org — email to mappnow(ftotmail.com Temecula City Council Urgency Ordinance No. 04-09 DEVELOPING POLICIES THAT ALLOW MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW Presented by Lanny Swerdlow Director My name is Lanny Swerdlow and I am director of the Marijuana Anti - Prohibition Project and the American Harm Reduction Association. In your consideration of any issue surrounding medical marijuana you need to consider the concerns of the citizens of Temcula who are legal medical marijuana patients under California state law. In regards to the issue of dispensaries, I would like to point out that medical marijuana dispensaries are profit -making businesses just like pharmacies and can hire their own lawyers to fight for their business rights. I am an advocate for medical marijuana patients, not dispensaries. The fact is that most medical marijuana dispensaries charge very high prices for the medicine that they dispense because their costs are very high. Pharmacies also charge very high prices for the medicine they dispense because the prices they pay to the giant pharmaceutical companies are also very very high. However, I have a feeling if a giant high priced pharmaceutical company wanted to open a plant and contacted your city for regulatory information, I highly doubt if you would be considering an urgent ordinance to ban the establishment of a giant pharmaceutical manufacturing plant. The question that needs to be addressed along with the dispensary issue, is how are Temecula citizens, who are medical marijuana patients, going to obtain their medicine. For many of your citizens, they must drive up to two hours or more to obtain their medicine through one of the three dispensaries located in Los Angeles County. There are other ways, however, that medical Continued on next page TEMECULA CITY MUNCIL • STATEMENT BY LANNY SWERDLOW URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04-09 September 14, 2004 Page 2 marijuana patients can obtain their medicine and your ordinance recognizes this as it clearly states "This interim ordinance shall in no way limit the right to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes as is presently authorized by the laws of the State of California as set forth in the Health and Safety Code." I am heartened that the city of Temecula recognizes the right of its citizens to possess, use or cultivate marijuana for medicinal purposes. If your recognize this as their right, then it is your responsibility to help foster a climate in which medical marijuana patients can obtain their medicine through methods that, unlike dispensaries, are specifically sanctioned under SB 420 and Health and Safety Code 11362.5. In the packet of materials I have given you, there is a copy of SB 420. 1 refer you to Section 11362.775, which specifically sanctions patients to form collectives or coops for the purposes of cultivating marijuana for medicinal purposes. Along with the issue of dispensaries, the city of Temecula needs to address this issue and create city policy which will allow medical marijuana patients and law enforcement in Temecula to comply with state law. In the 45 day period that this issue is to be studied, I believe a citizen's task force should be formed to not only provide the city with citizen input on the issue of dispensaries, but to help the city of Temecula foster the ability of medical marijuana patients to obtain their medicine in ways specifically sanctioned by state law. In addition to medical marijuana patients and advocates, the Task Force should have representatives from law enforcement, the city attorney's office, the planning commission, county health department, health professionals and others so as to best develop efficient and fair means to obtain these ends. In this way, the Temecula City Council would be encouraging citizen involvement in the decision making process, would provide a forum for expressing and resolving divergent opinions and goals and demonstrate for the rest of southern California how this issue can be addressed in a rational process and provide results and benefits for everyone. 0 Overview and analysis of SB 420 SB 420 clears up some of the issues surrounding implementation of Prop 215 (HS11362.5) and formulates a voluntary system to protect patients from arrest. It empowers communities to adopt scientific local medical marijuana guidelines, but also sets biased and unrealistic standards as the default baseline for protection. SB 420 negative characteristics: • SB420 creates a voluntary card system that may become a "de facto' mandatory system by legitimizing some patients at a higher level than others (i.e., if you have a card you get more respect) • It sets a wholly inadequate limit of 8 ounces of dry bud and 6 mature OR 12 immature plants, which is not scientific or reasonable. While it allows counties to increase these amounts, again these may become "de facto" limits that counties adopt or even roll back their guidelines to match. While both of these problems are hypothetical, they are very risky. SB 420 positive characteristics: • SB 420 was the result of much input from patients and reformers • It recognizes all patient's rights as embodied in Prop 215 as summarized in SB420 Section 1(a)(1) • Participation in the voluntary ID program is not a requirement for full protection under Prop 215 11362.71(f) • It asserts medical marijuana as a matter of states rights 420 (1)(e) • It extends the power of recommendation/approval to osteopaths 11362.7(a) • It allows agencies to provide medical marijuana to qualified patients 11362.7(d)(2) • It allows caregivers to have more than one patient in the same county 11362.7(d)(3) • It allows caregivers to have one out -of -county patient 11362.7(d)(3) • It creates a completely voluntary and protective 1-year photo ID program for participating patients and/or caregivers. 11362.71(a)(1) • It provides "around the clock" validation of participation in the program when police confront a patient or caregiver 11362.71(a)(2) • It allows non -governmental agencies to process the cards 11362.71(c) • It promises confidentiality of records 11362.71(d)(1I • It stops arrests -- not just prosecutions -- of qualified individuals for possession, transportation, delivery or cultivation up to a very minimal level of 8 oz and 6 plants per patient (that could arguably be hash or hash oil, which would be equivalent to more, I'm not sure what it does about tinctures, which have a lot of liquid weight) 11362.71(e) • It includes the right for an individual to appeal if rejected for a patient ID card 11362.74 (b) • It gives Medi-Cal patients a 50% fee discount 11362.755(a) • It allows transportation and processing (HS 11360) 11362.765 (b) • It reduces the risk of a patient being charged with intent to sell (11359) maintaining a place where cannabis is produced, provided or used (HS11366, 11366.5, 11570 ) 11362.765(b) • It allows reimbursement for •regiver's material and labor 11362.765(c)• • It empowers physicians to grant exemptions for quantities 11362.77 (b) • It allows communities to adopt more realistic amounts but does not allow them to go below the "floor" amounts 11362.77(c) • It codifies the medical use of dried cannabis flowers rather than leaf 11362.77(d) • It opens the door for us to work with the AG to amend these levels upward 11362.77(e) • It recognizes collectives and coop gardens, without regard to county boundaries 11362.775 • It requires police to comply with these provisions 11362.78 • It recognizes that inmates can use medical marijuana 11362.785(c) • It exempts patients in their homes from the penalties associated with using cannabis within 1000 feet of a school 11362.79(b) • It enables parolees, defendants and probates to retain full access to MMJ 11362.795 • It criminalizes breach of confidentiality (eg., gives patient info to the feds) 11362.81(b)(4) These benefits are not hypothetical, they are the law. Legislative Intent Regarding SB 420 September 10, 2003 The Honorable John Burton President pro Tempre of the Senate State Capitol, Room 205, Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Legislative Intent Regarding SB 420 (as amended September 4, 2003) JOHN -- In order to clarify the Legislature's intent in enacting Senate Bill 420, 1 respectfully request that this letter be published in the Senate Daily Journal. Fully recognizing that Proposition 215 cannot be amended by the Legislature, we have resisted all efforts to make the new identification card system created by SB 420 mandatory &endash, and at least two times SB 420 contains specific language declaring our intent that this program is wholly voluntary. In addition, the guidelines in SB 420 establish permissible amounts that are intended to be the threshold, and not a ceiling. Furthermore, SB 420 specifically allows localities with higher possession or cultivation amounts to retain them, and other local jurisdictions to establish new guidelines to exceed what has been set forth in this bill. No jurisdiction may establish amounts lower than those set forth in SB 420. Altogether, we believe that our final version of SB 420 is the very best we could hope to get enacted into law and that it provides (pursuant to the California voters' will in enacting Proposition 215) broad protection to tens of thousands of ill Californians without jeopardizing any ill Californians. Thank you for allowing us to clarify our legislative intent regarding SB 420. Sincerely, JOHN VASCONCELLOS / MARK LEND, Senator, 13th District / Assemblyman, 13th District INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 20, 2003 BY Senator Vasconcellos PASSED SENATE SEPTEMBER 11, 2003 PASSED ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Leno. Coauthors: Assembly Members Goldberg, Hancock, and Koretz) An act to add Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to controlled substances. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 420, Vasconcellos. Medical marijuana. Existing law, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, prohibits any physician from being punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes. The act prohibits the provisions of law making unlawful the possession or cultivation of marijuana from applying to a patient, or to a patient' s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician. This bill would require the State Department of Health Services to establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients and would establish procedures under which a qualified patient with an identification card may use marijuana for medical purposes. The bill would specify the department's duties in this regard, including developing related protocols and forms, and establishing application and renewal fees for the program. The bill would impose various duties upon county health departments relating to the issuance of identification cards, thus creating a state -mandated local program. The bill would create various crimes related to the identification card program, thus imposing a state - mandated local program. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to set forth and clarify details concerning possession and cultivation limits, and other regulations, as specified. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General to recommend modifications to the possession or cultivation limits set forth in the bill. The bill would require the Attorney General to develop and adopt guidelines to ensure the security and nondiversion of marijuana grown for medical use, as specified. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed $1,000,000. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (1) On November 6, 1996, the people of the State of California enacted the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (hereafter the act), codified in Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code, in order to allow seriously ill residents of the state, who have the oral or written approval or recommendation of a physician, to use marijuana for medical purposes without fear of criminal liability under Sections 11357 and 11358 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) However, reports from across the state have revealed problems and uncertainties in the act that have impeded the ability of law enforcement officers to enforce its provisions as the voters intended and, therefore, have prevented qualified pa i nts and designated primary caregivers from obtaining the protections afforded by the act. (3) Furthermore, the enactment of this law, as well as other recent legislation dealing with pain control, demonstrates that more information is needed to assess the number of individuals across the state who are suffering from serious medical conditions that are not being adequately alleviated through the use of conventional medications. (4) In addition, the act called upon the stale and the federal government to develop a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need thereof. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature, therefore, to do all of the following: (1) Clarify the scope of the application of the act and facilitate the prompt identification of qualified patients and their designated primary caregivers in order to avoid unnecessary arrest and prosecution of these individuals and provide needed guidance to law enforcement officers. (2) Promote uniform and consistent application of the act among the counties within the state. (3) Enhance the access of patients and caregivers to medical marijuana through collective, cooperative cultivation projects. (c) It is also the intent of the Legislature to address additional issues that were not included within the act, and that must be resolved in order to promote the fair and orderly implementation of the act. (d) The Legislature further finds and declares both of the following: (1) A state identification card program will further the goals outlined in this section. (2) With respect to individuals, the identification system established pursuant to this act must be wholly voluntary, and a patient entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code need not possess an identification card in order to claim the protections afforded by that section. (e) The Legislature further finds and declares that it enacts this act pursuant to the powers reserved to the State of California and its people under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. SEC. 2. Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 11362.7) is added to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, to read: Article 2.5. Medical Marijuana Program 11362.7. For purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply (a) "Attending physician" means an individual who possesses a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy issued by the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and who has taken responsibility for an aspect of the medical care, treatment, diagnosis, counseling, or referral of a patient and who has conducted a medical examination of that patient before recording in the patient's medical record the physician's assessment of whether the patient has a serious medical condition and whether the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (b) "Department" means the State Department of Health Services. (c) "Person with an identification card" means an individual who is a qualified patient who has applied for and received a valid identification card pursuant to this article. (d) "Primary caregiver" means the individual, designated by a qualified patient or by a person with an identification card, who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that patient or person, and may include any of the following: (1) In any case in which a qualified patient or person with an identification card receives medical care or supportive services, or both, from a clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1200) of Division 2, a health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250) of Division 2, a residential care facility for persons with chronic life -threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 (commencing with Section 1568.01) of Division 2, a residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 1569) of Division 2, a hospice, or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 1725) of Division 2, the owner or operator, or no more than three employees who are designated by the owner or operator, of the clinic, facility, hospice, or home health agency, if designated as a primary caregiver by that qualified patient or person with an identification card. (2) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by more than one qualified patient or person with an identification card, if every qualified patient or person with an identification card who has designated that individual as a primary caregiver resides in the same city or county as the primary caregiver. (3) An individual who has been designated as a primary caregiver by a qualified patient or person with an identification card who resides in a city or county other than that of the primary caregiver, if the individual has not been designated as a primary caregiver by any other qualified patient or person with an identification card. (e) A primary caregiver shall be at least 18 years of age, unless the primary caregiver is the parent of a minor child who is a qualified patient or a person with an identification card or the primary caregiver is a person otherwise entitled to make medical decisions under state law pursuant to Sections 6922, 7002, 7050, or 7120 of the Family Code. (f) "Qualified patient" means a person who is entitled to the protections of Section 11362.5, but who does not have an identification card issued pursuant to this article. (g) "Identification card" means a document issued by the State Department of Health Services that document identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. (h) "Serious medical condition" means all of the following medical conditions: (1) Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). (2) Anorexia. (3) Arthritis. (4) Cachexia. (5) Cancer. (6) Chronic pain. (7) Glaucoma. (8) Migraine. (9) Persistent muscle spasms, including, but not limited to, spasms associated with multiple sclerosis. (10) Seizures, including, but not limited to, seizures associated with epilepsy. (11) Severe nausea. (12) Any other chronic or persistent medical symptom that either: (A) Substantially limits the ability of the person to conduct one or more major life activities as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336). (B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient's safety or physical or mental health. (i)'Written documentation" means accurate reproductions of those portions of a patient's medical records that have been created by the attending physician, that contain the information required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.715, and that the patient may submit to a county health department or the county's designee as part of an application for an identification card. 11362.71. (a) (1) The department shall establish and maintain a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to qualified patients who satisfy the requirements of this article and voluntarily apply to the identification card program. (2) The department shall establish and maintain a 24-hour, toll -free telephone number that will enable state and local law enforcement officers to have immediate access to information necessary to verify the validity of an identification card issued by the department, until a cost-effective Internet Web -based system can be developed for this purpose. (b) Every county health department, or the county's designee, shall do all of the following: (1) Provide applications upon request to individuals seeking to join the identification card program. (2) Receive and process completed applications in accordance with Section 11362.72. (3) Maintain records of identification card programs. (4) Utilize protocols developed by the department pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). (5) Issue identification cards developed by the department to approved applicants and designated primary caregivers. (c) The county board of supervisors may designate another health -related governmental or nongovernmental entity or organization to perform the functions described in subdivision (b), except for an entity or organization that cultivates or distributes marijuana. (d) The department shall develop all of the following: (1) Protocols that shall be used by a county health department or the county's designee to implement the responsibilities described in subdivision (b), including, but not limited to, protocols to confirm the accuracy of information contained in an application and to protect the confidentiality of program records. (2) Application forms that shall be issued to requesting applicants. (3) An identification card that identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and an identification card that identifies the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. The two identification cards developed pursuant to this paragraph shall be easily distinguishable from each other. (e) No person or designated primary caregiver in possession of a valid identification card shall be subject to arrest for possession, transportation, delivery, or cultivation of medical marijuana in an amount established pursuant to this article, unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the information contained in the card is false or falsified, the card has been obtained by means of fraud, or the person is otherwise in violation of the provisions of this article. (f) It shall not be necessary for a person to obtain an identification card in order to claim the protections of Section 11362.5. 11362.715. (a) A person who seeks an identification card shall pay the fee, as provided in Section 11362.755, and provide all of the following to the county health department or the county's designee on a form developed and provided by the department: It ) The name of the person, and proof of his or her residency within e county. (2) Written documentation by the attending physician in the person' s medical records stating that the person has been diagnosed with a serious medical condition and that the medical use of marijuana is appropriate. (3) The name, office address, office telephone number, and California medical license number of the person's attending physician. (4) The name and the duties of the primary caregiver. (5) A government -issued photo identification card of the person and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. If the applicant is a person under 18 years of age, a certified copy of a birth certificate shall be deemed sufficient proof of identity. (b) If the person applying for an identification card lacks the capacity to make medical decisions, the application may be made by the person's legal representative, including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) A conservator with authority to make medical decisions. (2) An attorney -in -fact under a durable power of attorney for health care or surrogate decisionmaker authorized under another advanced health care directive. (3) Any other individual authorized by statutory or decisional law to make medical decisions for the person. (c) The legal representative described in subdivision (b) may also designate in the application an individual, including himself or herself, to serve as a primary caregiver for the person, provided that the individual meets the definition of a primary caregiver. (d) The person or legal representative submitting the written information and documentation described in subdivision (a) shall retain a copy thereof. 11362.72. (a) Within 30 days of receipt of an application for an identification card, a county health department or the county's designee shall do all of the following: (1) For purposes of processing the application, verify that the information contained in the application is accurate. If the person is less than 18 years of age, the county health department or its designee shall also contact the parent with legal authority to make medical decisions, legal guardian, or other person or entity with legal authority to make medical decisions, to verify the information. (2) Verify with the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California that the attending physician has a license in good standing to practice medicine or osteopathy in the stale. (3) Contact the attending physician by facsimile, telephone, or mail to confirm that the medical records submitted by the patient are a true and correct copy of those contained in the physician's office records. When contacted by a county health department or the county' s designee, the attending physician shall confirm or deny that the contents of the medical records are accurate. (4) Take a photograph or otherwise obtain an electronically transmissible image of the applicant and of the designated primary caregiver, if any. (5) Approve or deny the application. If an applicant who meets the requirements of Section 11362.715 can establish that an identification card is needed on an emergency basis, the county or its designee shall issue a temporary identification card that shall be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance. The county, or its designee, may extend the temporary identification card for no more than 30 days at a time, so long as the applicant continues to meet the requirements of this paragraph. (b) If the county health partment or the county's designee approves the application, it shall, within 24 hours, or by the end of the next working day of approving the application, electronically transmit the following information to the department: (1) A unique user identification number of the applicant. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or the county's designee that has approved the application. (c) The county health department or the county's designee shall issue an identification card to the applicant and to his or her designated primary caregiver, if any, within five working days of approving the application. (d) In any case involving an incomplete application, the applicant shall assume responsibility for rectifying the deficiency. The county shall have 14 days from the receipt of information from the applicant pursuant to this subdivision to approve or deny the application. 11362.735. (a) An identification card issued by the county health department shall be serially numbered and shall contain all of the following: (1) A unique user identification number of the cardholder. (2) The date of expiration of the identification card. (3) The name and telephone number of the county health department or the county's designee that has approved the application. (4) A 24-hour, toll -free telephone number, to be maintained by the department, that will enable state and local law enforcement officers to have immediate access to information necessary to verify the validity of the card. (5) Photo identification of the cardholder. (b) A separate identification card shall be issued to the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, and shall include a photo identification of the caregiver. 11362.74. (a) The county health department or the county's designee may deny an application only for any of the following reasons: (1) The applicant did not provide the information required by Section 11362.715, and upon notice of the deficiency pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 11362.72, did not provide the information within 30 days. (2) The county health department or the county's designee determines that the information provided was false. (3) The applicant does not meet the criteria set forth in this article. (b) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may not reapply for six months from the date of denial unless otherwise authorized by the county health department or the county's designee or by a court of competent jurisdiction. (c) Any person whose application has been denied pursuant to subdivision (a) may appeal that decision to the department. The county health department or the county's designee shall make available a telephone number or address to which the denied applicant can direct an appeal. 11362.745. (a) An identification card shall be valid for a period of one year. (b) Upon annual renewal of an identification card, the county health department or its designee shall verify all new information and may verify any other information that has not changed. (c) The county health department or the county's designee shall transmit its determination of approval or denial of a renewal to the department. 11362.755. (a) The department shall establish application and renewal fees for persons seeking to obtain or renew identification cards that are sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the department, including the startup cost, the cost of reduced fees for Medi- Cal beneficiaries in accordance with subdivision (b), the cost of identifying and developing a cost-effective Internet Web -based system, and the cost of maintaining the 24-hour toll -free telephone number. Each county health department or the county's designee may charge an additional fee for all costs incurred by the county or the county's designee for administering the program pursuant to this article. (b) Upon satisfactory proof of participation and eligibility in the Medi-Cal program, a Medi- Cal beneficiary shall receive a 50 percent reduction in the fees established pursuant to this section. 11362.76. (a) A person who possesses an identification card shall: (1) Within seven days, notify the county health department or the county's designee of any change in the person's attending physician or designated primary caregiver, 'rf any. (2) Annually submit to the county health department or the county s designee the following: (A) Updated written documentation of the person's serious medical condition. (B) The name and duties of the person's designated primary caregiver, if any, for the forthcoming year. (b) If a person who possesses an identification card fails to comply with this section, the card shall be deemed expired. If an identification card expires, the identification card of any designated primary caregiver of the person shall also expire. (c) If the designated primary caregiver has been changed, the previous primary caregiver shall return his or her identification card to the department or to the county health department or the countys designee. (d) If the owner or operator or an employee of the owner or operator of a provider has been designated as a primary caregiver pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 11362.7, of the qualified patient or person with an identification card, the owner or operator shall notify the county health department or the county's designee, pursuant to Section 11362.715, if a change in the designated primary caregiver has occurred. 11362.765. (a) Subject to the requirements of this article, the individuals specified in subdivision (b) shall not be subject, on that sole basis, to criminal liability under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570. However, nothing in this section shall authorize the individual to smoke or otherwise consume marijuana unless otherwise authorized by this article, nor shall anything in this section authorize any individual or group to cultivate or distribute marijuana for profit. (b) Subdivision (a) shall apply to all of the following: (1) A qualified patient or a person with an identification card who transports or processes marijuana for his or her own personal medical use. (2) A designated primary caregiver who transports, processes, administers, delivers, or gives away marijuana for medical purposes, in amounts not exceeding those established in subdivision (a) of Section 11362.77, only to the qualified patient of the primary caregiver, or to the person with an identification card who has designated the individual as a primary caregiver. (3) Any individual who provides assistance to a qualified parent or a person with an identification card, or his or her designated primary caregiver, in administering medical marijuana to the qualified patient or person or acquiring the skills necessary to cultivate or administer marijuana for medical purposes to the qualified patient or person. (c) A primary caregiver who receives compensation for actual expenses, including reasonable compensation incurred for services provided to an eligible qualified patient or person with an identification card to enable that person to use marijuana under this article, or for payment for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in providing those services, or both, shall not, on the sole basis of that fact, be subject to prosecution or punishment under Section 11359 or 11360. 11362.77. (a) A qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess no more than eight ounces of dried marijuana per qualified patient. In addition, a qualified patient or primary caregiver may also maintain no more than six mature or 12 immature marijuana plants per qualified patient. (b) If a qualified patient or primary caregiver has a doctor's recommendation that this quantity does not meet the qualified patient' s medical needs, the qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess an amount of marijuana consistent with the patient's needs. (c) Counties and cities may retain or enact medical marijuana guidelines allowing qualified patients or primary caregivers to exceed the state limits set forth in subdivision (a). (d) Only the dried mature processed flowers of female cannabis plant or the plant conversion shall be considered when determining allowable quantities of marijuana under this section. (e) The Attorney General may recommend modifications to the possession or cultivation limits set forth in this section. These recommendations, if any, shall be made to the Legislature no later than December 1, 2005, and may be made only after public comment and consultation with interested organizations, including, but not limited to, patients, health care professionals, researchers, law enforcement, and local governments. Any recommended modification shall be consistent with the intent of this article and shall be based on currently available scientific research. (f) A qualified patient or a person holding a valid identification card, or the designated primary caregiver of that qualified patient or person, may possess amounts of marijuana consistent with this article. 11362.775. Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely on the basis of that fact be subject to state criminal sanctions under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570. 11362.78. A state or local law enforcement agency or officer shall not refuse to accept an identification card issued by the department unless the state or local law enforcement agency or officer has reasonable cause to believe that the information contained in the card is false or fraudulent, or the card is being used fraudulently. 11362.785. (a) Nothing in this article shall require any accommodation of any medical use of marijuana on the property or premises of any place of employment or during the hours of employment or on the property or premises of any jail, correctional facility, or other type of penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a person shall not be prohibited or prevented from obtaining and submitting the written information and documentation necessary to apply for an identification card on the basis that the person is incarcerated in a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained. (c) Nothing in this article shall prohibit a jail, correctional facility, or other penal institution in which prisoners reside or persons under arrest are detained, from permitting a prisoner or a person under arrest who has an identification card, to use marijuana for medical purposes under circumstances that will not endanger the health or safety of other prisoners or the security of the facility. (d) Nothing in this article shall require a governmental, private, or any other health insurance provider or health care service plan to be liable for any claim for reimbursement for the medical use of marijuana. 11362.79. Nothing in this article shall authorize a qualified patient or person with an identification card to engage in the smoking of medical marijuana under any of the following circumstances: (a) In any place where smoking is prohibited by law. (b) In or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school, recreation center, or youth center, unless the medical use occurs within a residence. (c) On a schoolbus. (d) While in a motor vehicle that is being operated. (e) While operating a boat. 11362.795. (a) (1) Any criminal defendant who is eligible to use marijuana pursuant to Section 11362.5 may request that the court confirm that he or she is allowed to use medical marijuana while he or she is on probation or released on bail. (2) The court's decision and the reasons for the decision shall be stated on the record and an entry stating those reasons shall be made in the minutes of the court. (3) During the period of probation or release on bail, if a physician recommends that the probationer or defendant use medical marijuana, the probationer or defendant may request a modification of the conditions of probation or bail to authorize the use of medical marijuana. (4) The court's consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. (b) (1) Any person who is to be released on parole from a jail, state prison, school, road camp, or other state or local institution of confinement and who is eligible to use medical marijuana pursuant to Section 11362.5 may request that he or she be allowed to use medical marijuana during the period he or she is released on parole. A parolee's written conditions of parole shall reflect whether or not a request for a modification of the conditions of his or her parole to use medical marijuana was made, and whether the request was granted or denied. (2) During the period of the parole, where a physician recommends that the parolee use medical marijuana, the parolee may request a modification o• conditions of the parole to authorize these of medical marijuana. (3) Any parolee whose request to use medical marijuana while on parole was denied may pursue an administrative appeal of the decision. Any decision on the appeal shall be in writing and shall reflect the reasons for the decision. (4) The administrative consideration of the modification request authorized by this subdivision shall comply with the requirements of this section. 11362.8. No professional licensing board may impose a civil penalty or take other disciplinary action against a licensee based solely on the fact that the licensee has performed acts that are necessary or appropriate to carry out the licensee's role as a designated primary caregiver to a person who is a qualified patient or who possesses a lawful identification card issued pursuant to Section 11362.72. However, this section shall not apply to acts performed by a physician relating to the discussion or recommendation of the medical use of marijuana to a patient. These discussions or recommendations, or both, shall be governed by Section 11362.5. 11362.81. (a) A person specified in subdivision (b) shall be subject to the following penalties: (1) For the first offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than six months or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (2) For a second or subsequent offense, imprisonment in the county jail for no more than one year, or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. (b) Subdivision (a) applies to any of the following: (1) A person who fraudulently represents a medical condition or fraudulently provides any material misinformation to a physician, county health department or the county's designee, or state or local law enforcement agency or officer, for the purpose of falsely obtaining an identification card. (2) A person who steals or fraudulently uses any person's identification card in order to acquire, possess, cultivate, transport, use, produce, or distribute marijuana. (3) A person who counterfeits, tampers with, or fraudulently produces an identification card. (4) A person who breaches the confidentiality requirements of this article to information provided to, or contained in the records of, the department or of a county health department or the county's designee pertaining to an identification card program. (c) In addition to the penalties prescribed in subdivision (a), any person described in subdivision (b) may be precluded from attempting to obtain, or obtaining or using, an identification card for a period of up to six months at the discretion of the court. (d) In addition to the requirements of this article, the Attorney General shall develop and adopt appropriate guidelines to ensure the security and nondiversion of marijuana grown for medical use by patients qualified under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. 11362.82. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this article is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. 11362.83. Nothing in this article shall prevent a city or other local governing body from adopting and enforcing laws consistent with this article. SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because in that regard this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. In addition, no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for other costs mandated by the state because this act includes additional revenue that is specifically intended to fund the costs of the state mandate in an amount sufficient to fund the cost of the state mandate, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. * Footnotes to the above: 11366. Every person who opens or maintains any place for the purpose of unlawfully selling, giving away, or using any controlled substance which is (1) specified in subdivision (b), (c), or (e), or paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 11054, specified in paragraph (13), (14), (15), or (20) of subdivision (d) of Section 11054, or specified in subdivision (b), (c), paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (d), or paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 11055, or (2) which is a narcotic drug classified in Schedule III, IV, or V, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one year or the state prison. 11366.5. (a) Any person who has under his or her management or control any building, room, space, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, who knowingly rents, leases, or makes available for use, with or without compensation, the building, room, space, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, or distributing any controlled substance for sale or distribution shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or in the state prison. (b) Any person who has under his or her management or control any building, room, space, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, who knowingly allows the building, room, space, or enclosure to be fortified to suppress law enforcement entry in order to further the sale of any amount of cocaine base as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 11054, cocaine as specified in paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 11055, heroin, phencyclidine, amphetamine, methamphetamine, or lysergic acid diethylamide and who obtains excessive profits from the use of the building, room, space, or enclosure shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years. (c) Any person who violates subdivision (a) after previously being convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years. (d) For the purposes of this section, "excessive profits" means the receipt of consideration of a value substantially higher than fair market value. 11570. Every building or place used for the purpose of unlawfully selling, serving, storing, keeping, manufacturing, or giving away any controlled substance, precursor, or analog specified in this division, and every building or place wherein or upon which those acts take place, is a nuisance which shall be enjoined, abated, and prevented, and for which damages may be recovered, whether it is a public or private nuisance. The info below is from NORML. SACRAMENTO. Oct. 12, 2003. Gov. Davis signed Sen. Vasconcellos' medical marijuana task force bill, SB 420, which would establish state Prop. 215 enforcement guidelines. The bill was marred by a flurry controversy over a last-minute amendmenTsetting Prop 215 cultivation guidelines of 6 mature or 12 immature plants plus one-half pound of processed cannabis per patient. The guidelines would not be legally binding limits for the purposes of determining guilt or innocence, but are intended to provide guidance for when police can make arrests. SB 420 would establish a voluntary identification card system to protect patients and caregivers from arrest throughout the state. The card, which is modeled on the San Francisco ID system in order to protect patient privacy, would protect against arrest for not only possession and cultivation, but also transportation and other related charges for persons adhering to specified guidelines. As originally proposed, SB 420 would have had the guidelines set by the State Dept. of Health Services pursuant to public hearings. However, this idea was opposed by the Davis administration on the grounds it would be too costly and burdensome on DHS. In order to save the bill, Sen. Vasconcellos negotiated a last-minute compromise with Attorney General Bill Lockyer, setting guidelines of 112 pound of marijuana and up to 6 mature or 12 immature plants. Medical marijauana advocates strongly opposed the guidelines as arbitrary and inadequate for many patients. Instead, they pushed for more liberal guidelines like those adopted in Sonoma County, which allow up to 3 pounds and 99 plants within 100 square feet. However supporters of SB 420 argue that the guidelines are not a ceiling on what patients can have, but rather a floor beneath which they will be protected from arrest. They point out that SB 420 does not and cannot limit the amount of medicine patients may legally have or grow, since Prop. 215 gives them the right to as much as they need for their personal medical use. Under SB 420, patients with state cards who adhered to the guidelines would be protected from arrest, which they are not under current law. On the other hand, patients who exceeded the guidelines would be subject to arrest, but would still retain their full Prop. 215 rights in court. As additional protections, SB 420 specifies that patients can exceed the guidelines if their physician says that is necessary, and permits local jurisdictions to enact more liberal guidelines if they wish. In other provisions, SB 420 Recognizes the right of patients to cultivate collectively or cooperatively, though not for profit. Does not allow marijuana smoking in no smoking zones, within 1000 feet of a school, on schoolbuses, in operating vehicles, or while steering a boat. Allows "primary caregivers" to have multiple patients within the same city or county, but just one patient outside. Allows reasonable compensation for caregivers. Allows prisoners and probationers to have medical marijuana cards and request its use in appropriate circumstances. "IW]e concluded that thNwe some limited circumstances which we recommend smoking marijuana for mediecd uses." — from Principal Investigator Dr. John Benson's opening remarks at IOM's 3/17/99 news conference Questions about medical marijuana answered by the Institute of Medicine's report Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base* Excerpts compiled by the Marijuana Policy Project What conditions can marijuana treat? "The accumulated data indicate a potential thera- peutic value for cannabinoid drugs, particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation." [p. 31 "[$]asic biology indicates a role for cannabinoids in pain and control of movement, which is consistent with a possible therapeutic role in these areas. The evidence is relatively strong for the treatment of pain and, intriguing although less well established, for movement disorders." [p. 701 "For patients such as those with AIDS or who are under- going chemotherapy and who suffer simultaneously from severe pain, nausea, and appetite loss, cannabinoid drugs might offer broad-spectnnn relief not found in any other single medication. The data are weaker for mus- cle spasticity but moderately promising." 1p. 1771 "The most encouraging clinical data on the effects of cannabinoids on chronic pain are from three studies of cancer pain." [p. 1421 Why can't patients use medicines that are already legal? "Mhere will likely always be a subpopulation of patients who do not respond well to other medica- tions." [Pp. 3, 41 "The critical issue is not whether marijuana or cannabinoid drugs might be superior to the new drugs, but whether some group of patients might obtain added or better relief from marijuana or cannabinoid drugs." [p. 153] - "The profile of cannabinoid drug effects suggests that they are promising for treating wasting syndrome in AIDS patients. Nausea, appetite loss, pain, and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana. Although some medica- tions are more effective than marijuana for these problems, they are not equally effective in all patients." [p. 1591 What about MarinolO, the major active ingredient in marijuana in pill form? "It is well recognized that Marinol's oral route of administration hampers its effectiveness because of slow absorption and patients' desire for more con- trol over dosing." [Pp. 205, 2061 Why not wait for more research before making marijuana legally available as a medicine? "[R]esearch funds are limited, and there is a daunting thicket of regulations to be negotiated at the federal level (those of the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA) and state levels." [p. 1371 "Some drugs, such as marijuana, are labeled Schedule I in the Controlled Substance Act, and this adds considerable complexity and expense to their clinical evaluation." [p. 1941 "[01n1y about one in five drugs initially tested in humans successfully secures FDA approval for mar- keting through a new drug application" [p. 1951 "From a scientific point of view, research is difficult because of the rigors of obtaining an adequate supply of legal, standardized marijuana for study." [p. 2171 *Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences (ISBN 0-309-07155-0) Printed and distributed In the Coachella Valley for public *duration purposes by MARIJUANA ANTI -PROHIBITION PROJECT PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263 — 760-799-2055 On the web at www.marijuananews.org — email to: MAPPNOW@hotmail.com "In short, development of the in ana plant is beset by substantial scientific, regu atory, and com- mercial obstacles and uncertainties." [p. 218] "[Dlespite the legal, social, and health problems asso- ciated with smoking marijuana, it is widely used by certain patient groups." [p. 71 Do the existing laws really hurt patients? "G.S. spoke at the IOM workshop in Louisiana about his use of marijuana first to combat AIDS wasting syndrome and later for relief from the side effects of AIDS medications.... [He said,] `Every day 1 risk arrest, property forfeiture, fines, and imprisonment.'" [Pp. 27, 281 Why shouldn't we wait for new drugs based on marijuana's components to be developed, rather than allowing patients to eat or smoke natural marijuana right now? "Although most scientists who study cannabinoids agree that the pathways to cannabinoid drug devel- opment are clearly marked, there is no guarantee that the fruits of scientific research will be made available to the public for medical use." [p. 41 "[11t will likely be many years before a safe and effec- tive cannabinoid delivery system, such as an inhaler, is available for patients. In the meantime there are patients with debilitating symptoms for whom smoked marijuana might provide relief." [p. 71 "What seems to be clear from the dearth of products in development and the small size of the companies sponsoring them is that cannabinoid development is seen as especially risky." [Pp. 211, 2121 [IOM later totes that it could take more dtan five years and cost $200-300 million to get new c a naNnoid drugs approwA—#ever.] "Cannabinoids in the plant are automatically placed in the most restrictive schedule of the Controlled Substances Act, and this is a substantial deterrent to development." [p. 2191 Isn't marijuana too dangerous to be used as a medicine? "[Elxcept for the harms associated with smoking, the adverse effects of marijuana use are within the range of effects tolerated for other medications." [p. 5] "Until the development of rapid onset antiemetic drug delivery systems, there will likely remain a sub - population of patients for whom standard antiemetic therapy is ineffective and who suffer from debilitat- ing emesis. It is possible that the harmful effects of smoking marijuana for a limited period of time might be ourwqjJfd by the arxiemetic benefits of marijuana, at le for patients for whom standard antiemetic therapy is ineffective and who suffer from debilitating emesis. Such patients should be evaluat- ed on a rase -by -case basis and treated under close medical supervision." [p. 1541 "Terminal cancer patients pose different issues. For those patients the medical harm associated with smoking is of little consequence. For terminal patients suffering debilitating pain or nausea and for whom all indicated medications have failed to pro- vide relief, the medical benefits of smoked marijuana might outweigh the harm." [p. 1591 What should be done to help the patients who already benefit from medical marijuanaprior to the development of new drugs and delivery devices? "Patients who are currently suffering from debilitating conditions unrelieved by legally available drugs, and who might find relief with smoked marijuana, will find little comfort in a promise of a better drug 10 years from now. In terms of good medicine, marijuana should rarely be recommended unless all reasonable options have been eliminated. But then wharf It is conceivable that the medical and scientif- ic opinion might find itself in conflict with drug reg- ulations. This presents a policy issue that must weigh --at least temporarily —the needs of individual patients against broader social issues. Our assessment of the scientific data on the medical value of [marijuana and its constituent cannabinoids is but one component of attaining that balance." [p. 1781 "Also, although a drug is normally approved for medical use only on proof of its 'safety and efficacy,' patients with life -threatening conditions are some- times (under protocols for 'compassionate use') allowed access to unapproved drugs whose benefits and risks are uncertain." [p. 141 "Until a nonsmoked rapid -onset cannabinoid drug delivery system becomes available, we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting. One possible approach is to treat patients as n-of-1 clinical trials (single -patient trials), in which patients are fully informed of their status as experi- mental subjects using a harmful drug delivery system and in which their condition is closely monitored and documented under medical supervision...." [p- 81 [The federal governments "compassionate use' program, which currently provides marivana to seen Mrivntc nr rimunrb k on prnmhlp of an n-rtf- I Mith I Yho IOM report doesn't explicitWdorse state bills and initiatives to simply re ve criminal penalties for bona fide medical marijuana users. Does that mean that we should keep the laws exactly as they are and keep arresting patients? "This report analyzes science, not the law. As in any policy debate, the value of scientific analysis is that it can provide a foundation for further discussion. Distilling scientific evidence does not in itself solve a policy problem." [p. 141 If patents were allowed to use medical marijuana, wouldn't overall use increase? "Finally, there is a broad social concern that sanc- tioning the medical use of marijuana might increase its use among the general population. At this point there are no convincing data to support this con- cern The existing data are consistent with the idea that this would not be a problem if the medical use of marijuana were as closely regulated as other med- ications with abuse potential.... Mhis question is beyond the issues normally considered for medical uses of drugs and should not be a factor in evaluat- ing the therapeutic potential of marijuana or cannabinoids." [Pp. 6, 71 "No evidence suggests that the use of opiates or cocaine for medical purposes has increased the perception that their illicit use is safe or acceptable." 1p. 1021 "Thus, there is little evidence that decriminalization of marijuana use necessarily leads to a substantial increase in marijuana use." [p. 1041 [Decriminalization is defined as the rerriota[ of criminal penalties for all uses, even recreational.] Doesn't the medical marijuana debate send children the wrong message about marijuana? "[T1he perceived risk of marijuana use did not change among California youth between 1996 and 1997. In summary, there is no evidence that the medical marijuana debate has altered adolescents' perceptions of the risks associated with marijuana use." [p. 1041 "Even if there were evidence that the medical use of marijuana would decrease the perception that it can be a harmful substance, this is beyond the scope of laws regulating the approval of therapeutic drugs. Those laws concern scientific data related to the safety and efficacy of drugs for individual use; they do not address perceptions or beliefs of the general population." [p. 1261 Isn't marijuana •addictive to be used as a medicine? "Some controlled substances that are approved med- ications produce dependence after long-term use; this, however, is a normal part of patient manage- ment and does not generally present undue risk to the patient." [p. 981 "Animal research has shown that the potential for cannabinoid dependence exists, and cannabinoid withdrawal symptoms can be observed. However, both appear to be mild compared to dependence and withdrawal seen with other drugs." [p. 351 "A distinctive marijuana and T HC withdrawal syn- drome has been identified, but it is mild and subtle compared with the profound physical syndrome of alcohol or heroin withdrawal." [Pp. 89, 901 Pntportiom Of Users That Thug Category Ever Became Dependent(%) Alcohol 15 Marijuana (including hashish) [P. 951 "Compared to most other drugs ... dependence among marijuana users is relatively rare." [p. 941 "In summary, although few marijuana users develop dependence, some do. But they appear to be less likely to do so than users of other drugs (including alcohol and nicotine), and marijuana dependence appears to be less severe than dependence on other drugs." [p. 981 Doesn't the use of marijuana cause people to use more dangerous drugs? "[l1t does not appear to be a gateway drug to the extent that it is the cause or evert that it is the most signifi- cant predictor of serious drug abuse; that is, care must be taken not to attribute cause to association." [p.1011 "There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a step- ping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect" [p. 991 "Instead, the legal status of marijuana makes it a gateway drug." [p. 991 Shouldn't medical marijuana remain illegal because It is bad for the Immune system? "The short-term immunosuppressive effects are not well established; if they exist at all, they are probably not great enough to preclude a legitimate medical use. The acute side effects of marijuana use are with- in the risks tolerated for [Harty medications." [p. 1261 Doesn't marijuana cause brain age? "Earlier studies purporting to show structural changes in the brains of heavy marijuana users have not been replicated with more sophisticated techniques." [p. 1061 Doesn't marijuana cause amotivational syndrome? "When heavy marijuana use accompanies these symptoms, the drug is often cited as the cause, but no convincing data demonstrate a causal relation- ship between marijuana smoking and these behav- ioral characteristics." [Pp. 107, 1081 Doesn't marijuana cause health problems that shorten the life span? "[Elpidemiological data indicate that in the general population marijuana use is not associated with increased mortality." [p. 1091 Isn't marijuana too dangerous for the respiratory system? "Given a cigarette of comparable weight, as much as four times the amount of tar can be deposited in the lungs of marijuana smokers as in the lungs of tobac- co smokers." [p. 111] "However, a marijuana cigarette smoked recreational- ly typically is not packed as tightly as a tobacco ciga- rette, and the smokable substance is about half that in a tobacco cigarette. In addition, tobacco smokers generally smoke considerably more cigarettes per day than do marijuana smokers." [Pp. 111, 112] "There is no conclusive evidence that marijuana caus- es cancer in humans, including cancers usually relat- ed to tobacco use.... More definitive evidence that habitual marijuana smoking leads or does not lead to respiratory cancer awaits the results of well -designed case control epidemiological studies." [p. 1191 Don't the euphoric side effects diminish marijuana's value as a medicine? "The high associated with marijuana is not generally claimed to be integral to its therapeutic value. But mood enhancement, anxiety reduction, and mild sedation can be desirable qualities in medications — particularly for patients suffering pain and anxiety. Thus, although the psychological effects of marijuana are merely side effects in the treatment of some symptoms, they might contribute directly to relief of other symptoms." [p- 841 What other the*utic potential does marijuana hare? "One of the most prominent new applications of carmabinoids is for'neuroprotection,' the rescue of neurons from cell death associated with trauma, ischemia, and neurological diseases." [p. 2111 '"There are numerous anecdotal reports that marijuana can relieve the spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury, and animal studies have shown that cannabinoids affect motor areas in the brain —areas that might influence spasticity" [p. 1601 "High intraocular pressure (IOP) is a known risk fac- tor for glaucoma and can, indeed, be reduced by cannnabinoids and marijuana. However, the effect is too and [sic] short lived and requires too high doses, and there are too many side effects to recommend lifelong use in the treatment of glaucoma. The potential harmful effects of chronic marijuana smok- ing outweigh its modest benefits in the treatment of glaucoma. Clinical studies on the effects of smoked marijuana are unlikely to result in improved treat- ment for glaucoma." [p. 177] (Note that IOM found that marijuana does work for glaucoma, but was uncom - fortable with the amount that a person needs to smoke. Presumably, it would be an acceptable treatment for glaucoma patients to ear marijuana. Additionally, MPP believes that IOM would not support arresting patients who choose to smoke marijuana to treat glaucoma.] Do the American people really support legal access to medical marijuana, or were voters simply tricked Into passing medical marijuana ballot initiatives? "Public support for patient access to marijuana for medical use appears substantial; public opinion polls taken during 1997 and 1998 generally report 60- 70 percent of respondents in favor of allowing med- ical uses of marijuana." [p. 181 But shouldn't we keep medial marijuana Illegal because some advocates want to "legalize" marijuana for all uses? "[I]t is not relevant to scientific validity whether an argument is put forth by someone who believes that all marijuana use should be legal or by someone who believes that any marijuana use is highly damaging to individual users and to society as a whole." [p. 141 The full report by the National Academy of Sciences can be viewed on-line at http://bob.nap.edu/books/0309071550/htmV E Long -Term Marijuana -Use Study: No Ill Health Effects http://www.carinabisnews.com/news/threadl 0533. shtm l By Peter Gorman, Special To HighWitness News Source: High Times In the first study of its kind, four recipients of federally provided medical marijuana were examined for the health effects of their long-term cannabis use -and none showed any serious adverse effects. The Missoula Chronic Clinical Cannabis Use Study -headed by Montana neurologist Dr. Ethan Russo and Virginia nurse Mary Lynn Mathre, cofounder of Patients Out of Time -investigated "the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects" among patients receiving cannabis through the department of Health and Human Services' Compassionate Investigational New Drug program. That program was closed to new applicants in 1991, but continues to supply medical marijuana to seven patients. The four patients studied -one with glaucoma, one with chronic musculoskeletal pain, one with spasm and nausea, and one with spasticity from multiple sclerosis -were run through a battery of tests, including magnetic -resonance -imaging brain scans, chest X-rays, and neuropsychological, immunological and pulmonary -functions tests. The study provided the first opportunity to investigate the long-term physical effects of cannabis -smoking on patients who used a "known dosage of a standardized, heat -sterilized, quality -controlled supply of low-grade marijuana for 10-19 years." The results, which will be published in the Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics in January 2002, showed "all four patients are stable with respect to their chronic conditions, and are taking many fewer standard pharmaceuticals than previously." Mild changes in pulmonary function were found in two of the four, but no cancer cells were detected. No other negative functions were discovered. The study, conducted at St. Patrick's Hospital in Missoula. Montana, was sponsored by Patients Out of Time and funded by outside individuals. "This is a positive result using a poor -quality medicine. What could we expect using a better quality cannabis?" Al Byrne. Patients Out of Time's other cofounder, told HT. Asked whether he thought the study would result in a reopening of the Compassionate IND program, Byrne bristled. "No. I don't think it will, but it should. I think the study's effect on the government will be that they will no longer be able to say that long-term therapeutic cannabis use is bad for you. But will the federal government pay it any heed? Probably not." When asked why it took a nonprofit to organize the study rather than the government, Byrne noted that "I suppose because they suspected the result of the study would be positive and the government does not want anything positive said about cannabis use as medicine. That's the bottom line." (Note: The government says smoking pot is bad for your health, particularly in the long run. But four of the seven people it supplies lume been looked at from every angle, and researchers conclude that their marijuana use hasn't hurt them a bit.) Printed and distributed in the Coachella Valley for public education purposes by MARIJUANA ANTI -PROHIBITION PROJECT PO Box 739, Palm Springs CA 92263 - 760-799-2055 On the web at www.marijuananews.org - email to: MAPPNOW@hotmaii.com r - - - - - - - - - - - _� MARIJUANA & MEDICINE FACT: "Most of us in the medical profession believe this decision (banning medical marijuana) is politically motivated. Marijuana as medicine works." Dr. Dean Edell, M..D.; Syndicated Radio Show Host & ABC TV Medical Advisor FACT: "Marijuana has been shown to be We and effective, particularly for nausea, in people being treated for cancer, AIDS and other serious Illnesses." David Siegel. MD; Stephen Hulley, MD; Normal Hearst, MD; Michelle Berlin, MD; Stephen Hulley, MD; - Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, Univ. of Calif. at S.F. FACT: 'This medicine does no harm to the patient and is effective in relieving pain and nausea." Dr. Richard Cohen, Chief Oncologist, California Pacific Hospital FACT: 'The health professionals want medical marijuana." Representative Henry Waxman, California, United States Congress Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington by voter initiative or legislative law allow seriously ill people to use marijuana for medicine. Scientific and Medical Research Support Medical Marijuana Numerous published studies demonstrate that marijuana has medical value in treating patients with serious illnesses such as AIDS, glaucoma, cancer. multiple sclerosis, epi- lepsy, and chronic pain. In 1999. the Institute of Medicine, in the most comprehensive study of medi- cal marijuana's efficacy, concluded that, "Nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety . . all can be mitigated by marijuana." Allow- ing patients legal access to medical mari- juana has been endorsed by numerous or- ganizations, including the AIDS Action Council, American Bar Association, Ameri- can Public Health Association, California Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, and several state nurses associations. Marinol is touted by the DEA as the legal means to obtain the benefits of marijuana. However, marinol does not deliver the same therapeutic ben- efits found in the natural herb. Marinol is a synthetic form of THC, which is only ONE of the therapeutic elements found in the cannabis plant. In isolation, THC cannot offer the same therapeutic value, and has an array of negative side effects not found with cannabis. Feds Ignore Their Own Research When it comes to federal policy on marijuana, the right hand doesn't know, or care, what the left hand is doing. For example, in 1978 the federal government cre- Gloria Stone, 76 ated the Investiga- BREAST CANCER tional New Drug (IND) compas- "I'm 76 years old. I found sionate access re- using marijuana stimulated search program to my appetite and calmed my allow some pa - nausea from the chemo- tients to receive therapy. It also eased my medical marijuana pain." from the govem- ment. The IND was closed in 1992 after it was flooded by applications from AIDS patients. and the re- maining patients had to sue the federal government on the basis of "medical necessity" to retain access to their medi- cine. Today, eight surviving patients still receive medical marijuana from the federal government. The most a single patient receives from the federal government is 9 pounds a year. Despite this successful medical pro - ram marijuana is still classified as a 8 I1 Schedule I substance, defined as having a high potential for abuse and no medicinal value. Medical marijuana advocates have also pursued reform through the courts. In 1972, a petition was submitted to the Bureau of Nar- cotics and Dangerous Drugs (now known as the Drug En- forcement Administration, or DEA) to reschedule marijuana so that it could be prescribed to pa• ff�;_il tients. In 1988, the DEA's chief administrative law judge, Francis L. Young, ruled that, "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the EM safest therapeutically active substances known ... It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance .. " Without justification, the DEA refused to implement this ruling and continues to classify marijuana as a Schedule I substance. Widespread Public Support; State Referenda Passed Public opinion is clearly in favor of ending the prohibition of medical marijuana. According to a CNN/Time Poll in November 2002, 809c of Americans support medical mari- juana. Since 1996, voters in eight states plus the District of Columbia have passed favorable medical marijuana bal- lot initiatives. Currently, laws that effectively remove state - level criminal penalties for growing and/or possessing medical marijuana are in place in Alaska, California. Colo- rado. Hawaii. Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Ten states have symbolic medical marijuana laws. daws that support medical marijuana but do not provide patients with legal protection under state law).