Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
102604 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 (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting 128 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE OCTOBER 26, 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. 6:00 P.M. - Closed Session of the ,City Council pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) with respect to one matter of existing litigation involving the City. The following cases will be discussed: 1. City of Temecula vs. First and Front, et al. 2. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real properties located in Old Town at APN Nos. 922-034-019, -020 (Keen), APN 922-034-018 (McLaughlin), APN 922-034-022 (Berger) — south side of Main Street west of Mercedes Street, and APN 922-034-021 (Eastern Municipal Water District) — north side of First Street west of Old Town Front Street. The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and Keen, McLaughlin, Berger, and Eastern Municipal Water District. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of real property interests proposed to be conveyed and/or acquired. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer. 3. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property acquisition located at I-15/State Route 79 South (APN Nos. 922-210-060, 922-210-061, and 922-210-052). The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and Margarita Canyon LLC. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of real property interests. The City/Agency negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and Bill Hughes. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2004-13 Resolution: No. 2004-104 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Nagger R:\Agenda\101204 Prelude Music: Matthew Fagan Invocation: Pastor John Ruhlman of Life Church Flag Salute: Councilman Roberts ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, Naggar PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS National Immigrants Day Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk rp for 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. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of October 12, 2004. R:1Hgenda\101204 5 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 Community Service Funding Program RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Review and approve the 2004-05 Community Service Funding Program grants per the attached table outlining the Committee's recommendations of $127,300 to 41 organizations. RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717 — A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 45-FOOT TALL MONO -PALM WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITH FOUR OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT CABINETS PROPOSED AT 31575 ENFIELD LANE, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ENFIELD LANE, APPROXIMATELY 3,200 FEET EAST OF RIVERTON LANE (APN 957-170-012) AND DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:Wgenda\101204 7 0 0 RESOLUTION NO.04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A PENALTY SCHEDULE IN SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS PRESERVATION ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL DISASTER MITIGATION AND COST REDUCTION ACT OF 2000 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping - Project No. PW02-20. Theater Project No. PW02-23 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve an Agency Agreement with the Rancho California Water District pertaining to the two specific parcels of land that comprise the Old Town Temecula Community Theater site (PW02-23) and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement; 9.2 Approve a Water System Grant Deed with Rancho California Water District thereby transferring all rights, title, and interests in specific portions of the water system improvements to be constructed as part of the Old Town Temecula Community Theater - Project No. PW02-23 - to the District and authorize the City Manager to execute the Deed. 10 Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements— Final Stage— Project No. PW99-11 CH RECOMMENDATION: R:\Hgenda\101204 10.1 Approve Contract Change Order No. 5 to the existing contract with Road Builders, Inc. in the amount of $1,037,230.00, adding the construction of the downstream segment of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel — Stage 1 — from 900t feet north of Muirfield Drive to Temecula Creek; 10.2 Increase the project contingency and the City Manager's Contract Change Order approval limit by $103,723.00 above the previously approved 10% contingency. 11 Award of Construction Contract for the Rorioaugh Ranch Fire Station — Proiect No. PW03- 01 RECOMMENDATION 11.1 Award a construction contract for the Roripaugh Fire Station — Project No. PW03-01 — to Tovey/Schultz Construction, Inc. in the amount of $3,298,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 11.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $329,800.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 11.3 Accelerate the appropriation of budgeted funds in FY 1005-2006 to FY 2004-2005 in the amount of $3,782,830.00; 11.4 Approve an appropriation of $937,170 for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station from Community Facility District (CFD) Reimbursables and County of Riverside Reimbursables; 11.5 Increase estimated revenues for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station in the amount of $648,585 for CFD Reimbursables and $288,588 for Riverside County Reimbursables. 11.6 Approve an advance of $815,000 from the General Fund to the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station. 12 Ranch Fire Station — Proiect No. PW03-01 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the agreement with Vanir Construction Management, Inc. to provide professional construction management, material testing, and special inspection services in an amount not to exceed $273,240.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 12.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve amendments to the agreement not to exceed the contingency amount of $27,300 which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 13 1-15/State Route 79 South Ultimate Interchange - Proiect No. PW04-08 APNs 922-210- 660. 922-210-061, and 922-210-052 Property Acquisition RECOMMENDATION: R:Wgenda\101204 13.1 Enter into a purchase agreement with Margarita Canyon, LLC for Assessor Parcel Nos. 922-210-060, 922-210-061, and 922-210-052. The purchase price is currently under negotiation with the owner of the property. Staff expects the negotiations to be completed prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on October 26, 2004 and within the budget range. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:Wgenda\101204 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2004-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2004-12 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 October 12, 2004. 2 Replace Pool Water Heater at the Community Recreation Center RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Award a contract to Horizon Mechanical Contractors of California and authorize the expenditure of $33,110.00 for the replacement of the Pool Water Heater at the Temecula Community Recreation Center; 2.2 Approve a 10% contingency in the amount of $3,311.00. R:1Agenda\101204 3 Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Agreements for Tract Mao No. 29305-1 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to Improve the north side perimeter slopes and parkways within Tract Map No. 29305-1; 3.2 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to Improve the Wolf Valley Road Median within Tract Map No. 29305-1; 3.3 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to Improve the Linear Park -North within Tract Map No. 29305-1; 3.4 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to Improve the six -acre neighborhood park within Tract Map No. 29305-1. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. WAgenda\101204 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2004-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2004-10 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Stone, Roberts, 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 October 12, 2004. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS'REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, November 9, 2004, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\101204 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 14 An Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan) - a proposal to develop a 24,287 square foot church facility on a 4.72 acre lot — continued from the October 12, 2004 City Council meeting RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration; 14.2 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 15 User Fees Revisions RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO.04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF CITYWIDE FEES R:Wgenda1101204 10 16 Zone Change from L-1 to L-2 (PA02-0372) and Tentative Tract Mao to create seven residential lots ranging from .5 to .82 acres in lot area (PA02-0371) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLATION NO. PA02- 0372, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006 16.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 — TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING 4.57 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945.060-006 17 First Extension of Interim Ordinance: Prohibition of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Adopt an ordinance, by a 4/5ths vote, entitled: URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING, CONTINUING, AND EXTENDING THE PROHIBITION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY R:Wgenda\101204 11 COUNCIL BUSINESS 18 Community Services Commission Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Appoint two applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Community Services Commission through October 10, 2007. 19 Public Traffic Safety Commission Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Appoint two applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Public Traffic Safety Commission through October 10, 2007. 20 City Council Meeting Schedule — December 2004 RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Provide direction to the City Clerk to reschedule or cancel a meeting in December 2004, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. 21 Freeway Bridge Fencing (At the request of Councilman Roberts) RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Provide direction to staff regarding the installation of additional barrier fencing on freeway bridges within the City of Temecula. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, November 9, 2004, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\101204 12 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS The City of Temecula PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Nick M. Ioannidis (Nick the Greek) has been a symbol of freedom, hope, and opportunity to all those who gather in Huntington Park to participate in the activities in observance of National Immigrants Day; and WHEREAS, for centuries, people from countries throughout the world have come to our great Nation with the hope that they would be able to secure a better life for themselves and their families; and WHEREAS, The United States truly is a country of great ethnic diversity and multicultural character which has provided our Nation with boundless energy and strength and contributed significantly to our growth, progress, and prosperity; and WHEREAS, millions of immigrants settled throughout the vast territory of the United States and supported the ideals of independence and liberty. These immigrants have demonstrated the dedication and perseverance that enabled them to make their dreams come true; and WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States, does hereby salute Nick the Greek for his exemplary service to the children, parents, and communities of the City of Huntington Park and extend best wishes and continued success. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Michael S. Naggar, on behalf of the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby proclaim October28, 2004 to be . A . t ., "National Immigrants Day" IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Temecula to be affixed this 260'day of October, 2004. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jo#s, CMC, City Clerk ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12, 2004 The City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, October 12, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: 4 Councilmembers: Comerchero, Stone, Washington, and Naggar Absent: 1 Councilmembers: Roberts PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Kenji Oberlander. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Reverend Howard Brown of Winchester United Methodist. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was presented by Councilman Comerchero. PRESENTATION/PROCLAMATIONS Relay for Life Proclamation Representatives were not in attendance to accept the proclamation. Goals for Graduation Proclamation Thanking the City Council for its ongoing support, Ms. Tammy Marine, Director of Operations of Boys & Girls Clubs of Southwest County, was in attendance to accept the proclamation and apprised the public of the upcoming Pledge Rally on October 14, 2004, at the Promenade Mall from 5:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. Domestic Violence Awareness Month Proclamation Providing an example of the benefits of this program, Ms. Melissa Donaldson, Executive Director of S.A.F.E., and Police Chief Domenoe thanked the City Council for the recognition and with appreciation accepted the proclamation. Breast Cancer Awareness and Race for the Cure Proclamation Thanking the City Council and staff for its continued efforts over the past nine years and its additional funding this year for the distribution of materials to the high schools, Ms. Lori Stone - Rubin, Ms. Maryanne Edwards, and Ms. Lisa Stevenson apprised the Council and the public of a newly launched program Hats of Hope in honor of Breast Cancer Awareness Month to honor those stricken with the disease or who have passed. Because this will be the last race in which RAMinutes\101204 Councilman Stone will be participating as a City representative, appreciation was extended to Mr. Stone for his strong voice over the past nine years and, therefore, the Board of Directors honored him with a Hat of Hope. Although Councilman Stone will be leaving the City Council, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero assured the Board of Directors that the support and the passion for this cause will not be leaving with him. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. In appreciation of the Council's continued support, Ms. Shari Crall, Temecula, representing the Temecula Valley International Film and Music Festival, presented a music CD to each City Councilmember and provided an overview of the successful event. B. Commenting on the continued success of this event, Ms. Donna Boggins, Temecula, President of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Valley Museum, personally subpoenaed each Councilmember to attend the Third Annual Award -Winning Erle Stanley Gardner Mystery weekend, November 6 and 7, 2004. C. Mr. Otto Baron, Temecula, addressed the issue of illegal aliens and immigration laws. D. Ms. Renee Milot-Hathway, the mother of Mathew Hathway who died October 3, 2004 at the Overland Bridge, advised that an investigation of this incident is in progress and noted that she believes that it was an accident. She recommended the installation of cyclone fencing on the other side of Overland Bridge even though that side is prohibited from pedestrian use and as well recommended fencing for the Rancho California Road Bridge. She also recommended the installation of a blinking light on the sign which states no pedestrian crossing to make it more visible at night or during foggy weather. Expressing great sympathy to Ms. Hathaway and her family, Mayor Naggar advised that Councilman Roberts had requested that the matter of fencing be discussed at the October 26, 2004, City Council meeting. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. On behalf of the City of Temecula and the City Council, Councilman Washington advised that he attends monthly Western Riverside Council Regional Conservation Authority meetings as well as Western Riverside Council of Government (WRCOG) meetings and updated the Councilmembers on upcoming items such as RCA Policy changes which affect collection of funds generated by implementation of the MSHCP; advised that a new General Manager will be announced; that WRCOG recently implemented the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees; and that the fees may be raised or lowered dependent on cost and will be annually reviewed, noting that sometime in December, these fees will be raised. B. Commenting on the new commuter bus line from the City to the City of Oceanside, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero advised that after some review because of lack of ridership, the fare had been decreased from $4.00 to $1.00; that an almost completed RTA fare study will recommend that the fare on the commuter bus lines should be the same as all other bus line rates through the year 2008; and that a slight fare increase on all buses will be forthcoming next year as per the fare study. R1Minutes\101204 2 C. Reiterating that the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure will be Sunday, October 17, 2004, Councilman Stone invited everyone to attend, noting that last year's race raised over $1 million and 75% of the funds raised will remain in the local community. As a member of the Veterans' Memorial Subcommittee along with Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, Councilman Stone advised that the final selection of the letters as part of the monument has been made and invited the public to the unveiling of the Veterans' Memorial on November 11, 2004, at 2:00 P.M., at the Duck Pond, advising that President Bush and other dignitaries have been invited. Mr. Stone requested that the Holiday Schedule for the November/December City Council meetings be identified and considered at the next City Council meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of September 14, 2004; 2.2 Approve the minutes of September 28, 2004. 3 Resolution approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-102 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 August 31, 2004. R:\Minutes\101204 3 5 First Amendment to Webb Associates Professional Services Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a First Amendment to agreement between the City of Temecula and Albert A. Webb Associates for CFD Annual Administration Services in an amount not to exceed $5,500.00 for a total contract amount of $53,500.00. 6 Annual Purchase Agreement for Citywide Street Name Sign Replacement and Repairs for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve an annual agreement with Main Street Signs for the purchase of Citywide street name sign replacements and repairs in the amount of $50,000.00. Completion and Acceptance of the SR 79S Sidewalk Improvement Project — Project No PW01-02 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Accept the construction of the SR 79S Sidewalk Improvement Project — Project No. PW01-02 as complete; 7.2 Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 7.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Approval of the Plans and Specifications and solicitation of Construction Bids — Traffic Signal at Pechanga Parkway and Muirfield Drive — Project No. PW99-11TS RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Project No. PW99-11TS —Traffic Signal at Pechanga Parkway and Muirfield Drive Expenditure of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Funds RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Increase reimbursement revenue to the General Fund by $16,568; 9.2 Approve an additional appropriation of $16,568 to the Police Department Budget; 9.3 Approve the expenditure of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant funds and local match funds in the amount of $18,409 for the purchase of police equipment. R:\Minutes\101204 10 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 04-10 (Development Code Amendment for multiple office buildings in BP and L1 zones) RECOMMENDATION 10.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04-10 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR MULTIPLE OFFICE BUILDINGS IN BUSINESS PARK AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONES (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0477) 11 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 04-11 (Development Code Amendment for private heliports RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04-11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE HELIPORTS IN VARIOUS ZONES AND TO MAKE OTHER MINOR CHANGES (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0297) 12 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 04-12 (Community Standards Preservation) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 1 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.24 — COMMUNITY STANDARDS PRESERVATION ORDINANCE MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-12. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who vote no with regard to Item No. 11 and Councilman Roberts who was absent. RAMinutes\101204 At 7:39 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:41 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. 13 An Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan) a proposal to develop a 24,287 square foot church facility on a 4.72 acre lot RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Continue the public hearing to the October 26, 2004 City Council meeting. Mayor Naggar informed the public that this matter will be continued; therefore, the public hearing was opened and continued to October 26, 2004. 14 Circular Wireless Telecommunications Site (PA02-717) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program based on the Initial Study for Planning Application No. PA02-0717 which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072; 14.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717 — A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TO INCLUDE A 45-FOOT HIGH ARTIFICIAL PALM TREE WITH THREE (3) ANTENNAS HOUSED WITHIN THE BULB PORTION OF THE TREE AND FOUR OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT CABINETS WITHIN A 310 SQUARE FOOT BLOCK WALL ENCLOSURE AT 31575 ENFIELD LANE, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ENFIELD LANE, APPROXIMATELY 3,200 FEET EAST OF RIVERTON LANE (APN 957-170-012) Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material). In response to the Councilmembers, Ms. Ubnoske noted the following: That the project, if approved, would be conditioned to mitigate all impacts That the Master Plan concept was not raised at the Commission level but referenced in the appeal; that the appellant had provided information to staff that indicated the implementation of a Master Plan for such facilities in other cities R:\Minutes\101204 That the applicant had explored sites that would permit the possibility of partnering but that coverage ranges restricted such partnering. At this time, the public hearing was opened. Having relocated to the City of Temecula for its rural environment, Ms. Valesta Ayer, Temecula, expressed concern with the following as it relates to the proposed project: • The use of generators o Should be conditioned to prohibit the use of generators • The depreciation of property value o Must disclose the location of the cell tower Ms. Roma Stromberg, Temecula, referenced communication (submitted for the record) forwarded to staff and expressed the following concerns regarding the project: • That the City has not complied with the intent or the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) o Project will result insignificant and direct and cumulative environmental impacts not addressed or adequately addressed in the environmental documentation • That it would not be appropriate for the City to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project o That the California Environmental Quality Act states that a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be adopted only if there were no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant affect on the environment • That the project will result in significant project -specific and cumulative land use and aesthetic impacts • That the Planning Commission's determination of no significant impact is not founded • That potential impacts related to noise, air, and erosion should be evaluated in more detail • That an alternative analysis, which focuses on technically feasible alternatives that avoid or significantly reduce impacts, should also be conducted as per the CEQA guidelines • That the City had not disclosed or analyzed the potential aesthetic or land use impacts that could occur with the implementation of the telecommunications ordinance; therefore, the City should not use this ordinance as a threshold to assume that any particular project may or may not result in significant impacts based on whether or not this project would be consistent with this ordinance • That because cellular facilities are permitted in every zone, the public has no way to anticipate whether or not one may be constructed in their neighborhood; that land should be designated for these facilities, giving the public a choice as to whether they would be desirous of living next to such a facility; that wireless facilities can be master planned and that the City should consider and plan for wireless facilities as any other land use • That, as part of the General Plan Update, the City should inventory areas that may be sensitive to wireless facilities; describe the characteristics of these areas; rank these areas from highly sensitive to least sensitive; compile a map for planning and public disclosure purposes; and develop goals and policies in relation to wireless land uses • That, as per the Planning Commission staff report, if the proposed site will not meet Cingular's needs and the height is prohibitive to collocation, why approve this project At this time, Ms. Ayer submitted to the City Clerk a petition opposing the proposed project. R:\Minutes\101204 In response to Councilman Stone, Ms. Stromberg further clarified and commented on her previously made comments, noting the following: • Land use and impact analysis • Inconsistencies with the City's Telecommunication Ordinance • Aesthetic Impacts • Initial study was not available for public review • Visual blight o A setback which will make the palm tree appear more like a real palm tree • Erosion problems — existing/cumulative • Project description is not complete • Noise Impacts • Prohibit use of a generator • Sites must be technically feasible prior to completing an alternative analysis • Air quality because of the generator Responding to Mayor Naggar and Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, Planning Director Ubnoske advised of the following: • That a grading plan would be required prior to the issuance of a building permit (erosion concerns) • That an 85-foot setback is being proposed; that the Code requires a 75-foot setback; that the homes on the cul-de-sac are over 325 feet away • That a condition stating that noise levels shall not exceed General Plan standards may be imposed; that provisions will be made for a generator hookup but that there will not be generator on the site unless of a major emergency • That the project may be conditioned to only permit generator hookup in the event of major emergencies. Addressing the previously made comments, Mr. Tim Fitzsimmons, representing Cingular Wireless, Costa Mesa, stated the following: • That site locations are determined by drop call studies; therefore, it is difficult to determine future location needs • That collocation was explored but was not feasible • That generators are only used during emergency situations; that a condition limiting the use of a generator only during emergency situations would be acceptable • That no known studies have proven that cellular towers depreciate property values • That the applicant worked with City staff to address environmental impacts. In response to Councilmember comments, Mr. Fitzsimmons stated the following: • That the picture of the proposed tower, placement of the antenna, and the additional planting of palm trees (4), as presented by Ms. Stromberg, is an accurate rendering • That if there were no restrictions, the tower would be as tall as possible; that although the entire pole will be 45 feet tall, the actual antenna will be located at 39 foot which would make it inadequate to provide the desired service; • That landscaping conditions were imposed to hide the wall R:\Minutes\101204 8 • That Cingular would be supportive of other companies collocating on the proposed tower. Living in the tract neighborhood contiguous to the proposed site, Mr. Leonard Cole, Temecula, viewed the proposed project as an industrial enterprise in a residential area; stated that the proposed project would be unsightly; noted that the property has been graded and is unstable; expressed concern with electromagnetic fields and its impacts on hearing aids or health concerns; suggested that a Master Plan for such sites be explored; and suggested that the matter be deferred and that the information provided by Ms. Stromberg be studied. Addressing previously made comments, Ms. Roma Stromberg noted the following: That the alternative analysis was not available for public review; that a CECA level alternative analysis should be completed for this specific project. Mr. Tim Fitzsimmons, representing the applicant, stated the following in response to previously made comments: • That with regard to the grading concern, the project would have to proceed with the building permit process and will require an approval process • That with regard to the electromagnetic field (EMF) concern, the towers are regulated by the FCC and all imposed guidelines are adhered to; that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 exempts such facilities from EMF concerns • That the proposed facility will be constructed in a very -low density residential • That alternative analysis was completed. At this time, the public hearing was closed In response to Ms. Stromberg's comments, Councilman Stone stated that he would be of the opinion that erosion, air quality, and noise impacts will not be significant impacts and that the proposed site will be technically feasibly. However, Mr. Stone concurred with Ms. Stromberg about the master planning such facilities, noting that he had, at a previous public hearing with regard to the construction of a cellular tower; requested that this matter be addressed and that that such master planning be included in the City's General Plan; that once master planned, the City may mandate cohabitation, eliminating the visual blight; expressed concern with the setback of 300 feet, commenting on the close proximity of the proposed site to residential homes; stated that the safety and efficacy of electromagnetic fields has not been totally ascertained; and, therefore, relayed his opposition to granting the Conditional Use Permit and that he would not support any future cellular tower until the completion of a master plan. Councilman Washington echoed support of master planning such facilities. Concurring with Ms. Stromberg's comment that a site or alternative site for a cellular tower should be viewed as technically feasible, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero echoed Mr. Stone's comment with regard to the Council having previously requested the master planning of such facilities. Mr. Comerchero suggested that staff explore the possibility of the City constructing such poles on City -owned land and then invite the communication& industry to locate to these sites. R:\Minutes\101204 Mayor Naggar suggested that a third party/non-partisan individual be involved in the alternative site analysis; relayed his support of the appellant; and requested that information with regard to the master planning of such facilities be forwarded to the City Council. MOTION: Councilman Washington moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution approving the appeal and denying the application. Councilman Stone seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. MOTION: Mayor Naggar moved to direct staff to forward information to the City Council with regard to master planning such facilities and the design of such a master plan. Councilman Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. 15 Weed Abatement Liens for FY 2003-04 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04-104 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ORDERING CONFIRMATION OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR COSTS OF ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 Principal Planner Brown presented the staff report (of record). For Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, Mr. Brown confirmed that the firms being used to perform the needed abatement are charging competitive rates. In response to Councilman Washington, Mr. Brown advised that the charged rate recuperates the associated cost as well as an administrative fee ($150 per parcel) and that as a result of this fee, taxpayers are not subsidizing this effort. There being no public input, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to adopt Resolution No. 04-104. The motion was seconded by Councilman Washington and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. Responding to Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, City Attorney Thorson advised that it would always be within the property owners' best interest to complete the abatement on their own and that the City does not derive a profit from the charged rates. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No additional comment. RAMinutes\101204 10 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that there was no Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT At 8:47 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to a regular meeting on Tuesday, November 9, 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%101204 11 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 $1,839,259.11. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 26" day of October, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] RdResos 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 26th day of October, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- CITY OF TEMECULA ' LIST OF DEMANDS 10/07/04 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $ 512,166.11 10/14/04 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 968,513.02 10/07/04 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 358,579.98 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 10/26/04 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 1,839,259.11 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND $ 1,237,509.25 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 4,243.50 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 11,632.07 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 125,368.46 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL'B' STREET LIGHTS 102.31 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL'C' LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 6,122.91 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL 'D' REFUSE/RECYCLING 988.49 210 CAPITAL IMPROV PROJECT FUND 18,671.46 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -CIP PROJECT 6,525.44 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,514.56 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 35,633.03 330 SUPPORTSERVICES 7,120.77 340 FACILITIES 11,195.74 473 CROWNE HILL CFD 03-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 6,743.31 ' 475 WOLF CREEK CFD 03-3 DEBT SERVICE FUND 7,307.83 $ 1,480,679.13 001 GENERAL FUND 248,825.19 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 5,452.77 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 62,751.73 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL'B' STREET LIGHTS 131.63 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL'C' LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 5,411.93 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL'D' REFUSE/RECYCLING 873.16 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 2,535.07 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,055.14 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 21,166.59 330 SUPPORTSERVICES 3,458.32 340 FACILITIES 6,918.45 358,579.98 TOTAL BY FUND: $ 1,839,259.11 PREPARED BY RETA WESTON, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST 1744ui� z -, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. GENIE ROBERTS,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I . Y L , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING ISTRUEAND CORRECT. ' SHAWN NELSON, CITY MANAGER apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check If Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 388 10/07/2004 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIU PERS Health Admin Cost Payment 60,580.29 60,580.29 389 10/07/2004 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Disability Ins Payment 18,024.57 18,024.57 390 10/07/2004 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 68,855.96 68,855.96 391 10/07/2004 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SO Nationwide Retirement Payment 19,318.77 19,318.77 392 10/07/2004 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREME PERS ER Paid Member Contr Pmt 90,857.20 90,a57.20 393 10/07/2004 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA), OBRA - Project Retirement Payment 2,863.22 2,863.22 94763 10/07/2004 003552 A F L A C AFLAC Cancer Payment 1,732.20 1,732.20 94764 10/07/2004 001700 A PLUS TEACHING MATERIALS Teen Program Supplies 88.33 88.33 94765 10/07/2004 000434 ACCELA.COM Permits Plus Conversion Assistance 1,480.00 Reconfigure Scantron Machine 1,280.00 2,760.00 94766 10/07/2004 008158 ACCESS INTELLIGENCE, LLC Emerg Response Conf:11/17-20 250.00 250.00 94767 10/07/2004 002038 ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPLY Aquatics pool supplies 51.50 51.50 94768 10/07/2004 005058 ADAMS, AARON Employee Computer Purchase Prgm 2,000.00 2,000.00 94769 10/07/2004 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES Oct stand by for DUI Screening 500.00 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 162.50 662.50 94770 10/07/2004 007280 AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONS Paramedic training:10/14:Olson 120.00 120.00 94771 10/07/2004 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS Lifeguard training supplies:Aquatics 8.00 8.00 94772 10/07/2004 002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALL Aug Animal control services 8,750.00 8,750.00 94773 10/07/2004 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. Temp help ppe 9/18104 S. Wills 697.60 Temp help ppe 9/18/04 G. Kasparian 648.00 Temp help ppe 9/18 S. Lee 528.00 Temp help ppe 9/18/04 T. Pee 369.77 2,243.37 Page:1 apChktst Final Check List Page: 2 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check If Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94774 10/07/2004 008146 ARGERICH, TRACY Refund:Exercise-Belly Dancing 35.00 35.00 94775 10/07/2004 008062 ARROW STAFF RESOURCES, I Temp help ppe 9/26/04 J. Hear 2,789.96 2,789.96 94776 10/07/2004 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY Embroidered shirts for Planning Dept 436.39 436.39 94777 10/07/2004 006690 BEST WESTERN Hotel:Police Budget tmg:10/29:Herd 122.32 122.32 94778 10/07/2004 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES Feb 04 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 165.56 Apr 04 DUI Drug & Alcohol Screening 90.00 255.56 94779 10/07/2004 006721 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE Children Museum office furniture 1,618.77 Office Supplies: Finance 99.33 1,718.10 94780 10/07/2004 008137 BROWN, DOROTHY Refund: Tia-Chi 13.75 13.75 94781 10/07/2004 002099 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES Oct Iease:Old town restroom 826.00 826.00 94782 10/07/2004 004462 C D W GOVERNMENT INC Fujitsu Scanner:IS 13,002.54 Software for Scanner 756.29 13,758.83 94783 10/07/2004 004621 C-18 INC Citywide Street Striping svcs 1,366.82 1,366.82 94784 10/07/2004 001089 CALIF DEBT & INVESTMENT Bond Sale Sem:10/27-28:von Richter 195.00 195.00 94785 10/07/2004 004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT May 04 DUI Screening 3,080.00 Oct 2003 Fingerprints info 861.00 Jan 04 DUI Screening 210.00 4,151.00 94786 10/07/2004 008156 CALLAHAN, LORI Reimb: CCPOA Conf:9/21-24/04 289.61 289.61 94787 10/07/2004 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY Helium tanks refill:TCSD 32.03 32.03 94788 10/07/2004 000387 CAREER TRACK SEMINARS Bus. Writing Sam: 12/2:Simpkins 99.00 99.00 94789 10/07/2004 006660 CMTA Otdy Tmg:10/13:Grance 25.00 25.00 94790 10/07/2004 003997 COAST RECREATION INC Various playground equip:TCSD 2,688.22 2,688.22 94791 10/07/2004 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI Community Health Charities Payment 163.00 163.00 Paget apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 3 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94792 10/07/2004 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS Geotechnical testing Jefferson Ave 5,767.50 5,767.50 94793 10/07/2004 001393 DATA TICKET INC Aug 04 Prkg citation processing: Police 278.61 Aug 04 Prkg citation processing: Police 200.00 478.61 94794 10/07/2004 008149 DEJOYA,MAY Refund:Hawaiian-Int/AdvTeen/Adu 35.00 35.00 94795 10/07/2004 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL Various parks portable toilets 57.48 57.48 94796 10/07/2004 000684 DIEHL EVANS & COMPANY LLP FY 0304 Audit Svcs: City 2,700.00 2,700.00 94797 10/07/2004 000684 DIEHL EVANS & COMPANY LLP '04 Gov t Tax Sem:12/15:MJ 175.00 175.00 94798 10/07/2004 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK Sept 04 special events premiums 742.15 742.15 94799 10/07/2004 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIALFUELING Fuel for city vehicles: TCSD 61343 835.92 835.92 94800 10/07/2004 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATI PW graffiti removal supplies 157.54 157.54 94801 10/07/2004 002438 ENGEN CORPORATION Aug geo test:SR79S Sidewalk/Ldscp 1,095.00 1,095.00 94802 10/07/2004 006487 EUROPEAN CAFE & VINEYARD Refreshments: Otly as luncheon 2,843.25 Refreshments Veterans Memorial 148.24 2,991.49 94803 10/07/2004 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE Aug Idscp impr.Vail Ranch Prkwy 450.00 Aug Idscp impr.Rancho Vista/ViaCreco 307.11 Aug Idscp impr: Santiago & Ynez 245.00 Aug Idscp impr: Vail Ranch/Ovrland 208.59 Aug Idscp impr: Vail Ranch 203.40 Aug Idscp impr:Rancho Calif. 91.88 Aug Idscp impr:Tradewinds 80.27 1,586.25 94804 10/07/2004 006902 FANENE, LYNN Reimb:CCPOA Conf:9/21-24/04 349.38 349.38 94805 10/07/2004 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC Express mail services 228.54 228.54 94806 10/07/2004 005747 FIRE SERVICE SPECIFICATION Holmatro Rescue Tools 721.93 721.93 94807 10/07/2004 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE Lot Book Rept: 42456 Agana St. 150.00 Lot Book Rept: 31583 Via Santa 150.00 300.00 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check p Date Vendor Description Amount Paid 94808 10/07/2004 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER SOUTHWEST AIRLINES DU Airfare:CACE Sem: 10/5-7:Cole 538.80 NATIONAL RECREATION/PARK HP Reg:Nat'I Rec/Prk Assn:10/12-16 500.00 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE DU Reg:ULI Conf:9/13-14:Peters 475.00 MARRIOTT HOTEL RR H11:Mayor/Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 442.96 HYATT GR Hotel:Bond Buyer Cf:9/12-14 408.32 LOW E'S GY City Hall Storage Shelves 318.94 AMERICAN AIRLINES RR Airfare:Mayor/Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 307.90 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES AE Airfare:'04 Code Council Cf:Elmo 291.90 SIMULAIDS INC GY Multiple Kit:Tmg Supplies:Citzen 263.77 OLD BATH HOUSE, THE RR Meal:Mayor/Council Cf: 7/28-8/1 209.74 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES HP Airfare:Nat'I Rec/Prk Assn:10/12-1 184.90 HERTZ RENT -A -CAR RR Car Rental:Mayor/Council Cf: 7/2 182.44 HYATT GY Htl:League Conf:9/17-18/04 178.00 HYATT RR HtI:SCAG Mtg:8/04-05 171.62 DINE IN DELIVERY GY Retreshments:Theater Mtg Inter 158.36 INSTITUTE OF GY Recruitment ad: Asst Eng - 150.00 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES DU Airfare:ULI Conf:Peters:9/13-14 138.70 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES JC Airfare:NLC steering mtg:9/30-10/2 116.70 VOLKER LUTZ ENTERPRISES, I HP Refreshments:Theater Mgr Intery 108.83 HARRAHS RENO HP Hfl:Nat'I Rec/Prk Cf:10/12-16 96.48 HUNGRY HUNTER DU Refreshments:Planning Comm Mt 84.32 TEMECULA CREEK INN INC HP Htl:interview panelist:Theater Mgr 76.73 MEXICO CHIOUITO DU Refreshments:Planning Comm Mt 59.58 BLACK ANGUS DU Refreshments:Working Mtg 38.63 GRAINGER GY Bar Pinch Point:Citzen Corps 37.22 CIAO TRATTORIA RR Meal:SCAG Mtg:9/01 36.24 ONTARIO AIRPORT GR Ovmght Prkg:Bond Buyer Cf 36.00 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES GR Airfare:Bond Buyer Cf:9/12-14 36.00 ONTARIO AIRPORT RR OvrNgt Prkg:Mayor/Council Cf: 36.00 Check Total Page:4 apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check It Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total RR Add't Credit Card Chrgs 34.99 FISH HOUSE VERA CRUZ GY Refreshments:Trffc Safety Comm. 28.68 OUTBACK GY Meal:League Conf:9/17-18/04 28.15 SONY DU Camera Compact Disc 26.54 UNION 76 RR Rental Car Fuel:Mayor/Council Cf: 19.55 SIZZLER RESTAURANT DU Refreshments: Council Mtg 19.37 HYATT RR Hotel:SCAG Mtg:9/1 -23.95 5,817.41 94809 10/07/2004 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED New hire physicals & drug screenings 85.00 New hire physicals & drug screenings 25.00 110.00 94810 10/07/2004 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY I Day timer supplies - Planning 86.16 86.16 94811 10/07/2004 000173 GENERAL BINDING CORPORAT Copy Ctr binding & lamination supplies 107.93 107.93 94812 10/07/2004 004053 HABITAT WEST INC 4th Qtr Habitat Svcs Pala Bridge 650.00 650.00 94813 10/07/2004 008081 HALL & FOREMAN INC July Survey for Pechanga Pkwy/Wolf 1,110.00 1,110.00 94814 10/07/2004 002107 HIGHMARK INC Voluntary Supp Life Insurance 734.10 734.10 94815 10/07/2004 005748 HODSON, CHERYL A. Support Payment 35.07 35.07 94816 10/07/2004 008155 HOGAN, FELICIA Reimb:League CS Conf:7/28-30 53.10 53.10 94817 10/07/2004 008147 HUFF, HELEN Refund:Sr. Excursion Bates Nut Farm 5.00 5.00 94818 10/07/2004 000193 I C M A Books: Customer Svc: Planning 45.03 45.03 94819 10/07/2004 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT TRUST 45 1 C M A Retirement Trust 457: Part 7,803.12 7,803.12 94820 10/07/2004 005693 1 S G THERMAL SYSTEMS USA Repair Stn 73 Thermal imaging camer 265.00 265.00 94821 10/07/2004 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Aquatics pool supplies 222.50 222.50 94822 10/07/2004 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD instructor earnings 364.00 364.00 Pages apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 6 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94823 10/07/2004 008153 JAGODA, DENISE Refund:Dance Hawaiian:Beg Keikis 30.00 30.00 94824 10/07/2004 008157 JAMES, REZA Employee Computer Purch Prgm 1,481.53 1,481.53 94825 10/07/2004 004908 JIFFY LUBE 1878 City Vehicle Maint Svcs: B&S 53.81 53.81 94826 10/07/2004 003860 JOE'S SHEET METAL II Medical boxes for Fire paramedics 188.93 188.93 94827 10/07/2004 008139 KELLEHER, PAT Refund: Music for Toddlers 33.57 33.57 94828 10/07/2004 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC Decals: Car Show 10/8-9/04 188.24 188.24 94829 10/07/2004 004481 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATES I Aug prof svcs: Diaz Rd Extension 5,100.00 5,100.00 94830 10/07/2004 000206 KINKOS INC Stationery paper/misc supplies 27.48 27.48 94831 10/07/2004 008152 KOCH, BARRY Refund:Music-Instant Piano 25.00 25.00 94832 10/07/2004 000209 L & M FERTILIZER INC New Chainsaw for Fire Truck 73 899.71 Repair Fire Truck 73 Chainsaw 159.35 PW Maint am equipment repair 91.26 1,150.32 94833 10/07/2004 008145 LAFRENIERE, SANDY Refund: Picnic Shelter Temeku Hills 25.00 25.00 94834 10/07/2004 000210 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES Law/Election Sem:1218-10:SJ/CD 790.00 790.00 94835 10/07/2004 006284 LEWIS & LEWIS ENTERPRISES Cables for AIMS unit:Police Dept. 105.53 105.53 94836 10/07/2004 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC Supplies for Paramedic squad 777.63 Supplies for Paramedic squad 149.86 927.49 94837 10/07/2004 003028 LOS ANGELES TIMES Recruitment ads:B&S/Eng/Mntc 916.00 916.00 94838 10/07/2004 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER temp help w/e 09/26 Dankworth 658.40 temp help w/e 09/19 Dankworth 658.40 1,316.80 94839 10/07/2004 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS Promotion Svcs:E.S.G.Mystery Wkend 2,000.00 2.000.00 94840 10/07/2004 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE Met Life Dental Payment 7,722.90 7,722.90 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check p Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94841 10/07/2004 001905 MEYERS, DAVID WILLIAM TCSD Instructor Earnings 950.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 352.00 1,312.00 94842 10/07/2004 007210 MIDORI GARDENS 7/28 irrigation repairs: Vail Ranch Prk 420.97 8/30 irrigation repairs: Vail Ranch Prk 340.35 761.32 94843 10/07/2004 004951 MIKE'S PRECISION WELDING I Welding svcs: C. Museum 130.00 130.00 94844 10/07/2004 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS business cards: (6) Planning Staff 689.17 City stationary: Fire Prevention 185.08 envelopes: Fire Prevention 142.75 business cards: Police (L.F./R.G./R.Z) 128.49 business cards: G. Wolnick 114.86 business cards: B. Gutierrez 114.86 business cards: J. Ross 114.86 business cards: J. Grove/M. Parker 85.66 business cards: T. Cole/K. Nolan 85.66 business cards: A. Matthews 42.83 1,704.22 94845 10/07/2004 004534 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES Oct EOC stn satellite phone svcs 70.75 70.75 94846 10/07/2004 008162 MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL SOLUTI Police Budgeting: 1 0/29/04:Maida Herd 195.00 195.00 94847 10/07/2004 005872 MUNICIPAL INFO SYS ASSN OF M.I.S.A.C. Cf:T.Thorson:t 117-9/04 250.00 250.00 94848 10/07/2004 001986 MUZAK -SOUTHERN CALIFORN Oct Music Broadcast:Old Town 64.86 64.86 94849 10/07/2004 008033 NEELS, CRYSTAL Refund:Sec. Deposit/Room Rental 190.00 190.00 94850 10/07/2004 008151 NELSON, ALYSIA Refund:Dance Hawaiian:Beg Kids 25.62 25.62 94851 10/07/2004 002292 OASIS VENDING coffee/kitchen supplies: City Hall 513.91 coffee/kitchen supplies: Maint Fee 123.63 637.54 94852 10/07/2004 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE 8 SERVICE City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 55.00 55.00 94853 10/07/2004 003299 OLDER THAN DIRT GANG Entertainment:Smr Nights:7/30/04 300.00 300.00 94854 10/07/2004 001619 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER I General/Eng recruit ads for H.R. Dpt 494.60 494.60 94855 10/07/2004 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY Family Fun Night supplies 61.65 61.65 Page:7 apChklst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 8 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check p Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94856 10/07/2004 008136 PALMER, BRAD Refund:Business License 35.00 35.00 94857 10/07/2004 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE ( 24 m-xl TCSD staff jackets 873.68 873.68 94858 10/07/2004 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECUtA IN Teen Program supplies 119.51 119.51 94859 10/07/2004 008150 PASOL, JENNIFER Refund:Kids Love Soccer 55.00 55.00 94860 10/07/2004 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE FROG PERS Long Term Care Payment 288.55 288.55 94861 10/07/2004 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 308.93 308.93 94862 10/07/2004 005820 PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES I Prepaid Legal Services Payment 324.95 324.85 94863 10/07/2004 004576 PRIMEDIA Wildfire subscription: H. Windsor 30.00 30.00 94864 10/07/2004 003493 PRO -CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR Res Imp Prgm: Hicks, Rodney & Maril 950.00 950.00 94865 10/07/2004 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Dup blueprints: Pechanga Pkwy 84.08 Dup blueprints: SR79S/Country Glen 21.46 105.54 94866 10/07/2004 000526 REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF Vehicle Inspect Analysis:10/08: 145.00 145.00 94867 10/07/2004 000352 RIVERSIDE CO ASSESSOR Aug Assessor Maps: B&S Dept. 48.00 48.00 94868 10/07/2004 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & Ntc/Detennination filing fees:R.C.wide 1,314.00 1,314.00 94869 10/07/2004 005785 RIVERSIDE CO EMS Rawlings:EMT/Paramedics Recertif. 50.00 50.00 94870 10/07/2004 005785 RIVERSIDE CO EMS Buckley: EMT/Paramedics Recertif. 50.00 50.00 94871 10/07/2004 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CO - CIT files: PW Land Dev 42.50 42.50 94872 10/07/2004 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO Aug emerg. radio rentals: Police 1,312.96 1,312.96 94873 10/07/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Aug 2004 Booking Fees 7,396.80 7,396.80 Pages apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 9 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94874 10/07/2004 003587 RIZZO CONSTRUCTION INC PW reception lobby modifications 20,038.00 20,038.00 94875 10/07/2004 005026 ROAD WORKS, INC. Traf Cntd Cart Sem:10/26-27:N.Rint 50.00 50.00 94876 10/07/2004 008144 ROBERSON, LISA Refund:Yoga-Prenatal Yoga 85.00 85.00 94877 10/07/2004 001942 S C SIGNS Jul -Aug public ntc postings: Planning 2,550.00 Jul -Aug public ntc postings: C.Clerk 510.00 3,060.00 94878 10/07/2004 004598 S T K ARCHITECTURE INC Aug dsgn svcs: Roripaugh Fire Stn 3,932.50 3,932.50 94879 10/07/2004 007582 SAFEGUARD DENTAL & VISION SafeGuard Vision Plan Payment 979.65 979.65 94880 10/07/2004 005227 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF Support Payment #DF099118 25.00 25.00 94881 10/07/2004 006815 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF Support Payment #581095025 12.50 12.50 94882 10/07/2004 004609 SHREDFORCE INC Sep doc shred svcs: Records Mgmt 110.00 Sep doc. shred svcs: P.D. O.T. Stn 24.00 134.00 94883 10/07/2004 000645 SMART & FINAL INC MPSC recreation supplies 116.04 supplies for mtgs: Finance 115.43 Teen Programs supplies 49.17 280.64 94884 10/07/2004 002536 SMITH, ZENAIDA B. Adv:CMRTA Conf:10/19-22/04 200.00 200.00 94885 10/07/2004 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Sep 2-02-502-8077 Maint Fac 2,339.92 Sep 2-20-798-3248 C. Museum 2,048.42 Aug 2-19-683-3263 Front St Ped 1,222.78 Sep 2-10-331-2153 TCC 1,153.28 Sep 2-22-575-0876 Various Mtrs 282.70 7,047.10 94886 10/07/2004 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST pest control Svcs: var. City slopes 84.00 pest control svcs: T. Museum 42.00 pest control svcs: TCC 36.00 pest control svcs: C. Museum 36.00 pest control svcs: Wedding Chpl 32.00 pest control svcs: MPSC 29.00 259.00 94887 10/07/2004 007762 STANDARD OF OREGON Mandatory Life Insurance Payment 2,441.25 2,441.25 94888 10/07/2004 007867 STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE Replace ice machine: Fire Stn 84 2,342.49 2,342.49 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94889 10/07/2004 004420 STATE COMP INSURANCE FUN Sept workers' comp premium 47,623.12 47,623.12 94890 10/07/2004 006145 STENO SOLUTIONS TRANSCRI Sep transcription svcs: Police 714.85 Credit: amt billed not per contract -42.05 672.80 94891 10/07/2004 004247 STERICYCLE INC medical waste disposal: Paramedics 94.60 94.60 94892 10/07/2004 000305 TARGET STORE TCSD Spooktacular supplies 87.33 High Hopes supplies 64.43 151.76 94893 10/07/2004 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 Union Dues Payment 3,709.00 3,709.00 94894 10/07/2004 006465 TEMECULA AUTO REPAIR Vehicle repair/maint: Fire Prev 167.30 Vehicle repair/maint: Fire Prev 15.00 182.30 94895 10/07/2004 006914 TEMECULA COPIERS INC. Copier/fax/printer. Pin reception area 2,659.27 2,659.27 94896 10/07/2004 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL Sunshine Fund 59.21 59.21 94897 10/07/2004 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN SMART Program supplies 345.34 as recogn award: R. Weston 61.63 406.97 94898 10/07/2004 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY Locksmith svcs: 6th St. Park 90.00 locks for Paramedics cabinets 49.54 Locksmith svos: Police Storefront 40.02 179.56 94899 10/07/2004 003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWON TCSD Instructor Earnings 235.20 TCSD Instructor Earnings 80.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 60.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 20.00 395.20 94900 10/07/2004 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC DJ Svcs:Teen Pool Parry 8128/04 350.00 Sound Vendor:Band Jam 8/27/04 250.00 600.00 94901 10/07/2004 000978 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRG 1st Otr Emerg. Response Vol. Prgm 2,181.25 2,181.25 94902 10/07/2004 005873 TRI AD ACTUARIES INC Child Care Reimbursement Payment 7,230.77 7,230.77 94903 10/07/2004 002065 UNISOURCE copy paper supplies for City Hall 2,060.18 2,060.18 94904 10/07/2004 004981 UNISOURCE SCREENING & 9/16-30/04 background screening svc 595.00 595.00 94905 10/07/2004 000325 UNITED WAY United Way Charities Payment 373.00 373.00 Page:10 apChkLst 10/07/2004 9:00:20AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 11 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94906 10/07/2004 004819 UNUM LIFE INS. CO. OF AMER[ Long Term Disability Payment 6,750.54 6,750.54 94907 10/07/2004 004261 VERIZON Sep xxx-1408 P.D. O.T. Sin 358.55 Sep xxx-9897 general usage 90.15 448.70 94908 10/07/2004 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. Sep access -CRC phone line 348.48 Sep access-Rvsd Co. phone line 292.72 641.20 94909 10/07/2004 004864 VINEYARD OF THE NEW WINE- FY 04105 CDBG Reimbursement 4,243.50 4,243.50 94910 10/07/2004 008140 WATERMAN, COLLEEN Refund:Kids Luv PreSoccer 4-5yrs 40.00 40.00 94911 10/07/2004 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC Pro -Guard Gloves: TCSD 151.44 151.44 94912 10/07/2004 000339 WEST PUBLISHING CORP Aug -Sept City Hall Judicial Updates 258.60 258.60 94913 10/07/2004 008138 WILLIAMS, LORENA Refund:Arts/Crafts-Childrens 5.00 Refund:Cooking-Amazing Chefs 5.00 Refund:Cooking-Amazing Chefs 5.00 Refund:Cooking-Kinder Kitchen 4.00 19.00 94914 10/07/2004 004829 WILSON GROUP LLC, THE Oct State lobbyist svcs for City issues 3,500.00 3,500.00 94915 10/07/2004 005027 WYNDHAM HOTEL htl:CCAPA Conf:10/17-20/04 309.81 309.81 94916 10/07/2004 008148 YBARRA, JOCELYN Refund:Music-Instant Piano 20.00 20.00 94917 10/07/2004 008021 YOUNG, DENNIS BRIAN Square dance caller: MPSC 100.00 100.00 94918 10/07/2004 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION Paramedic equipment supplies 477.91 Credit: Items Returned -402.90 75.01 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 512,166.11 Page:11 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94919 10/14/2004 001985 A E P (ASSOC OF ENVIRO Membership Debbie Ubnoske 100.00 100.00 94920 10/14/2004 008252 A G E JAPAN Depst transfer:Sister City tour guide svcs 13,520.00 13,520.00 94921 10/14/2004 001700 A PLUS TEACHING MATERIALS CRC Tiny Tots Prgm Supplies 46.24 46.24 94922 10/14/2004 007598 ABCO 100 Travelers Insurance 1119 Sister City 170.85 170.85 94923 10/14/2004 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES Sept DUI Blood Draw/Suspect Kit 717.50 717.50 94924 10/14/2004 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCI Publications:Comm Plan/Mstr Mig Mg 155.08 155.08 94925 10/14/2004 004446 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL Mb: Greg Butler 32095 230.00 230.00 94926 10/14/2004 002696 ANIMAL AMBASSADORS, INC 10/8/04 Family Fun Night @ CRC 325.00 325.00 94927 10/14/2004 008249 ANTHONY, STEVEN & YVETTE Refund: Eng Depst: PM31144 Par 1 995.00 995.00 94928 10/14/2004 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. Temp help PPE 9/25 Wills 697.60 Temp help PPE 9/25 Lee 528.00 1,225.60 94929 10/14/2004 008062 ARROW STAFF RESOURCES, 1 Temp help PPE 10/03 Grove/Heer 3,383.56 3,383.56 94930 10/14/2004 000475 B N I PUBLICATIONS INC Books:Standard Plans/99 Supplement 133.81 133.81 94931 10/14/2004 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV A.C. Saw cutting for PW Mntc Crew 6,825.00 6,825.00 94932 10/14/2004 008167 BULL OUTDOOR PRODUCTS I Fire Sin 84 BBQ replacement 1,900.00 1,900.00 94933 10/14/2004 008250 BURCH, SANDY Refund: Admin Cite 0001 & 0003 100.00 100.00 94934 10/14/2004 003138 CAL MAT PW patch truck materials 1,150.03 1,150.03 94935 10/14/2004 005384 CALIF BAGEL BAKERY & DELI Refreshments: Council closed session 181.02 181.02 94936 10/14/2004 004241 CALIF DEPT OF ARCHITECT Accessibility tmg:Elmo:11/9-10 350.00 350.00 Page:t apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description 94937 10/14/2004 004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT June 04 DUI screening July 03 DUI screening Jan 04 DUI screening Nov 03 DUI screening Sept 03 DUI screening April 04 DUI screening Jan 04 DUI screening May 04 DUI screening Oct 03 DUI screening Feb 04 DUI screening Oct 03 Fingerprinting svcs:Police Sept 03 DUI screening 94938 10/14/2004 001267 CALIF DEPT OF MOTOR Commercial Driver Test:R.Gilliland 94939 10/14/2004 006091 CALIF YOUTH KARATE ALL ST Refund:Room Rental 0 CRC 94940 10/14/2004 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY Helium tanks refill:TCSD 94941 10/14/2004 002534 CATERERS CAFE Sister City Student Breakfast Refreshments: Sparks of Love Mtg 94942 10/14/2004 005417 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY First Aid supplies:PW Yard & Vehicles Bldg & Safety vehicle First Aid Kits 94943 10/14/2004 006957 CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ASS Trff Comm Wrkshp: 1 1/6:Jacobs 94944 10/14/2004 008251 CLAUSE, SONJA 94945 10/14/2004 008253 COLBERT, TIM 94946 10/14/2004 001193 COMP U S A INC 94947 10/14/2004 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE TCSD instructor earnings Refund: Picnic Shelter Deposit Computer supplies: 4/8-port Switch Computer supplies:2/8-port Swtch Credit: Returned 1GB USB Fish Drive Chamber TV Re -broadcasting equip 94948 10/14/2004 006954 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVA City Hall plumbing repairs 94949 10/14/2004 003625 DAVIS, JOHN TCSD instructor earnings 94950 10/14/2004 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL C.Museum portable restroom rental Amount Paid 2,940.00 2,135.00 1,750.00 1,610.00 1,610.00 1,435.00 1,365.00 1,050.00 945.00 665.00 373.00 70.00 64.00 100.00 28.40 139.69 89.45 130.84 125.83 80.00 189.00 30.00 199.30 102.34 -237.04 323.23 147.27 400.00 114.95 Check Total 15,948.00 64.00 100.00 28.40 229.14 256.67 80.00 189.00 30.00 64.60 323.23 147.27 400.00 114.95 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Checks Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94951 10/14/2004 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI Fuel for city vehicles: Land Devel 835.92 Fuel for city vehicles: PW Mntc 791.51 Fuel for city vehicles: B&S 530.04 Fuel for city vehicles: Planning 398.34 Fuel for city vehicles: CIP PW 279.05 Fuel for city vehicles: PW Trffc 198.81 Fuel for city vehicles: Code Enforce 64.68 Fuel for city vehicles:City Van 55.33 3,153.68 94952 10/14/2004 008248 FAMILY HOPE Refund: Security Depst: Picnic Shelter 100.00 100.00 94953 10/14/2004 000478 FAST SIGNS Halloween Directional sign:TCSD 27.67 27.67 94954 10/14/2004 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC Express mail services 90.78 90.78 94955 10/14/2004 007663 FEINBERG, CAROLE Refund: Fun -Fit -Fab 22.00 22.00 94956 10/14/2004 007238 FILIPINO CHURCH COMM- Refund: Security Depst CRC 100.00 100.00 94957 10/14/2004 007515 FIRERESCUE Fire Rescue CIA 1/12-14:Deyo 459.00 459.00 94958 10/14/2004 004239 FISHER SEHGAL YANEZ INC Sept Architectural svcs:Old Twn theater 207.89 207.89 94959 10/14/2004 008247 GEDDIE, DYANA Refund:Creative Beg Mom & Me 35.00 35.00 94960 10/14/2004 002528 GLASS BLASTERS INC New employees engraved coffee mug 84.05 84.05 94961 10/14/2004 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS Office Supplies:Planning 889.57 Office supplies: Public Works 600.76 Office Supplies: Bldg & Safety 573.60 Office Supplies: Info System 517.82 Office Supplies: TCSD 392.05 Office Supplies: HR 351.16 Office Supplies: City Clerk 220.89 Office Supplies: City Mgr 121.64 Office Supplies: Finance 41.10 Office Supplies: Central Svcs 32.70 3,741.29 94962 10/14/2004 005947 GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT Express Mail Service: Fire Prev. 37.58 37.58 94963 10/14/2004 008246 GREINER-ROSALES, KIMBERL Refund:Sports:BB Fundamentals 40.00 40.00 Page3 apChkLst 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 4 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94964 10/14/2004 008245 GROVE, JEFF Reimb: Sic" Wtr Reg Tmg:UCR 129.00 129.00 94965 10/14/2004 005311 H2O CERTIFIED POOL WATER Sept 04 CRC/TES pool mntc/supplies 2,154.71 2,154.71 94966 10/14/2004 000378 HAFELI, THOMAS Microsoft Active Directory:10/4-8 170.00 170.00 94967 10/14/2004 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC Hardware supplies: TCSD 577.80 Hardware supplies: PW Str Mntc 273.89 Hardware supplies: TCSD/CRC 233.20 Hardware supplies: C.Museum 170.48 Hardware supplies: Aquatics 87.69 Hardware supplies: Old Twn 86.11 Hardware supplies:T.Museum 61.68 Hardware supplies: TCC 48.08 Hardware supplies: Sr Ctr 23.00 Hardware supplies: Bldg & Safety 15.04 Hardware supplies: PW inspectors 14.54 Invoice wasn't calculated correctly. 10.77 1,602.28 94968 10/14/2004 008244 HARVEY, SCOTT Employee Computer Purchase Prgm 1,077.49 1,077.49 94969 10/14/2004 006250 HAZ MAT TRANS INC Asbestos/Lead surveys:RDA 4,200.00 4,200.00 94970 10/14/2004 003198 HOME DEPOT, THE Res impr prgm: Albert Garcia 57.90 57.90 94971 10/14/2004 002166 INGRAM ELECTRIC Repair track lighting 0 T. Museum 110.00 Wtr heater elect repair: Fire Stn 84 60.00 170.00 94972 10/14/2004 003266 IRON MOUNTAIN OFFSITE Records mgmt microfilm storage unit 422.00 422.00 94973 10/14/2004 005065 K M E FIRE APPARATUS Supplies for Paramedic squad 92.10 92.10 94974 10/14/2004 008057 KHATCHATURIAN, CHRISTINA Refund: Creative Beg Mom & Me 60.00 60.00 94975 10/14/2004 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS INC pH indicator supplies: Pool Mntc 31.79 31.79 94976 10/14/2004 007188 LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP. Supplies for Paramedic squad 269.38 269.38 94977 10/14/2004 003286 LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERVICE Sept svcs-library system agnnnt 11,392.11 Sept svos-library system agmmt 1,090.08 12,482.19 PageA apChkLst 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94978 10/14/2004 000996 LOCAL GOVERNMENT PUBLIC Publications:CA Land Use Updates 119.56 119.56 94979 10/14/2004 006897 LORY, SUSAN, J. TCSD instructor earnings 367.50 TCSD instructor earnings 364.00 TCSD instructor earnings 294.00 TCSD instructor earnings 238.00 TCSD instructor earnings 196.00 TCSD instructor earnings 143.50 1,603.00 94980 10/14/2004 004697 LOW ES HIW INC Pliers & caution tape: Fire Stn 92 64.48 64.48 94981 10/14/2004 004772 MAACO AUTO PAINTING & BOD Repair TCSD S-10 truck 2,610.31 2,610.31 94982 10/14/2004 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS Var street signs for PW mntc 557.82 557.82 94983 10/14/2004 004141 MAINTEX INC custodial supplies: var parks 356.44 356.44 94984 10/14/2004 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASSN Sep softball umpire svcs 3,630.00 3,630.00 94985 10/14/2004 002693 MATROS, ANDREA TCSD Instructor Earnings 250.80 250.80 94986 10/14/2004 008254 MCCONNAUGHEY, DENISE Refund:Sec. Deposit:10/09 CRC 100.00 100.00 94987 10/14/2004 008242 MEDEIROS, MICHELLE Mus.1rolerance:10/27:T.Y.A. team 93.00 93.00 94988 10/14/2004 007210 MIDORI GARDENS mainline repairs: Veterans Park 275.16 275.16 94989 10/14/2004 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS business cards: DeLoss/Hatfield 85.66 business cards: S. Cammarota 42.83 128.49 94990 10/14/2004 001868 MIYAMOTO-JURKOSKY, SUSAN TCSD Instructor Earnings 180.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 164.57 TCSD Instructor Earnings 137.20 481.77 94991 10/14/2004 004128 MORAMARCO, ANTHONY J. TCSD Instructor Earnings 384.00 384.00 94992 10/14/2004 002257 MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAI drinking fountain parts: var. parks 921.57 921.57 94993 10/14/2004 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Sep public ntcs: City Clerk/Planning 892.32 892.32 Pages apChkLst 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 6 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 94994 10/14/2004 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 70.82 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 31.34 City Vehicle Repair/Maint Svcs 22.42 124.58 94995 10/14/2004 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES Sep Duck Pond water maint. svcs 1,196.80 1,196.80 94996 10/14/2004 008235 PARBALL CORPORATION Fire Rescue CIA 1/10-14 # J4ZCP 993.21 993.21 94997 10/14/2004 008235 PARBALL CORPORATION IWCE Conf:11/14-17:# L24CP 379.65 379.65 94998 10/14/2004 000680 PHOTO WORKS OF TEMECULA Sep film/photo developing:CIP/T.Mus. 32.81 32.81 94999 10/14/2004 007271 PINSON, JILL Refund:Creative Beg Mom & Me 80.00 80.00 95000 10/14/2004 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN Sept ads: CIP constr updates 707.25 707.25 95001 10/14/2004 005075 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPL uniforms/flr mat/towel rentals: City 1,131.27 1,131.27 95002 10/14/2004 000981 R H F INC repair/maint: Police radar equip. 135.77 135.77 95003 10/14/2004 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST Various Water Meters 6,491.40 Various Water Meters 1,063.05 Various Water Meters 69.19 7,623.64 95004 10/14/2004 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Dup. blueprints: W.C. Sports Complex 436.22 436.22 95005 10/14/2004 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING electrical supplies: CRC 190.39 electrical supplies: Senior Center 176.45 electrical supplies: CRC 122.84 electrical supplies: Senior Center 61.42 electrical supplies: TCC 61.42 612.52 95006 10/14/2004 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE debris/trash removal:City R-O-W's 5,000.00 5,000.00 95007 10/14/2004 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI propane gas: PW Maint Div 16.51 16.51 95008 10/14/2004 006483 RICHARDS, TYREASHA I. TCSD Instructor Earnings 240.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 144.00 384.00 95009 10/14/2004 000352 RIVERSIDE CO ASSESSOR Assessor Maps: B&S dept 18.00 18.00 PageB apChkLst 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 7 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 95010 10/14/2004 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR Aug parking citation assessments 1,910.00 1,910.00 95011 10/14/2004 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & Ntc/Determination fee:Pln Ord. amend 64.00 64.00 95012 10/14/2004 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & Ntc/Exemption fee:Rnbw Cyn Rd 64.00 64.00 95013 10/14/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP 8/19-9/15/04:law enforcement 811,320.10 811,320.10 95014 10/14/2004 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP Arrest/Search/Seizure:10/18-22/04 100.00 100.00 95015 10/14/2004 000357 RIVERSIDE CO Geotechnical Rpt:Maint Fee Expan 1,224.00 1,224.00 95016 10/14/2004 005756 RIVERSIDE CO TREASURER prop. acquisition:apn xx049/xx071 2,891.35 2,891.35 95017 10/14/2004 008237 RIZZUTO, BONNIE J Refund: Sec. Deposit:10/3 CRC 100.00 100.00 95018 10/14/2004 008255 RUND, ROSEMERI Refund:Sec. Deposit:10/10 CRC 100.00 100.00 95019 10/14/2004 004830 SAN DIEGO HISTORICAL SOCI exhibit display photos: T. Museum 267.00 267.00 95020 10/14/2004 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Coffee supplies:City Hall/Maint Fac 56.42 Supplies for Family Fun Nights 27.26 83.68 95021 10/14/2004 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Oct 2-02-351-5281 CRC 7,488.21 Oct 2-10-331-1353 Fire Stn 84 1,227.83 8,716.04 95022 10/14/2004 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST pest control svcs: City Hall 56.00 56.00 95023 10/14/2004 007851 SOUTHCOAST HEATING & AIR HVAC repairs @ CRC 271.00 271.00 95024 10/14/2004 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET CL general maint svcs: City Hall 400.00 carpet cleaning 0 CRC 300.00 700.00 95025 10/14/2004 000305 TARGET STORE Summer Day Camp supplies 174.80 Summer Day Camp supplies 92.51 Summer Day Camp supplies 23.52 290.83 95026 10/14/2004 006465 TEMECULA AUTO REPAIR Fire vehicle maint Svcs 248.28 248.28 95027 10/14/2004 004443 TEMECULA LITTLE LEAGUE Refund: Snack bar key fee 200.00 200.00 Page:? apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 10/14/2004 3:42:04PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check R Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 95028 10/14/2004 006896 TEMECULA MUSIC ACADEMY I TCSD Instructor Earnings 72.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 72.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 72.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 72.00 288.00 95029 10/14/2004 004873 TEMECULA VALLEY HISTORI Refund:Sec. Deposit:TCC 95.00 95.00 95030 10/14/2004 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & SU var parks irrigation supplies 715.73 Credit: finance chrg -4.10 711.63 95031 10/14/2004 008238 TIEMENS, MYRON F Refund:Sec. Deposit/Room Rental 150.00 150.00 95032 10/14/2004 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE Toll roads usage 51.10 51.10 95033 10/14/2004 004913 TOP DAWG TERMITE COMPAN pest control ® Senior Center 5,950.00 5,950.00 95034 10/14/2004 003228 U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL AS Trustee/Arbitrage fees: Wolf Crk 7,307.83 Trustee/Arbitrage fees: Crowns Hill 6,743.31 14,061.14 95035 10/14/2004 007766 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALE Oct Udrgmd svcs alert tickets:PW 78.40 78.40 95036 10/14/2004 004261 VERIZON Sept var. phones general usage 207.87 Sep xoa-5509 general usage 147.54 Sep :eoc-1999 general usage 37.40 Sep �-0049 general usage 30.93 Sep )=-2629 Naggar 28.40 452.14 95037 10/14/2004 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Internet svcs/EOC backup 0 Stn 84 72.35 72.35 95038 10/14/2004 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC Sep Citywide tree trimming maint 803.50 Aug Citywide tree/stump removal 696.00 1,499.50 95039 10/14/2004 000621 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNC Gen. Assembly Mtg:M.Naggar:6/24 55.00 55.00 95040 10/14/2004 007690 Y3K GRAFIX INC Decal graphics art/cart 4,323.50 Credit: Not per quotelagreement -215.50 4,108.00 95041 10/14/2004 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION defibrillator paddles for medic engine 501.80 501.80 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 968,513.02 PageB ITEM 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER 41 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Community Service Funding Program PREPARED BY: Denise Caravelli, Administrative Assistant RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and approve the 2004-05 Community Service Funding Program grants perthe attached table outlining the committee's recommendations of $127,300 to 41 organizations. BACKGROUND: The City Council appointed Councilman Jeff Stone and Mayor Mike Naggar to the 2004-05 Community Service Funding Program Ad Hoc Committee to allocate grant funds to non-profit organizations that provide community services to the citizens of Temecula. Community Service Funding Program applications were mailed to approximately 80 non-profit organizations in the Temecula Valley area. Applications were sent to community -based organizations that were in the City's database from the last distribution period as well as those organizations that called or stopped by City Hall requesting an application. In addition to the mailing, advertisements were placed in the local newspapers and the application and guidelines were posted on the City's web site. A total of 55 organizations submitted applications requesting $237,444 in grant funding. The committee, along with staff members, reviewed the requests for funding based on criteria previously adopted by the entire Council. After review and discussion, the committee recommends 41 of the 55 organizations receive grants as outlined on the attached schedule, totaling $127,300. Jeff Stone abstained from voting on two organizations, Michelle's Place and Temecula Senior Center and Food Bank due to a potential conflict of interest. Mike Naggar abstained from voting on Music Heritage due to a potential conflict of interest. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the FY 2004-05 CSF line item budget which includes funding of $120,000 and $10,000 for contingency for a total of $130,000. Attachments: Community Service Funding Program Committee Recommendation Schedule 0 u '0 d c_ v C 0 •- y Z d d o Q ty� ¢ m U c o a � a c y Z p LL C L U m 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O N N N N O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N N N N A E e ;V E 'o E Iti en » en en ui w e> en en w w en us w en w w ui of of of » en en en en w en en �» w w en ui w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 N 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O O N O I� O O O O O O O G O !� O O O O O O O M N O O O N O 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N h N m N N m N N N N N 0 ..N7:IC Hi N fA f9 f9 M f9 fA f9 iA e9 f9 to fA fA df f9 f9 V! f9 f9 t9 fA (A fA di fA M f9 F9 f9 f9 !9 M !9 O 0 0 0 O 0 O a 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N O O O O O N O O O O O O O N N N m 0' Hf N 43 f9 f9 t9 Hf f9 to t9 f9 H fA fA f9 f9 f9 H H (A M M N f9 w f k9 H W H w fq H w w W a OI C 3 O N d N G y n t L2 ESL m 0: m c o n n c a 0 L a m m U m o m V s� j Vl v m o d '$ O ii O. n E 0 U 9 N W n E C=; L= m N 3 ::I 0 x O d .Q `o' c9=�Q C o.cuc. cxwd o ¢ 0 m ° L' ° p m m Q d mpL O N Uw V 0 n H o°E LE`UZ Zm O m °° E c 0 a L° c vLuU Q � m E o c 2 W m d v U a LL udi a `p a u a 55 d>> .y N 0 C C m d p 0 N m m d dt C d J L U m ry m - O J~> T .. C 0 o fq U? to Q L d E C m 2 0 v_ m m m '.:o u u Ol _ T rn n c� E o m t r M L° m y E R E� E¢ '� r E t Z., m m m° r m m¢ 0 W a O' 0 m m mu ¢ m w m 3 2 9 C)= ci i m 3 w i ci m d y C a y � v 0 C 0 m O q d Ud > > 2 > ° O V LJ 9' ° d 000 O O O Y E E an d OE O a N m F i2a f O °vO fd 12 m m L L t m L UEry ry cN3Edd d O LL. m m m o 0 .mdm, O aO J o Om C i- Ud nm tU L0N 0ZLd` m O m d cE O a �HCC yU i d m w y : d E E o 1 L E s S E ' Jmm O LL o 0 o 0 00 N N 0 0 _ O EL O O () Um -:QcaOp CNU° UO jUC OO JU J O wN d N O W C N (i ! dS C 'E p N° 'C dmC 0 'UCumCm 'wCCV a UTC ma a.0J m W7. EUEMU 3 p d d T CEad d u ' LQd E E E E o 0 0 0 m = c 12 2 op 'q0 m o w Q tl m Zd w w m F- FQ -.0. ar•N M�f v7 !O t`00 CAO NM �'Y!t0 !�00AO N Met'K1 t0 t-- CO OfOe-NM V.L ¢ 2 �a-a-��et�r-e^�NN N N N N NNN N.MM MMMM N d O Z r a m � O O ,E ,E N a Q - $ o U � o m m in $ v m 4: 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M . C 'N O O N O O N N N N N N N N O N B C U E D S 4: - {g fA t9 b9 f9 f9 e9 di N f9 f9 N N N N N N N N N N hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 O 0 p 0 p 0 O 0 p 0 0 O 0 0 p 0 p 0 0 O 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 0 O 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 a. O O N O M O N O f7 N_ O N O Ul N N N N 0 N N N N N N N N N N N O O W N � fA fA fA t9 H3 b9 N bf M fA N N N N N N N N N M O p O p 0 O N 0 O O 0 O O 0 O N 0 O N O O GD O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N V W H t9 CC N E 3 v a A. mcx - C.. Q m V N c \ a N m J N N '� O O C N N~ L O N le d c 6 W f 6 N Lll y C C p.. C C > O> 6 O d d a LO N a J E O pp C 6 LL a V% Q O U 0 N W 9 O C O T C O •° 4S d a C p r° 10 - m ° N N ° c r O. u F o c (7 = z m - w U° 'o E °v W ¢c m o o o fn E w v Q L° �- 'o r o o 2° c� m` m 0:c9 w r w L° F o N '0 30, 0 0 b U m y C T d c y O1 N a O IL O 2L USN N N O N O A?U 2 d N p O q C a O (9 O V O N (n L N ° o o �? 3 v u m E c c o U Q o c) `m c7 m 0 of x w x � x m i o o. o n E F ° 3 'o r N u, 3 N `o d C N N i% N N i% N N i% N 6 i N 7% N N i% N N i> N N 1% O S o 0 U U Q N N N > N > N N > N > N > m > N > u N > u N 9 u N > u N 9 u N > u t0 5 u° N > u o 2 y a o E u° 0 E E u° E S E o°° E E E m u E o E v E o E v E m E v E m E m E �n o m c� o. E m m v o v v v aEi C o 2MMM to I,- CO M c)d' O r q N 4 Cl) d'� V t0 a��1 f� co 01 �'tl>tl7 tfi tt>tlf tf! ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE_ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Resolution Denying Planning Application No. PA02-0717 A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Construction and Operation of a 45 Foot Tall Mono - Palm Wireless Telecommunications Facility with Four Outdoor Equipment Cabinets Proposed at 31575 Enfield Lane, Generally Located on the South Side of Enfield Lane, Approximately 3,200 Feet East of Riverton Drive (Cingular Wireless, Applicant; Valesta Ayer, Appellant) PREPARED BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717—A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 45 FOOT TALL MONO -PALM WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITH FOUR OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT CABINETS PROPOSED AT 31575 ENFIELD LANE, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ENFIELD LANE, APPROXIMATELY 3,200 FEET EAST OF RIVERTON LANE (APN 957-170-012), AND DENYING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717 BACKGROUND: On October 12, 2004, the City Council held a hearing to consider Planning Application No. PA02-0717 which is for a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the construction and operation of a 45 foot tall mono -palm wireless telecommunications facility with four outdoor equipment cabinets proposed at 31575 Enfield Lane. The proposed resolution sets for the reasons for the denial as expressed by the City Council at the public hearing. R:/Agenda ReportsMin:less Telecommunications Facility 10 26 1 FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 04- R:/Agenda ReportsMireless Telecommunications Facility 1026 2 RESOLUTION NO. 04-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717 — A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 45 FOOT TALL MONO - PALM WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITH FOUR OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT CABINETS PROPOSED AT 31575 ENFIELD LANE, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ENFIELD LANE, APPROXIMATELY 3,200 FEET EAST OF RIVERTON LANE (APN 957-170-012), AND DENYING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0717. WHEREAS, Doug Kearney, representing Cingular Wireless (collectively the "Applicant"), filed Planning Application No. PA02-0717, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; and WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA02-0717, seeking both a Conditional Use Permit and a Development Plan approval (hereafter, the "Proposed Project"), was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by Federal, State and local law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on April 7, 2004 and April 21, 2004 to consider the Proposed Project, at which time the interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support of or in opposition to this matter; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after consideration of the staff report, conditions of approval, and public testimony, the Planning Commission adopted PC -Resolution No. 2004-018 on April 21, 2004 thereby approving Planning Application No. PA02-0717 subject to certain conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2004, Ms. Valestra Ayer (the "Appellant") filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Planning Application No. PA02-0717 based on 1) alleged insufficiency of the documentation prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and specifically in the areas of land use, aesthetics, noise, air, cumulative impacts, and alternatives analysis; 2) a lack of master planning for location of wireless telecommunications facilities in the City of Temecula; 3) the Proposed Project's failure to adhere to the City's Development Code requirements; and 4) facility impacts on hearing aids and pacemakers; and, WHEREAS, on October 12, 2004, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal, and during that public hearing and during the deliberations that ensued, the City Council considered the staff report, conditions of approval, Planning Commission minutes, testimony and correspondence from the Appellant, the Applicant and the public, and the complete public record. R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, FIND, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings — Conditional Use Permit. The City Council, in accordance with Section 17.04.010.E of the Temecula Municipal Code ("TMC"), hereby finds as follows: A. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility is not consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility is not consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the Development Code because the proposal is located in an area of residential development, is within approximately 325 feet of residential subdivision development and will have a significant impact on the neighboring residences because of the proximity and the highly visible location of the proposed wireless facility. The proposed facility does not advance, and is inconsistent with, the City of Temecula's Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance in that: 1) The facility does not protect the health, safety or welfare of the citizens of Temecula because of the significant aesthetic impacts the proposed facility would have on the residences that are as close as 325 feet from the proposed facility. TMC Sec. 17.40.010(A). The potential for significant aesthetic impacts has been documented with substantial evidence in the form of photographs and photo -simulations of the Proposed Project, as well as environmental analyses submitted on behalf of the Appellant at both the Planning Commission and the City Council hearings. 2) The facility does not protect the visual character of the city from potential adverse effects of telecommunication facility development and installation by maintaining architectural and structural integrity and preventing unsightly facilities because the proposed facility is not properly integrated into the site and neighborhood in which it is proposed. TMC Sec. 17.40.010(B). The lack of integration is demonstrated by the photographs and photo - simulations of the Proposed Project, as well as environmental analyses submitted on behalf of the Appellant at both the Planning Commission and the City Council hearings. 3) The proposed facility does not promote the planned and managed development of telecommunications infrastructure due to the inadequate study of alternative "technically feasible" locations. TMC Sec. 17.40.010(G). The Applicant has not demonstrated comprehensive planning of facilities within the City, and piecemeal proposals that are not related to future facility needs to achieve the services desired by the provider prevent the City from planning and managing the locations of such facilities to minimize the visual and other impacts generated by such wireless facilities. The absence of a Citywide master plan undermines TMC Sec. 17.40.010(G), and renders the application inconsistent with the TMC. 4) The proposed facility does not encourage co -location because the Applicant failed to demonstrate adequate consideration of co -location options that are technically feasible. TMC Sec. 17.40.010(L). Instead, the Applicant considered only three other sites that it found to be technically infeasible, thereby failing to provide other feasible options for the City's consideration. The Applicant identified one technically feasible location, but that location was in R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- 2 a residential subdivision, and the Applicant could not identify a property owner willing to permit construction of the facility on their land. 5) The alternatives analysis completed by the Applicant identified three technically infeasible alternatives, and one technically feasible alternative but which was not practically feasible because of its location in a single family residential neighborhood. Therefore, the Applicant's alternative site analysis failed to meet the requirement that "[t]he analysis shall identify all reasonable, technically feasible, alternative locations and/or facilities which could provide the proposed telecommunication service." TMC Sec. 17.40.030(A)(2). Further, the Applicant failed to "explain the rationale for selection of the proposed site in view of the relative merits of any of the feasible alternatives," and this failure undermines the intent of the City's ordinance "to present alternative strategies which would minimize the number, size and adverse environmental impacts" of wireless facilities. Id. The analysis provided by the Applicant is insufficient. Although the analysis asserts that the alternative sites are inadequate because of coverage objectives, that conclusion is not supported by technical information and analyses sufficient to support selection of the proposed site "in view of the relative merits of any of the feasible alternatives" as required by the TMC. Additionally, the Applicant provided inconsistent information during the proceedings on the proposed wireless facility. First, the Applicant stated that a 56-foot facility was the minimum necessary "to achieve the technical coverage necessary to send and receive signals...." (April 7, 2004 Planning Commission Staff Report at p. 3.) The Applicant also stated in its February 25, 2004 submittal to the City that "the site was tested at 45 feet and failed the requirements needed by [the Cingular Wireless] Radio Frequency Engineer." (SBA Network Services "Proposed Cell Site" information submitted February 25, 2004, at p. 3.) At the Planning Commission hearing on April 7, 2004, the Applicant stated that if the proposed 50 foot tower were lowered, "Cingular's coverage in the area would shrink and would, in effect, raise the need for another facility." (April 7, 2004 Planning Commission minutes at p. 12.) However, the Applicant never considered alternatives consisting of multiple less obtrusive facilities to attain its coverage goals rather than trying to resolve all of its deficiencies with one facility. At the appeal hearing before the City Council, the representative for Cingular stated that a height of 39 feet to the antenna panels would improve reception in the area, but did not meet Cingular's "goal." Based on inconsistent information provided by the Applicant, it is unclear what other alternatives, including alternatives with multiple smaller facilities, may be available that would result in less environmental impacts. 6) Section 17.40.110 of the Development Code requires all wireless telecommunication facilities to be located so as to minimize their visibility and the number of separate and distinct facilities. As the photo simulations provided by the Applicant and by the Appellant demonstrate, and according to testimony provided at both the Planning Commission and the City Council hearing, the Proposed Project does not minimize its visibility to the surrounding residential areas. Further, the facility is proposed on a site that is not already developed with telecommunication facilities, and therefore, the proposed facility falls within the TMC prohibition that states "[n]o telecommunication facility or antenna that is readily visible from off -site shall be installed on a site that is not already developed with telecommunication facilities ... unless it blends with the surrounding existing natural and man-made environment in such a manner so as to be effectively unnoticeable...." TMC Section 17.40.110(A). The photographs, photo -simulations, and public testimony provide substantial evidence that the proposed facility will be quite noticeable in the neighborhood. Therefore the Proposed Project is inconsistent with this code requirement. Additionally, the Applicant has made no showing that there is a clear need for this facility in this location, and that co -location is an infeasible alternative. (Id.) R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- 3 7) The facility interrupts the appearance of a natural ridge area based on the photo simulations presented by the Applicant and the Appellant. Although the site elevation does not exceed 1350 feet above mean sea level and therefore is not subject to the provisions of TMC Section 17340.110(E), the proposed facility has a significant visual impact based on the site topography, the prominence of the facility in the area in which it is proposed, and the projection over the readily visible ridgeline. 8) Section 17.40.120 of the TMC requires all wireless telecommunication facilities to be designed and blended into the surrounding environment to the greatest extent feasible. The Proposed Project will not be substantially blended into the surrounding environment, because of the prominent visibility of the location in which it is proposed, the residential neighborhoods surrounding the site, and the design of the facility. 9) Section 17.40.200 of the TMC requires visual compatibility between a proposed wireless telecommunication facility and the surroundings. The proposed facility is not located, designed or screened sufficiently to blend with the existing surroundings, and as such, fails to reduce visual impacts. Photo documentation and photo -simulations provide evidence to support this conclusion. 10) Section 17.40.140.E of the Development Code requires facilities that are not proposed to be co -located with another telecommunication facility or antenna to provide a written explanation why the subject facility is not a candidate for co -location. The Applicant has asserted that co -location is not feasible in this situation, but has failed to present any technical evidence in support of its assertion. B. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility is not compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, building, and structures and the proposed conditional use has the potential to adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. 1) 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 because the Proposed Project is in close proximity to existing single-family dwellings. 2) The Proposed Project is not compatible with the neighboring residences and substantially alters the character of the residential area. The photo simulations provided by the Applicant and the Appellant demonstrate that the proposed facility does not minimize its visibility to the surrounding residential areas. The Proposed Project will have detrimental aesthetic impacts on the neighborhood, and the proposed monopole does not blend into the site aesthetics. C. The site for the proposed wireless telecommunications facility is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, 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. 1) The Proposed Project meets the specific standards of the Very Low Residential zoning district, and the site is of adequate size to theoretically accommodate the development features required by the TMC, however, for the reasons stated in the previous sections of this Resolution, the City Council finds that the Proposed Project is not adequately integrated with the R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- 4 uses in the neighborhood 2) The private yard areas of adjacent and nearby residences are also sensitive viewsheds in assessing land use compatibility, and the Proposed Project is inconsistent with the character of the surrounding existing residential units. The Applicant has failed to provide acceptable technical evidence showing that the proposed site is the only technically feasible location for this facility. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. The nature of the proposed conditional use is detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community because the proposed site is immediately adjacent to existing single-family dwellings. The Proposed Project will create a visual blight and will detract from the neighborhood character of the area because of the visibility of the structure from both public rights -of -way and private property. E. The decision to deny the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. As set forth in the above findings, the decision to uphold the Appellant's appeal of the Planning Commission decision and the decision to deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the City Council, Planning Commission and as presented in the staff reports, documentation submitted by and on behalf of the Appellant, and testimony provided at the public hearings held on this matter. Section 3. Findings — Development Plan. The City Council, in accordance with Section 17.05.010.F of the TMC, hereby finds as follows: A. The proposed use is not in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city, since the Proposed Project is not consistent with the sections of the Development Code. The specific inconsistencies with the TMC are set forth in paragraph A of Section 2 of this Resolution, and those inconsistencies apply equally to the Development Plan finding requirements as they do to the Conditional Use Permit findings. B. The overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare, since the proposed site is immediately adjacent to existing single-family dwellings in the area. The Proposed Project will create a visual blight and will detract from the neighborhood character of the area because of the proposed design, when other alternatives to address these concerns are available. Section 4. Environmental Compliance. The wireless facility, as proposed, has the potential to result in significant adverse impacts in the areas of land use and aesthetics that have not been adequately mitigated. These potential impacts result from the proximity of the facility to residential areas, the failure to adequately analyze other less impactful alternative locations, designs and multi -facility options to provide service to the areas, and the Applicant has not provided sufficient information to demonstrate that there is no potential for such impacts to occur. Further, impacts to views from private residences, based on the photo simulations, photographic evidence provided by the Appellant, environmental documentation submitted by R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- the Appellant to the Planning Commission and the City Council, and testimony at public hearings, constitute substantial evidence of potential aesthetic and land use impacts resulting from the Proposed Project. Regardless of the potentially significant impacts associated with the Proposed Project, no CEQA determination must be made because of denial of the Proposed Project. Section 5. Denial Does Not Prohibit Provision of Personal Wireless Services. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial coverage existing in the area to be served by the Proposed Project, and due to the presence of other service providers in the area and the region, denial of the Proposed Project would neither prohibit nor have the effect of prohibiting provision of personal wireless service. Section 6. Grant of Appeal and Denial of Application. Based upon the findings set forth in this Resolution, the City Council hereby grants the appeal of Valesta Ayer and denies Planning Application No. PA02-0717. Section 7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula City Council this 26'h day of October, 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, California, 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 thereof held on the 26`h day of October, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- ITEM 6 F-119a•L CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FII CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Resolution adopting a penalty schedule for the Community Standards Preservation Ordinance PREPARED BY: Stephen Brown, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A PENALTY SCHEDULE IN SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS PRESERVATION ORDINANCE BACKGROUND: The City Council approved the introduction and first reading of the Community Standards Preservation Ordinance on September 28, 2004. Section 1.24.050 (d) gives the City Manager the authority to establish a penalty schedule to use as a guideline in determining the amount of civil penalties to be assessed in each individual case. The fines can total up to $2,500 per violation, per day, with an annual maximum of $100,000.00 of fines. This penalty schedule is intended to be substantial enough to induce voluntary compliance without requiring penalties or later judicial involvement. FISCAL IMPACT: None: The Ordinance allows the imposition of any and all reasonable administrative costs to cover any scheduling or staff and consultant time. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 04- Attachment No. 1 Penalty Schedule C:\Documents and Settings\Michaela.Ballreich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet F11es\0LK2FA\Pena1ty sch CC stfrpt 10-26-04.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A PENALTY SCHEDULE IN SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS PRESERVATION ORDINANCE Whereas, the City Council of the City of Temecula amended title 1 of the Temecula Municipal Code by adding a new chapter 1.24 known as the Community Standards Preservation Ordinance; Whereas, said Ordinance permits the City to establish a penalty schedule to use as a guideline in determining the amount of civil penalties to be assessed in each case; Whereas, the penalty schedule is intended to be substantial enough to induce voluntary compliance without requiring later judicial involvement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council: Adopts the penalty schedule as set forth on Attachment 1 hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of October, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor RABROWNS\Code\Civil Penallies\Penalty Schedule 10-26-04 City Council Reso.doc ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 04- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\BROWNS\Code\Civil Penalties\Penalty Schedule 10-26-04 City Council Reso.doc Attachment No. 1 City of Temecula Penalty Schedule Infraction Misdemeanor Code Section Description Penalty 5.04.030A Business license certificate required 500 5.09 Adult business licenses 500 5.20 Outdoor Vendors 500 Title 18 Unauthorized grading 1,000 8.12.020 C Buildings or structures partially destroyed 500 8.12.020 (D) Failure to secure and maintain buildings 500 from public access 8.12.020 (E) Property to be maintained in good repair • 2nd offense 500 • 3rd offense 750 1,000 8.12.020 (H) Overgrown, dead, decaying, or hazardous vegetation 500 • 2"d offense 750 • 3`d offense 1,000 8.12.020 (J) Accumulation of trash and debris 500 • 2"d offense 750 • 3`d offense 1,000 8.12.020 (N) Construction equipment maintained in 500 (1) residential zone 8.12.020 (R) Repair or dismantle of vehicle 500 8.12.020 (S) Trash containers in view from public ROW 500 8.12.020 (T) Occupy vehicle or RV not in legal 500 campground 18.12.020 Property containing infestations 500 8.12.020 (W) Swimming pools, spas, ponds 500 • 2"d offense 750 • 3rd offense 1,000 8.12.020 (Y) Unlawful encroachment 500 8.20.410 (C) Trash containers placed 24 hours prior to 500 pick up and 12 hours after pick up 8.20.690 Unlawful dumping 500 R:\BROWNS\Code\Civil Penalties\City of Temecula Municipal Code Bail Schedule.doc City of Temecula Penalty Schedule Infraction Misdemeanor Code Section Description Penalty 8.28 Storm water management and discharge controls 1,000 8.32.020 Construction noise • 2nd offense • Subsequent offense 500 750 1,000 9.04 Adult materials 1,000 10.08.075 Illegal dumping 500 10.16.042 Oversized vehicles parked on public streets 500 10.16.050 Parking for certain purposes prohibited 500 10.16.130 Parking on private property w/o permission 500 10.16.260 Commercial vehicles prohibited from parking 500 15.04.020 Violations of the California Building Code 500 15.04.030 Violations of the California Mechanical Code 500 15.04.040 Violations of the California Plumbing Code 500 15.04.050 Violations of the California Electrical Code 500 15.04.060 Violations of the Uniform Administrative Code 500 15.04.070 Violations of the Uniform Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings 500 15.04.080 Violations of the Uniform Housing Code 500 California Fire Code 500 15.04.090 Undergrounding of electrical and telecommunications wires 500 5.22 Massage establishments 500 17.24.020 Off street parking and loading (RV's) • 2"d offense • 3`d offense 500 750 1,000 17.28 Sign standards • 2"d offense • 3`d offense 500 750 1,000 Unauthorized encroachments 500 R:\BROWNS\Code\Civil Penalties\City of Temecula Municipal Code Bail Schedule.doc City of Temecula Penalty Schedule Infraction Misdemeanor Code Section Description Penalty 6.02.020 Mandatory dog licensing and vaccination 500 6.02.120 Vicious dogs and cats — Stray and barking dogs 500 • 2nd offense 750 • 3`d offense 1,000 6.06.020 Duty to care for animals 500 6.08.140 Inhumane treatment and abandonment of 500 (A) animals Pursuant to TMC (section), all other Temecula City Code Infraction violations not listed herein 500 • 2nd offense 750 • 3`d offense 1,000 All other Temecula City Code misdemeanor violations note listed herein shall be 1,000 The fourth violation of the same Code infraction provisions constitutes a misdemeanor The City Attorney may upgrade to a misdemeanor prior to the fourth violation R:\BROWNS\Code\Civil Penalties\City of Temecula Municipal Code Bail Schedule.doc ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Grant Yates, Assistant to the City Manager DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Adoption of the Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) PREPARED BY: Ashley Jones, Management Assistant RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 04-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL DISASTER MITIGATION AND COST REDUCTION ACT OF 2000. BACKGROUND: Changes to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act have placed a new emphasis on hazard mitigation planning, primarily moving from post -disaster mitigation to pre -disaster planning, mitigation, and projects. As part of the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) 2000, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the Act requiring local government, state, and special jurisdictions to develop hazard mitigation plans. In order to qualify for any future hazard mitigation grant awards, each jurisdiction must prepare, and have approved by the state, a local multi -hazard mitigation plan by November 1, 2004. Under the terms of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, which seeks to reduce federal expenditures for catastrophic events, a county, city, tribe, or special district affected by a declared disaster (i.e. earthquake, flood, or wildfire) will still be able to receive emergency aid without having an approved plan in place. However, it would be ineligible for FEMA funds to support hazard -mitigation projects, such as elevating flood -prone homes or seismic retrofitting vulnerable structures. Additionally, local, county, city, tribe, or special district officials are being asked to formally recognize the plan as a demonstration of commitment to the process and formally adopt the plan when complete. A plan must include a discussion of the planning process, a risk assessment, a description of mitigation measures, a plan -review process outline and documentation that the plan has been adopted formally by the county, city, or special district. The State of California has required all counties, cities, special districts, and participating tribes to prepare mitigation strategies. These strategies were developed as a group by the participating agencies, which subsequently established an individual prioritization for each strategy. The Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is in two parts. Part 1 is an overview of all of the identified hazards in the county. Part I also includes specific mitigation strategies for the county. Part 11 covers the participating agencies. In Part II, each agency provided documentation of their specific hazards, prioritized mitigation strategies, and a specific mitigation effort. The Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been reviewed by the California Office of Emergency Services and additional information has been added to the plan, based on the State's review. The City of Temecula is within the Riverside County Operational Area and has assisted OES with the coordination and development of the Riverside County Operational Area Multi jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as it pertains to Temecula. As such, it is the recommendation of City staff that the City Council adopt the Riverside County Operational Area Multi -jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Part I and Part II — City of Temecula Submissions as attached to meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation and Cost Reduction Act of 2000. To view the Riverside County Operational Area Multi - jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in its entirety please go the to County of Riverside Office of Emergency Services website at www.rvcfire.org. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachment: Resolution 04-_ Riverside County Operational Area Multi -jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan — City of Temecula Submissions RESOLUTION No. 04 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL DISASTER MITIGATION AND COST REDUCTION ACT OF 2000. WHEREAS, President William J. Clinton signed H.R. 707, the Disaster Mitigation and Cost Reduction Act of 2000, into law on October 30,2000; and WHEREAS, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires all jurisdictions to be covered by a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to be eligible for Federal Emergency Management Agency post - disaster funds; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Operational Area has coordinated the development of the Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in association with all participating jurisdictions within Riverside County ; and WHEREAS, the California State Office of Emergency Services has reviewed the plan on behalf of the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula is within the Riverside County Operational Area; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula is concerned with about mitigating potential losses from natural disasters before they occur; and WHEREAS, the plan identifies potential hazards, potential losses and potential mitigation measures to limit losses; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has determined that it would be in the best interest of the community as a whole to adopt the Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as it pertains to the City of Temecula; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Temecula hereby adopt the attached 'Riverside County Operational Area Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Part I and Part II — City of Temecula Submissions" to meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation and Cost Reduction Act of 2000. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of October 2004. Mike Naggar, Mayor R:\ASHLEYS\Resolutions\Resolution- Adoption of the LHMP.doc ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 04- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of October, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\ASHLEYS\Resolutions\Resolution- Adoption of the LHMP.doc RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTI - JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION AGENCY INVENTORY City of Temecula HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SUMMARY WORKSHEET PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Agency/Jurisdiction: Temecula Type Agency/Jurisdiction: city Contact Person: Title: Assistant to the City Manager First Name: Grant I Last Name: I Yates Agency Address: Contact Phone E-mail Population Served Street: City: State: 43200 Business Park Dr Temecula I CA 909 506-5100 1 FAX 80,000 1 Square Miles Served Does your organization have a general plan? Does your organization have a safety component to the general plan? What year was your plan last updated? Does your organization have a disaster/emergency operations plan? What year was your plan last updated? Do you have a recovery annex or section in your plan? Do you have a terrorism/WMD annex or section in your plan? 909 694- 6499 11998 1 I YES I DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION HAVE: AIRPORT IN JURISDICTION AIRPORT NEXT TO JURISDICTION DAIRY INDUSTRY POULTRYINDUSTRY CROPS/ORCHARDS DAMS IN JURISDICTION DAMS NEXT TO JURISDICTION LAKE/RESERVOIR IN JURISDICTION LAKE/RESERVOIR NEAR JURISDICTION JURISDICTION IN FLOOD PLAIN CONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL UNCONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL EARTHQUAKE FAULTS IN JURISDICTION EARTHQUAKE FAULTS NEXT TO JURISDICTION MOBILE HOME PARKS NON -REINFORCED FREEWAY BRIDGES NON -REINFORCED BRIDGES BRIDGES IN FLOOD PLAIN BRIDGES OVER OR ACROSS RIVER/STREAM ROADWAY CROSSING RIVERISTREAM NON REINFORCED BUILDINGS FREEWAY/MAJOR HIGHWAY IN JURISDICTION FREEWAY/MAJOR HIGHWAY NEXT TO JURISDICTION FOREST AREA IN JURISDICTION FOREST AREA NEXT TO JURISDICTION WITHIN THE 50 MILES SAN ONOFRE EVACUATION ZONE MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINES IN JURISDICTION MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINES NEXT TO JURISDICTION RAILROAD TRACKS IN JURISDICTION RAILROAD TRACKS NEXT TO JURISDICTION HAZARDOUS. WASTE. FACtIdTW4IN, JURISDICTI= HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES NEXT TO JURISDICTION HAZARDOUS STORAGE FACILITIES IN JURISDICTION HAZARDOUS STORAGE FACILITIES NEXT TO JURISDICTION DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION OWN OR OPERATE A FACILITY IN A FLOOD PLAIN NEAR FLOOD PLAIN NEAR RAILROAD TRACKS NEAR A DAM UPSTREAM FROM A DAM DOWNSTREAM FROM A DAM DOWNSTREAM OF A LAKE DOWNSTREAM FROM A RESERVOIR NEAR A CONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL NEAR UNCONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON AN EARTHQUAKE FAULT NEAR AN EARTHQUAKE FAULT WITHIN THE 50 MILE SAN ONOFRE EVACUATION ZONE IN A FOREST AREA NEAR A FOREST AREA NEAR A MAJOR HIGHWAY A HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY NEAR A HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY A HAZARDOUS STORAGE FACILITY NEAR A HAZARDOUS STORAGE FACILITY NON.REWFORCED BUILDINGS A MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINE NEAR A MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINE DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION HAVE ANY LOCATIONS THAT: HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY EARTHQUAKE AND NOT REPAIRED HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY FLOOD HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY FLOOD MORE THAN ONCE HAVE.BEEN.DAMAGED BY FOREST FIRE HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY FOREST FIRE MORE THAN ONCE HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY A TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY A PIPELINE EVENT NO YES YES NO NO NO NO EMERGENCY OPERATIONS INFORMATION DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION HAVE AN EOC IS YOUR EOC LOCATED: IN A FLOOD PLAIN NEAR FLOOD PLAIN NEAR RAILROAD TRACKS NEAR A DAM UPSTREAM FROM A DAM DOWNSTREAM FROM A DAM DOWNSTREAM OF A LAKE DOWNSTREAM FROM A RESERVOIR NEAR A CONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL NEAR UNCONTROLLED FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON AN EARTHQUAKE FAULT NEAR AN EARTHQUAKE FAULT WITHIN THE 50 MILE SAN ONOFRE EVACUATION ZONE IN A FOREST AREA NEAR A FOREST AREA NEAR A MAJOR HIGHWAY A HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY NEAR A HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY A HAZARDOUS. STORAGE FACILITY NEAR A HAZARDOUS STORAGE FACILITY NON REINFORCED BUILDINGS A MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINE NEAR A MAJOR GAS/OIL PIPELINE OTHER FACILITY INFORMATION ARE THERE LOCATIONS WITHIN YOUR JURISDICTION THAT: COULD BE CONSIDERED A TERRORIST TARGET YES COULD BE CONSIGERED.A =-HAZARRQ-RISK Y Specific Hazards Summary Jurisdiction Hazard Type Hazard Name in Adjacent to Jurisdiction? Jurisdiction? Temecula Dam Diamond Valley Reservoir No Yes Temecula Fault Earthquake Fault Yes Yes Temecula Hazmat Manufacturing International Rectifier Yes No Facility Dams Summary Dam Name SKINNER VAIL ROBERT A CLEARW ELL SKINNER River OFFSTREAM TEMECULA TUCALOTA CREEK CREEK Nearest City TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA Height (feet) 44 152 109 Storage (acre-feet) 410 Year Built 1991 1949 1973 Drainage Area (Sq miles) 0 306 51 Hazard Type Significant High High Jurisdiction's Critical Facility Evaluation In December of 2001, the County of Riverside, in cooperation with local jurisdictions and agencies, developed an Emergency Response Database. This database was created so emergency planners could use the database as a planning tool as well as quickly determine the potential impact an event may have on a community, district, or specific site. During the creation of the Emergency Response Database, contributors were asked to identify critical facilities within their jurisdictions under the following sections: • Airports • Community Colleges • Dams • Schools - Preschools - Elementary Schools - Middle Schools - High Schools • Fire Stations • Government Buildings • Highways • Hospitals • Red Cross Shelters • Law Enforcement Facilities • Waste Management Sites • Reservoirs / Water tanks For each site, the user can identify at a minimum, the address of the site, the type of structure, and the type of occupancy and site contact information. During the creation of this Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, it was determined that the Emergency Response Database could provide vital information for this project and it would be utilized as the source for the identification of critical facilities within hazard areas. To ensure the most up-to-date data was used, all participants involved updated the critical facilities data at the beginning of the Hazard Mitigation Plan project. The critical facility list for this jurisdiction will be reviewed and updated regularly to ensure that the vulnerability of each location is evaluated on a regular basis. Because of the sensitive nature of the data obtained through this process, address information will not be included in the identification of critical facilities for the protection of all participants. SUMMARIZED HAZUS RESULTS Jurisdiction: City of Temecula Scenario: M6.7 on Southern Elsinore Fault Epicenter on Border of Murrieta/Temecula Structural Damage $24.477.20 Non -Structural Damage $105,263.77 Building Damage $129,740.93 Contents Damage $41,253.19 Inventory Loss $1,741.54 Relocation Cost $605.92 Income Loss $6,714.01 Rental Income Loss $7,577.22 Wage Loss $7,949.31 Total Loss $195,582.10 Medical Aid Treatment We Treatment SUMMARIZED HAZUS RESULTS Jurisdiction: City of Temecula Scenario: M6.7 on Southern Elsinore Fault Epicenter on Border of Murrieta/Temecula Medical Aid Hospital Treatment Life -Threatening Se Death i Ir la Medical Aid Hospital Treatment Aid Treatment J SUMMARIZED HAZUS RESULTS Jurisdiction: City of Temecula Scenario: M6.7 on Southern Elsinore Fault Epicenter on Border of Murrieta/Temecula Treatment Threatening Severity LOCAL JURISDICTION VULNERABILITY WORKSHEET NAME:('rgnt Yatac AGENCY- Tamecula DATE Juae_11, 2004 COUNTY LOCAL JURISDICTION HAZARD SEVERITY 0-4 PROBABILITY 0-4 SEVERITY 0-4 PROBABILITY 0-4 RANKING 1-19 EARTHQUAKE 4 3 4 3 2 WILDLAND FIRE 3 4 3 3 5 FLOOD OTHER NATURAL HAZARDS DROUGHT 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 11 LANDSLIDES 2 3 2 2 14 INSECT INFESTATION 3 4 2 2 17 EXTREME SUMMERNVINTER WEATHER 2 4 2 3 8 SEVERE WIND EVENT AGRICULTURAL DISEASE/CONTAMINATION 1 3 3 1 3 4 1 3 0 2 0 9 18 TERRORISM OTHER MAN-MADE PIPELINE 4 2 2 3 0 2 0 2 19 12 AQUEDUCT 2 3 2 2 13 TRANSPORTATION 2 4 3 4 1 BLACKOUTS 3 4 3 3 7 HAZMAT ACCIDENTS 3 3 3 3 6 NUCLEAR ACCIDENT 4 2 3 2 10 TERRORISM 4 2 4 2 4 CIVIL UNREST 2 2 2 2 15 JAIUPRISON EVENT OTHER - PLEASE DESCRIBE BELOW 1 2 1 1 16 LOCAL JURISDICTION MITIGATION GOALS Please evaluate the priority level for each listed mitigation activity identified below as it relates to your jurisdiction or facility. If you have any additional mitigation activities or recommendations, please list them at the end of this document. Place an H (High), M (Medium), L (Low), or N/A (Not Applicable) for your priority level for each activity in the box next to the activity. EARTHQUAKE H Aggressivepublic education campaign in light of predictions M Generate new literature for dissemination to: M 1 Government employees M 1 Businesses M ? Hotel/motel literature M ? Local radio stations for.education H ? Public education via utilities L ? Identify/create television documentary content H Improve the Emergency Alert System EAS H ? Consider integration with radio notification systems M ? Upgrade alerting and warning systems for hearing impaired M ? Training and maintenance H Procure earthquake -warning devices for critical facilities M Reinforce facifitft H Provide training to hospital staffs L Require earthquake gas shutoffs on remodels/new construction M Evaluate re -enforcing reservoir concrete bases M Evaluate EOCs for seismic stability H Install earthquake cutoffs at reservoirs M Install earthquake -warning devices at critical facilities H Develop a dam inundation plan for new Diamond Valley Reservoir H Earthquake retrofitting H ? Bridges/dams/pipelines M ? Government build in s/schools M ? Mobile home parks H Develop educational materials on structural reinforcement and home inspections H Ensure Uniform Building Code compliance H ? Update to current compliance when retrofitting M Insurance coverage on public facilities M _Funding for non-structural abatement (Earthquake kits, etc. L Pre - identify empty commercials ace for seismic re -location L Electrical co -generation facilities need retrofittin reinforcement Palm Springs, others? H Mapping of liquefaction zones H Incorporate County geologist data into planning M Backu water supplies for hospitals H Evaluate pipeline seismic resilient M Pre -positioning of temporary response structures H Firesprinkler ordinance for all structures M Evaluate adequacy of reservoir capacity forsprinkler systems H Training/standardization for contractors performing retrofitting H Website with mitigation/contractor/retrofittingmitigation/contractor/retrofitting information H ? Links to jurisdictions H ? Alerting information H ? Volunteer information M Evaluate depths of aquifers/wells for adequacy during quakes H Evaluate hazmat storage regulations near faults COMMUNICATIONS IN DISASTER ISSUES H Communications Intero erabilit H Harden repeater sites H Continue existing interoperability project H Strengthen/harden L Relocate H Redundanr M IMobile repeaters FLOODS H Update development policies for flood plains H Public education on locations of flood plains H Develop multi jurisdictional working group on flood lain management H Develop greenbelt requirements in new developments H Update weather attem/flood plain maps M Conduct countywide study of flood barriers/channels/gates/water dispersal systems H Required water flow/runoff plans for new development H Perform GIS mapping of flood channels, etc. M Install vehicular crossing ates/ h sical barriers for road closure H Maintenance of storm sewers/flood channels H Create map of flood channels/diversions/waters stems etc M Require di ital floor plans on new non-residential construction M Upgrade dirt embankments to concrete M Conduct countywide needs study on drainage capabilities M Increase number of pumping stations M Increase sandbag distribution capacities H Develop pre -planned response plan for floods H ? Evacuation documentation H ? Re-examine historical flooding data for potential street re -design M Training for city/countycity/county PIOs about flood issues M Warning systems - ensure accurate information provided H ? Publicize flood plain information website? M ? Install warning/water level si na e H ? Enhanced public information M ? Road closure compliance M ? Shelter locations H ? Pre -event communications M Look at County requirements for neighborhood access M ? Secondary means of ingress/egress H Vegetation restoration programs H Ensure critical facilities are hardened/backed u M Hardening water towers M Terrorism Surveillance - cameras at reservoirs/dams M Riverbed maintenance M Evaluate existing lift stations for adequacy M Acquisitionof propwty for on -site reteotkw� M Evaluate regulations on roof drainage mechanisms M Erosion -resistant plants H Traffic light protection M Upkeep of diversionary devices M Install more turn-off valves on pipelines M Backup generation facilities M Identify swift water rescue capabilities across Count WILDFIRES H Aggressive weed abatement program M ? Networking of agencies for weed abatement H Develop strategic plan for forest management H Public education on wildfire defense H Encourage citizen surveillance and reporting H Identify hydrants with equipment ownership information H Enhanced fire fighting equipment M Fires otter program/red flag program M ? Expand to other utilities M Research on insect/pest mitigation technologies M Volunteer home inspection program H Public education program H ? Weather reporting/alerting H ? Building protection M ? Respiration H Pre -identify shelters/recovery centers/other resources H Roofina materials/defensivespacing regulations H Community task forces for planning and education H Fuel/dead tree removal M Strategic pre -placement of fire fighting equipment M Establish FEMA coordination processes based on ICS H Brush clearings around repeaters M Research new technologies for idenfi in trackin fires H Procure/deployProcure/deploy backup communications equipments M "Red Tag" homes in advance of event H Provide fire-resistant gel to homeowners M Involve insurance agencies in mitigation programs M Clear out abandoned vehicles from oases H Code enforcement H Codes Prohibiting fireworks H Fuel modificatior►frernoval, H Evaluate building codes M Maintaining catch basins OTHER HAZARDS M Improve i eline maintenance M Wetlands mosquito mitigation West Nile Virus M Insect control stud M Increase County Vector Control capacities M General public drought awareness M ? Lawn watering rotation M Develop County drought plan M Miti ation of landslide -prone areas M Develop winter storm sheltering Ian L Easegermitting process for building transmission lines M Evaluate restrictions on dust/dirt/generating activities during wind seasons. L Rotational crop planning/soil stabilization L Enhance agricultural checkpoint enforcement Agriculture - funding of detection programs L Communications of pipeline maps based on need to know L Im roved notification plan on runaway trains M improve/maintain blackout notification plan. M Support business continuity planning for utility outages H Terrorism training/equipment for first responders H . Terrorism lannin /coordination M ? Staffing for terrorism mitigation H Create a SONGS regional planning group M ?Include dirty bomb planning M Coolinq stations - MOUs in place L Fire Ant eradication program L White Fly infestation abatementleradication program M Develop Ian for supplemental water sources M Public education on low water landscaping L Salton Sea desalinization L Establish agriculture security standards focus on water supply) M ID mutual aid agreements L Vulnerability assessment on fiber-optic cable H Upgrade valves on California aqueduct H Public education H ? Bi-lingual signs M ? Blackout, inf m"atkwr M Notifications stem for rail traffic - container contents H Control and release of terrorism intelligence M Develop prison evacuation plan shelter in lace? LOCAL JURISDICTION PROPOSED MITIGATION ACTION AND STRATEGY PROPOSAL MITIGATION STRATEGY INFORMATION Proposal Name: Dam innundation plan for Diamond Valley Reservoir Proposal Location: Diamond Valley Lake Proposal Type Place an "X" by the type of mitigation strategy (one or more may apply) X Flood and mud flow mitigation Fire mitigation Elevation or acquisition of repetitively damaged structures or structures in high hazard areas Mitigation Planning (i.e. update building codes, planning develop guidelines, etc.) Development and implementation of mitigation education programs Development or improvement of warning systems Additional Hazard identification and analysis in support of the local hazard mitigation plan Drinking and/or irrigation water mitigation Earthquake mitigation Agriculture - crop related mitigation Agriculture - animal related mitigation X Flood inundation/Dam failure Weatherfremperature event mitigation Proposal/Event History Narrative: DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGY List any previous disaster related events dates, costs, etc Diamond Valley Reservoor is the largest and newest lake in the County and plarming for the possibility of a dam failure is important to the City of Temecula, which lies in the probable areas of concern. Give a detailed description of the need for the project, any history related to the project. List the activities necessary for its completion in the narrative section below. To our knowledge, there are dam innundation maps for Lake Skinner and Vail Lake, which could also negatively impact the City of Temecula. Planning for the worst case scenario, an innundation map of Diamond Valley could become an invaluable tool for the City of Temecula. Does your jurisdiction have primary responsibility for the project? If not, what agency does? Responsible Agency: Additional partners could include Riverside County, Yes X No X County Flood Control, and the Cities of Hemet and Murrietta. FUNDING INFORMATION Place an "X" by the proposed source of funding for this project X Unfunded project - funds are not available for the project at this time Local jurisdiction General Fund Local jurisdiction Special Fund (road tax, assessment fees, etc.) Non-FEMA Hazard Mitigation Funds Local Hazard Mitigation Grant Funds - Future Request Hazard Mitigation Funds Has your jurisdiction evaluated this mitigation strategy to determine it's cost benefits? (i.e. has the cost of the mitigation proposal been determined to be beneficial in relationship to the potential damage or loss using the attached Cost/Benefit Analysis Sheet or another internal method) LOCAL JURISDICTION DEVELOPMENT TRENDS QUESTIONNAIRE LAND USE ISSUES - COMPLETE THE INFORMATION BELOW JURISDICTION: City of Temecula DOE$ YOUR AGENCY HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR LAND USE9%MINOR DetlCCCPMENT ISSUES WITHIN YOUR JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES? YES X NO Current Population in Jurisdiction or Served 77,500 Projected Population in Jurisdiction or Served - in 2010 100,000 Current Sq Miles in Jurisdiction or Served 28.1 Projected Sq Miles in Jurisdiction or Served - in 2010 30 Does Your Jurisdiction have any ordinances or Yes If yes, please list ordinance or regulation number. regulations dealing with disaster mitigation, disaster preparation, or disaster response? What is the number one land issue your agency will Growth from unincorporated areas face in the next five years Approximate Number of Homes/Apts/etc. 25,000 Projected Number of Homes/Apts/etc.- in 2010 35,000 Approximate Total Residential Value $8.5 Billion Projected Residential Total Value - in 2010 $15 Billion Approximate Number of Commercial Businesses 3,000 Projected Number of Commercial Businesses - in 2010 3,500 Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in >1 % Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in flood hazard >1 % flood hazard zones zones - in 2010 Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in >1 % Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in earthquake >1 % earthquake hazard zones hazard zones - in 2010 Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in >1 % Approximate Percentage of Homes/Apts/etc in wildland fire >1 % wildland fire hazard zones hazard zones - in 2010 Approximate Percentage of Commercial >1 % Approximate Percentage of Commercial Businesses in flood >1 % Businesses in flood hazard zones hazard zones - in 2010 Approximate Percentage of Commercial 20% Approximate Percentage of Commercial Businesses in 20% Businesses in earthquake hazard zones earthquake hazard zones - in 2010 Approximate Percentage of Commercial 0% Approximate Percentage of Commercial Businesses in >1% Businesses in wildland fire hazard zones wildland fire hazard zones - in 2010 Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that See Above Projected Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that 0 are in flood hazard zones are in flood hazard zones - in 2010 Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that See Above Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that are in 0 are in earthquake hazard zones earthquake hazard zones - in 2010 Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that See Above Number of Critical Facilities in your Jurisdiction that are in 0 are in wildland fire hazard zones. wildland fire hazard zones - in 2010 Does your jurisdiction plan on participating in the Yes If not, how will your jurisdiction do plan maintenance? County's on -going plan maintenance program every two years as described in Part I of the plan? Will a copy of this plan be available for the various planning groups within your jurisdiction for use in future planning and budgeting Yes purposes? Supplement for all CA Local Government Jurisdictions participating in Multi -Jurisdictional, Local Hazard Mitigation Plans Each separate jurisdiction participating in a Multi -Jurisdictional Plan, must a formally adopt the Multi -Jurisdictional Plan as their own LHMP. Even though a jurisdiction is "participating" in a multi jurisdictional plan, EACH JURISDICTION must ensure that certain requirements of the Multi -Jurisdictional Plan have been met. Failure to do so MAY delay review and or approval of the multi -jurisdictional plan. i While each multi -jurisdictional plan must be a "stand alone" document upon completion, each jurisdiction must be aware of the information and requirements, unique to each participant, that must be provided in order for the multi -jurisdictional plan to be complete. The advantage for each local government in participating in a multi jurisdictional plan is, among many, that moat information and data (i.e. Information, data, maps), may be shared by all participating jurisdictions. The following "mini" Plan Review Crosswalk should be completed by each participating jurisdiction to document how and where information needed by the multi jurisdictional planning effort, but speck to each participating jurisdiction, has been included. Participating Jurisdictions Title/Lead Jurisdiction of Multi -Jurisdictional Date of Completion: September 8, 2004 Plani' Riverside County DES City `of Temecula Local Point of Contact: Address: Grant Yates 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92592 Title:', , Assistant to the` i , Manager, . Agencyt Gi of Temecula Phone Number: E-Mail: grant.yates@cityoftemecula.org 951 Sor State Reviewer: Title: Date: FEMA Reviewer: Title: Date: * Notes: [Y] — Participating [N] - Not Participating [N/A] - Not Mapped SCORING SYSTEM: One of the following scores will be assigned to each of the following LHMP requirements. N — Needs Improvement: The jurisdiction's portion of the multi -jurisdiction's plan does not meet the minimum for a plan requirement. Reviewer's comments must be orovided. S — Satisfactory: The jurisdiction's portion of the multi -jurisdiction's plan meets the minimum for the requirement. Reviewer's comments are encouraged, but not required. Prerequisite(s) (Check Applicable Box) NOT MET MET Plan Maintenance Process N S Planning Process r N S Documentation of the Planning Process§201 -6(b) and r Y Multi -Jurisdictional Risk Assessment N S §201.6(cx2)(Iii) Identifying Hazards (if applicable): §201.6(c)(2)(1) Profiling Hazards (if applicable): §201.6(c)(2)(i) Assessing Vulnerability: Overview: §201.6(c)(2)(ii) Mitigation Strategy N S Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan: NIA 201.6 c 4 (i Incorporation into Epsting Planning Mechanisms: 201.E c 4 ii Continued Public Ihvolvement §201.6(c)(4)(iii) N/A Additional State Requirements' N S See Planning Process, Local Capabilities Assessment NIA Insert State Requirement here N/A SUPPLEMENT STATUS SUPPLEMENT 1-1A6 REQUIREMENTS THAT "NEED IMPROVEMENT - SUPPLEMENT REQUIREMENTS ARE ALL "SATISFACTORY" "States that have additional requirements can add them in the appropriate sections of the Multi -Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance or create a new section and modify this Plan Review Crosswalk to record the score for those requirements. PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN LOCATION IN THE SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM THE INTERIM FINAL (MJP) MULTI SCORING SYSTEM RULE PART 201 JURISDICTIONAL PLAN (INDICATE (M) MET [NM) NOT MET (FOR PREREQUISITE (S) ONLY) SECTION ANNEX ANDD PAGE [NI —NEEDS IMPROVEMENT OR [S)—SATISFACTORY PREREQUISITE IS) NOTE: The prerequisite, or prerequisites In the case of multi -jurisdictional plans, may be reviewed before, but must be met before the plan can receive final FEMA approved. Multi -Jurisdictional Plan Requirement §201.6(c)(5): [MI [NM) Adoption Element B B C. For multi - jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must provide supporting documentation that it has been formally adopted by EACH participating jurisdiction. Multi -Jurisdictional Requirement §201.6(a)(3): Multi- Part I, Section 2 M Planning Participation jurisdictional plans (e.g., Page 6 watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process. Element A. Where in the MJP is this jurisdiction's participation, in the MJP development, documented? PLANNING PROCESS Documentation of the Requirement- IFR §201.6(b): In order to N/A - Should be Planning Process develop a more comprehensive approach included in the MJP to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: Local Capabilities Requirement — Section §201.4(cx3) (ii) See Elements A-D M Assessment of the Federal Register Interim Final Rule below. 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 states, '[The State mitigation strategy shall include] a general description and analysis of the effectiveness of local mitigation policies, rams, and capabilities. PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN LOCATION IN THE SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM THE INTERIM FINAL (MJP) MULTI SCORING SYSTEM RULE PART 201 JURISDICTIONAL PLAN (INDICATE [M) MET [NM) NOT MET (FOR PREREQUISITE (S) ONLY) SECTION ANNEX ANDD PAGE [N]—NEEDS IMPROVEMENT OR [S]-SATISFACTORY Local Capabilities Element A: Does the plan provide a Part 11, TEMECULA N Note: This Information is required to complete the State Assessment description of the human, technical and Section Hazard Mitigation Plan and must be covered. However, a financial resources available within this "Needs Improvement" score on this requirement will not jurisdiction to engage in a mitigation preclude the plan from passing. planning process and to develop a local hazard mitigation plan? (These resources are described in Section 2.2 of the OES LHMP Development Guide). Local Capabilities Element B: Does the plan list local Part 11, TEMECULA N Note: This Information is required to complete the State Assessment mitigation funding sources (taxes, fees, Section Hazard Mitigation Plan and must be covered. However, a assessments or fines) which affect or "Needs Improvement" score on this requirement will not promote mitigation within the reporting preclude the plan from passing. jurisdiction? Local Capabilities Element C: Does the plan list local TEMECULA Section, S Note: This information Is required to complete the State Assessment ordinances which affect or promote Supplemental Hazard Mitigation Plan and must be covered. However, a disaster mitigation, preparedness, Questionnaire "Needs Improvement" score on this requirement will not preclude the plan from passing. response or recovery within the reporting jurisdiction? Local Capabilities Element D: Does the plan describe the Part 11, TEMECULA S Note: This information is required to complete the State Assessment details of ongoing mitigation projects and Section Hazard Mitigation Plan and must be covered. However, a programs within the reporting jurisdiction? "Needs Improvement" score on this requirement will not preclude the plan from passing. PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN LOCATION IN THE SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM THE INTERIM FINAL (MJP) MULTI SCORING SYSTEM RULE PART 201 JURISDICTIONAL PLAN (INDICATE (M] MET [NM] NOT MET (FOR PREREQUISITE (S) ONLY) SECTION OR tN]—NEEDS IMPROVEMENT OR [S]—SATISFACTORY ANNEX AND PAGE RISK ASSESSMENT Multi -Jurisdictional Risk Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(iii): Part I S Assessment For multi jurisdictional plans, Flooding Pgs 41 — 53 the risk assessment must Earthquakes Pgs 54 assess each jurisdiction's — 66 risks where they vary from the Extreme Weather risks facing the entire planning Pgs 67 — 76 area. It should be noted that Hazmat incidents the Vulnerability Assessments Pgs 101 Blackout Pgs 115 — are almost always unique to 116 each jurisdiction (EXAMPLE: Nuclear incidents For a county based MJP, a Pgs 125 —128 school district's vulnerability to a hazard is different than the Part II, Temecula city that it is in, and the city will Section have different vulnerabilities than that of the overall planning area (county). Were unique Hazards & Hazard Yes S Profiles Included from this If yes, where in MJP: jurisdiction? Yes, Part II, TEMECULA Section Assessing Vulnerability: Part 1, Pages 19-139 S Overview: 201.6 c 2 ii Assessing Vulnerability: Part 1, Pages 19-139 S Note: This Information must be covered. However, a Needs Improvement' score on this requirement will not preclude the plan Identifying Structures: from passing. §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A) PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN LOCATION IN THE SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM THE INTERIM FINAL (MJP) MULTI SCORING SYSTEM RULE PART 201 JURISDICTIONAL PLAN (INDICATE [M] MET [NM] NOT MET (FOR PREREQUISITE (S) ONLY) SECTION OR IN] --NEEDS IMPROVEMENT OR [S]—SATISFACTORY ANNEX AND PAGE Part 1, Pages 19-139 S Note: This information must be covered. However, a weeds Assessing Vulnerability: Improvement' score on this requirement will not preclude the plan Estimating Potential Losses: from passing. §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B) Part 1, Pages 24-27 S Note: This information must be covered. However, a'Needs & TEMECULA ImprovemenPscore on this requirement will not preclude the plan Assessing Vulnerability: Supplemental from passing. Analyzing Development Trends: Questionnaire §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C) MITIGATION STRATEGY Multi -Jurisdictional Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv): Yes, Part II, N Mitigation Actions For multi -jurisdictional plans, TEMECULA Section there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. (That is, Does the plan include at least one identifiable action item for each jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval of the Ian? PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCESS Incorporation into Existing Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii): [The Part I, Page 143 S Planning Mechanisms fan shall include a] process by hich local governments ncorporate the requirements of the itigation plan into other planning echanisms. as this jurisdiction included a Part I, Page 143 S rocess by which the local overnment will incorporate the equirements in other plans, such s comprehensive or capital mprovement plans, when ro riate? PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN LOCATION IN THE SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM THE INTERIM FINAL (MJP) MULTI SCORING SYSTEM RULE PART 201 JURISDICTIONAL PLAN (INDICATE IM] MET [NMI NOT MET (FOR PREREQUISITE (S) ONLY) SECTION OR IN] —NEEDS IMPROVEMENT OR [S]—SATISFACTORY ANNEX AND PAGE ADDITIONAL STATE ee Planning Process — Local Part I, Page 143 S REQUIREMENTS apabilities Assessment for an dditional State & Local Planning e uirement. ITEM 8 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FII CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26 2004 SUBJECT: Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Project No. PW02-20 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Principal Engineer Ward Maxwell, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping, Project No. PW02-20. BACKGROUND: The City's consultant has completed the design and specifications for the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Project. The Project is identified in the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2004-2008. The proposed improvements will enhance the recently paved parking area and provide landscaping on the northwest corner of Old Town Front and First Streets with landscaping on the northeast corner of Old Town Front Street and Santiago Road. The improvements are being constructed on remnant parcels created by the re -alignment of Old Town Front Street, First Street, and Santiago Road as part of the First Street Extension Project. The Citywas approved for $250,000 in Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (EEM) Program funds to develop the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Project. The contract documents are available for review in the City Engineer's office. The Engineer's Construction Estimate for this project is $285,000.00. FISCAL IMPACT: The Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Redevelopment Agency funds and an (EEM) Grant. The EEM Grant is administered by the State of California Resources Agency. This grant will provide a reimbursement of up to $250,000 for all eligible costs. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description RAAGENDA REPORTS\2004\102604\PW02-20BID.DOC mi PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Title: OLD TOWN SOUTHERN GATEWAY LANDSCAPING PRIORITY: II Description: Landscaping for remnant parcels located on the north side of First Street created by re -alignment of First Street. Department: Redevelopment Agency— Account No.280.199.833 PW02-20 Scope of Project: Project will consist of the design and construction of landscaping. Benefit: Project will eliminate an undeveloped area and enhance the appearance of the gateway. Total Project Cost: $ 417,620 Actuals Future Cost To to Date 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Years Complete Administration $ 4,350 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Construction Engineering $ 7,040 $ 6,900 $ 6,900 Construction $ 369,500 $ 369,500 Design $ 9,650 $ 10,180 $ 10,180 Totals $ 21,040 $ 396,580 $ 396,580 Future O&M Costs: $ 2,000 Annually Source of Funds: Redevelopment Agency $ 167,620 EEM Grant $ 250,000 Total Funding: $ 417,620 250 ITEM 9 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN CITY MANAGER fl CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Pity Manager/City Council FROM: %'William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: V October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Agency Agreement and Water System Grant Deed between the Rancho California Water District and the City of Temecula Associated with the Old Town Temecula Community Theater Project No. PW02-23 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Principal Engineer —Capital Projects David McBride, Senior Engineer — Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve an Agency Agreement with the Rancho California Water District pertaining to the two specific parcels of land that comprise the Old Town Temecula Community Theater site (PW02-23), and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement, and Approve a Water System Grant Deed with Rancho California Water District thereby transferring all rights, title and interests in specific portions of the water system improvements to be constructed as part of the Old Town Temecula Community Theater Project PW02-23 to the District, and authorize the City Manager to execute the Deed. BACKGROUND: On February 10, 2004, City Council awarded a construction contract for the project and since that time the work is progressing satisfactorily. As a requirement of new development and prerequisite to obtaining water service, Rancho California Water District (RCWD) requires the developer to execute a new or update an existing Agency Agreement and a execute a Water System Grant Deed for any portion of the waterfacilities constructed by the new development that will be maintained by RCWD. The purpose of an Agency Agreement is to designate RCWD as the City's exclusive agent for the extraction, diversion, storage, blending, and distribution of local waters under the two parcels of land associated with the Theater project for the benefit of the City and other land owners within RCWD boundaries. It should be pointed out that approval of this Agreement merely updates the previous Agency Agreements that were approved by the previous land owners of the two distinct parcels of land that now compromise the Theater site. The City Attorney and Staff do not perceive a negative impact by approval of this updated Agency Agreement. The purpose of the Water System Grant Deed is to transfer all rights, title and interest in a portion of the water system, constructed as part of this project, not located on the theater site and which is designated to become part of the District's water conveyance system. More specifically, in order to provide adequate water supply to the Theater site, it was necessary to construct a 12 inch water line extension within Fourth Street from RCWD facilities in Old Town Front Street to the northeast comer of the Theater site, which is a distance of approximately 150 feet. The water line extension, service RAAGENDA REPORTS\2004\102604\PW02-23 RCWD Agreements.tloc laterals and valves up to the Theater's property line will, by this deed, be owned and maintained by RCWD. A plan designating the water system improvements associated with the Theater to be maintained by RCWD and the City is attached to the report. FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended actions have no fiscal impact. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Plan of City/RCWD Water System Improvements 2. Agency Agreement with RCWD 3. Water System Grant Deed with RCWD RAAGENDA REPORTS\2004\102604\PW02-23 RCWD Ag,.. enms.doc When recorded return to: RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 42135 Winchester Road Post Office Box 9017 Temecula, CA 92589-9017 AGENCY AGREEMENT NO. THIS AGREEMENT, made this 26th between day of October 2004 , by and (hereinafter referred to as "Landowner'), and RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT, a public corporation organized and existing under Division 13 of the Water Code of the State of California (hereinafter referred to as the "District"), for the property described as follows: Assessors Parcwl N rmb rc 9 —036-0 1—S and WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the District has power and authority to act as agent for the extraction, diversion, storage and distribution of water owned by other parties; and WHEREAS, Landowner is the owner of certain land within the District described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, said land owned by Landowner is a portion of land found by the United States District Court, United States of America vs. Fallbrook Public Utility District, et al, in the United States District Court, Southern District of California, Southern Division, Case No. 1247, affirmed in part by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Case No. 18931, to be land riparian to certain rivers and streams, including the Santa Margarita River and its tributaries, and also which may be land overlaying percolating waters under a court decree entered December 26, 1940 in the case Rancho Santa Margarita vs. Vail,11 Cal.2d 501 (1939), and reinstated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in said Case No. 18931; and WHEREAS, Landowner, without transferring any water right and privilege pertaining to said land, does desire to empower the District to act as its agent and the agent of its successors and assigns to extract, store and divert the water to which it is entitled (hereinafter referred to as "local water") and to supply the same to its land and all other land having, under the laws of the State of California or pursuant to any judgement or contract, a legal right to have said water applied thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Landowner hereby designates the District its exclusive agent and the exclusive agent of its assigns and successors in interest for the extraction, diversion, storage, blending and distribution of all local water upon or under the lands of Landowner referred to in the recitals hereof for the purpose of putting said local water to beneficial use to the fullest extent of which it is capable for the lands and inhabitants of Landowner and all other lands within the watershed of the Santa Margarita River, and its tributaries on which said local water now and hereafter may be (legal description attached). legally applied. It is the intention of Landowner by this Agreement to maintain a binding and permanent arrangement whereby said local water shall be properly maintained and be perpetually delivered and distributed to all of said lands entitled thereto and the subdivisions thereof for the use of Landowner, its assigns and its successors in interest and other owners of such lands. Section 2. Landowner hereby grants to the District the right to blend local water with imported supplemental water, to distribute imported water to Landowner in lieu of or in addition to the distribution of local water and to store imported water under the lands of Landowner. Section 3. Landowner agrees that all local water to be used by Landowner within the District shall be obtained from the District or its assigns and successors in interest. Landowner shall not divert or extract within or outside the boundaries of the District local water for Landowner's own use within the District nor shall Landowner supply local water for use within the District by others. Landowner further agrees not to divert or extract within the District local v:ater for use by Landowner or others outside the District. Landowner reserves to itself, its assigns and its successors in interest all water rights and privileges presently owned and which may be hereinafter acquired pertaining to said land and nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as appropriating or dedicating said water rights or any water to public use. Section 4. This agency shall be effective and irrevocable in perpetuity and the same shall be deemed an agency coupled with an interest, provided, however, this Agreement shall terminate and be of no further force or effect upon a determination by any court of competent ;urisdiction in an appropriate action that the method of extraction and distribution of said local water herein provided is not a proper method of exercising the riparian and other water rights of Landowner. Section 5. The District agrees to divert, extract, store and distribute local water for the benefit of Landowner. The District agrees to acquire by lease, purchase, gift or otherwise all wells and water distribution facilities useful and nP.neSSary to RYtract cinrn and riictrihvtn chid Innnl water to the lands and inhabitants entitled thereto in accordance with this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit the District from exercising any of its powers granted by the California Water District Law nor shall the District be prohibited from acquiring supplemental water for distribution to all lands within the District. Section 6. This Agreement shall not be assignable by the District without the written consent of Landowner; provided, however, the District may contract with any municipal, public or private corporation for the management and operation of any water facilities owned by or leased by the District. Section 7. The District shall have full control of the allocation of all costs of acquisition and construction of District facilities using any method or a combination of methods, as set forth in the California Water District Law, or raising funds to defray said costs. The District may adopt such rules and regulations for the distribution of local water as it deems necessary. The District may allocate the distribution of the available local water in any manner authorized in the California Water District Law or the rules and regulations of the District adopted pursuant to said law. Rates and charges for the distribution of local water may be made and shall be payable by Landowner, its assigns and the successors in interest as determined by the Board of Directors of the District from time to time; provided, however, said rates and charges shall not be so set to discriminate between water users in substantially the same classification. SECTION 8. Neither the District nor the Landowner warrants the quantity or quality of the local water to be extracted and distributed by the District. SECTION 9. The District and Landowner intend that the provisions of the Agency Agreement shall constitute covenants that run with the land and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the assigns and successors in interest of the District and Landowner. The District and Landowner therefore agree as follows: (a) The District is the owner of land and water distribution facilities within its boundaries which will be benefitted by the Agency Agreement. The District land benefits from the Agency Agreement because wells located on the District land have a more assured reliable water supply. The District land particularly benefitted by the terms of this Agency Agreement is described in Exhibit "B" of that certain Agency Agreement recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside as Document No. 398782 by the District on October 22, 1992, which is incorporated herein by reference. Landowner's land benefits from the rights set forth in Cections 1 and 5 above to connect to the District's water system. The covenants of the Agency Agreement also benefit all other landowners within the boundaries of the District who have similarly covenanted with the District, by securing a reliable region -wide water source, and its attendant increased property values. The boundaries of the District are described in Exhibit "C" of that certain Agency Agreement recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside as Document No. 398782 by the District on October 22, 1992, which is incorporated herein by reference. Landowner is the owner of land which is affected by the covenants of this Agency Agreement and is described in Exhibit "A". (b) The covenants of this Agency Agreement shall be binding upon the successive owners of the land described in Exhibit "A" or any interest therein or a portion thereof for the benefit of the District land and facilities and other landowners who have similarly covenanted with the District. (c) The parties agree that the acts required by this Agency Agreement relate to the use, repair, maintenance and improvement of the land described in Exhibit "A". (d) The parties agree that the Agency Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder's Office of Riverside County. It is further agreed that this Agency Agreement shall not be effective until it is recorded at the office of the Riverside County Recorder, and consent for recordation is hereby given. SECTION 10. In the event Landowner shall convey, transfer or in any manner alienate title to all or any portion of the real property of Landowner located within the District, the successors in interest in the fee simple estate or any lessor estate of said real property shall execute an Agency Agreement in the identical form hereof as a condition precedent to said transfer; provided, however, non-compliance with said condition shall in no wise be construed to annul or terminate the agency created hereby and all rights and duties hereunder shall be binding on the assigns and successors in interest of the real property of Landowner located within the District. SECTION 11. If any one or more of the terms, provisions, covenants or conditions of this Agency Agreement shall to any extent be declared invalid, unenforceable, void or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, the finding or order or decree of which becomes final, none of the remaining terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of this Agency Agreement shall be affected thereby and each provision of this Agency Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. (CORPORATE SEAL) ATTEST: ("Landowner") Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT LINDA M. FREGOSO By: General Manager BRIAN J. BRADY District Order Number: 0625-826363 (21) Page Number: 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: Lots 16 through 22, inclusive, in Block 27 of the Town of Temecula, as shown by Map on file in book 15 page 726 of Maps, records of San Diego County, California; Together with that portion of River Street as vacated and closed to public use by Resolution recorded august 6, 1940 in book 474 page 109 of Official Records of Riverside County, California, as described in Parcel 1 of said Resolution, and lying Northwesterly of the Southwesterly prolongation of the center line of the alley in said Block 27; Also together with that portion of the Northwesterly half of the alley adjoining said Lots 16 through 22, inclusive, on the Southeast as vacated and closed to public use by Resolution No. 79- 68, recorded April 23, 1979 as instrument no. 80863 of Official Records of Riverside County, California; Also together with that portion of the Southeasterly half of Fourth Street adjoining said Lots 16 through 22, inclusive, on the Northwest, as vacated and closed to public use by Resolution No. 87-272, recorded July 29, 1987 as instrument no. 218023 of Official Records of Riverside County, Califomia. APN: 722-036-031-8 922 FirstAmerican Title Order Number: NCS-93150RN Page Number:6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: LOTS 4, 5 AND 6 IN BLOCK 27 OF THE TOWN OF TEMECULA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 15, PAGE(S) 726 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY 10 FEET OF MAIN STREET, ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND, WHICH WOULD PASS WITH A CONVEYANCE OF SAID LAND, AS VACATED BY RESOLUTION NO. 75-104 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, RECORDED APRIL 23, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO.46491 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY HALF OF THE ALLEY ADJOINING SAID LOTS 4, 5 AND 6 ON THE NORTHWEST AS VACATED AND CLOSED TO PUBLIC USE BY RESOLUTION NO. 79-68 RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80863 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT 4. APN: 922-036-020-8 First American Title Insurance Company p ,r o' Z —7W ER EOM a+ 1NE Vti U �kVh> :WQpR Gh`� 3 I IB 0 sp e 4 4� 9 C15 Vol O� \B �. 6 o�eax�E, 4 i Q :e•'ek ..kiK ,xCe �• ° C ° 4--�'I A C Ib C \0 q --1 3k 9 A C 61i Pk' 6� .R 66 _bC I—�/g Opp 2 ^I 0 � - --7 E 6S��ri FF - ° RIVER STREET c t � a u � a tD b y� r W � � • N ° bl tl V b 3y Op F 0) b 4 M 41Y� Ag 0 I 4 S^ w� �C r+> Y ! m ` d� a� � C V 2 WS a �e M F— CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of I ss. On before me, Date Nacre am net a arcer te.0.,'. Dae. Notary PUGc� Personally appeared , NLMteI d Siq,ertat ❑ personally known to me ❑ 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/shetthey 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. SoWure a Name k OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: . e ❑ Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: 0 1999 Naliar,al Notary Association • 9350 De Salo Ave., P.O. Box 2402 • Cl,atswoM, CA 913132a02 • ww mbora4praryor9 Prof. Na. 5907 aearaer: Cae Tod -Free 1-e0P9]& 7 [Project No.: 1 WATER SYSTEM GRANT DEED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION paid and received, The City of Temecula ("Developer") hereby grants(s) to Rancho California Water District all rights, title, and interest in the water system improvements for the entire domestic water system facilities for the development referenced with records of the County of Riverside, State of California as The Old Town Temecula Community Theater PW02-23, and agrees to indemnify the District for any and all claims, liens, causes of action, or any type of liability arising from or in any way related to the construction of said facilities. Said water system improvements are shown in detail on the construction drawings entitled Rancho California Water District Old Town Community Theatre (Sheets 1 through 2) for said development. This Grant Deed is in accordance with Section 5 of the Water System Agreement between Rancho California Water District and The City of Temecula, dated October 26, 2004 and is effective upon Developer providing the Unconditional Lien Waiver and Release and upon filing of the Notice of Completion by the District for the aforementioned water system improvements. SELLERS, on behalf of his heirs, executors, and administrators, covenants and agrees to warrant and defend this sale of property, goods, and chattels against every and all person/persons claiming the same. SIGNED AND SEALED this 26t' day of October, 2004. (SEAL AND NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT) (Seal) Principal Name: Shawn D. Nelson Title: City Manager Signature: CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On NW I ss. before me, r Noma eM TAb d Olrnr (a 9..Jeee Doe, l4dary Pudic personally appeared , Ndlire(6)d$gMr(6) ❑ personally known to me ❑ 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. Sg d f tm Pudic OPTIONAL Through the information below is not requtred by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this loan to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: 0 1We NalbrNl Notary AssodeBm • e35o N Soto Ave.. PA. Box 24M • ClmtvS N. CA e1313M • w wfimakr lMa Pm . W. 5W7 Rawtler: Catl TaA-Free 1�8715) 6827 ITEM 10 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FI CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: /O*illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements, Final Stage - Project No. PW99-11 CH PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Principal Engineer Steven W. Beswick, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve contract change order number 5 to the existing contract with Road Builders, Inc. in the amount of $1,037,230.00 adding the construction of the downstream segment of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel — Stage 1; from 900± feet north of Muirfield Drive to Temecula Creek. 2. Increase the project contingency, and the City Manager's contract change order approval limit, by $103,723.00 above the previously approved 10% contingency. BACKGROUND: On March 23, 2004 the City Council awarded a construction contract to Yeager Skanska, Inc. in the amount of $4,187,607.00 for the construction of Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements (the segment of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel Stage 1, from Loma Linda Rd to 900± feet north of Muirfield Drive), and on June 22, 2004 the City Council awarded a construction contract to Road Builders, Inc. for construction of Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements (Wolf Valley Creek Channel —Stage 2) in the amount of $2,940,768.42. At the time of award, City Council was advised that additional environmental clearances were necessary before the downstream segment of Wolf Valley Creek Channel —Stage 1 project could be started. The final environmental permits have now been acquired. Staff solicited proposals from both Yeager Skanska, Inc. and Road Builders, Inc. to complete this last segment of the channel. Staff was able negotiate a cost of $1,037,230, with Road Builder's Inc., which is approximately equivalent to the engineer's estimate and is significantly lower than Yeager Skanska, Inc. proposal. Staff has determined that the completion of this channel work is critical to complete ahead of the rainy season and to head off a potential emergency situation; the work is similar in scope to the work already under contract with Road Builder's inc. and is a natural extension of their existing contract. 1 R:WGENDA REPORTS\2004\102604\PW99-11CH Add'I Funds.DOC FISCAL IMPACT: The construction of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel (Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements) is a part of the overall Pechanga Parkway Improvements — Phase II project which is funded by County of Riverside AD-159 bond proceeds, Wolf Creek Community Facilities District (CFD) bond proceeds, City development impact fees, a Federal Public Land Highways Grant, Development Impact Fees and a contribution from the Pechanga Tribe. Adequate funds have been appropriated forthe Pechanga Parkway Improvements - Phase II project and are available in account no. 210-165-668-5804. Both the AD-159 and Wolf Creek CFD bond proceeds funds are governed by acquisition type agreements which require the City to request reimbursement for project expenses, thus the City will be required to temporarily cover project expenditures until the reimbursement revenue is received. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Project Description 3. Contract Change Order 5 2 R:WGENDA REPORTS\2004\102604\PW99-11CH Add9 Funds.DOC s z� FBI a O a C N d u m 'o a` 0 mo [-1 •--� N C �O \O .� O N Y G h W M \O M N O y vt h O� 7 N U Urz 60) vj Fn Fn us s5 va va 0 �4p o 0 to S O O N 0 0 0, o 0 0 o rn h O N 0 0 O 1n N O 00 O o0 m O N N O .r N 7 00 � .-i O V O h W M O 1O MN. O\ p0 M I M N In 69 603 69 b9 fA (A 69 b4 vj sn ss ss to Ny O p U W U a •n a O ,°, •p00 F d dUU9, . k ✓�i O V�1 N O M b N 7 7 h Ci r, h 'T N V V 7 N V9 b 69 6 f b)I 6.3 0 0 U � � w �o ,a ,a, faxw>>bo a CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 CONTRACT NO. PW99-11CH -1 of 2- City of Temecula Public Works Department 43200 Business Park Drive -Temecula, CA 92590-Mailing Address: PO. Box 9033-Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (909) 694-641 1 - Fax (909) 694-6475 PROJECT: PECHANGA PARKWAY PHASE 1113 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS WOLF VALLEY CREEK CHANNEL - STAGE 2 PROJECT NO. PW99-11CH, RCFC & WCD PROJECT NO. 7-0-0260-02 TO CONTRACTOR: ROAD BUILDERS, INC. NOTE: This change order is not effective until approved by the City Manager. CHANGE ORDER REQUESTED BY: ENGINEER 5.1 DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Construct the following Wolf Valley Creek Channel - Stage 1 Improvements from Station 12+00 to Station 22+51.65 per the Wolf Valley Creek Channel (Project No. PW99-11SD) Technical Specifications and the City's letter (with technical specifications) dated October 14, 2004: Engineering & Construction Surveying, Clear and Grub, Traffic Control, NPDES Compliance, Aggregate Base, Asphalt Concrete Pavement, Reinforced Concrete Channel and Access Roads, Junction Structure, Drainage Inlet, 18" RCP, Fencing, Rock Slope Protection, and Channel Earthwork. Extend the number of working days in the contract by fifty (50) working days. Method of Payment: Increase in Contract at Agreed Unit Prices Engineering/Construction Surveying 1 LS @$70,700/LS.......................... $ 70,700.00 Clear and Grub 1 LS @$46,000/LS............................................................... $ 46,000.00 Traffic Control 1 LS @$11,000/LS................................................................ $ 11,000.00 NPDES Compliance 1 LS @$9,000/LS......................................................... $ 9,000.00 Class 2 Aggregate Base 140 TN @ $47/TN.................................................. $ 6,580.00 Asphalt Concrete Pavement 80 TN @$115/TN............................................ $ 9,200.00 Reinforced Concrete Channel and Access Roads 1250 CY @ $465/CY... $581,250.00 Junction Structure No. 6, 3 EA @$3,950/EA............................................... $ 11,850.00 Drainage Inlet Type IX, 2 EA @$2,800/EA.................................................... $ 5,600.00 18" RCP Class IV, 50 LF @$90/LF................................................................ $ 4,500.00 6-Foot Chain Link Fence and Chain Link Fence Repairs at Station 12+50, 850 LF @$23/LF.......................................................... $ 19,550.00 Rock Slope Protection (1 Ton) 4,200 CY @ $60/CY.................................... $252,000.00 Earthwork for Channel 1000 CY @$10/CY.................................................. $ 10,000.00 Subtotal............................................................................................ $ 1,037,230.00 The agreed unit prices constitute full compensation, including all mark-ups for the work described above and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor. ®Pr mn o RegdW Paper CCO 5 - Total Increase ...... CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 CONTRACT NO. PW99-11CH -2- ............................................... $ 1,037,230.00 Original Contract Amount....................................................................$ 2,940,768.42 This Change Order..............................................................................$ 1,037,230.00 Previously Approved Changes............................................................. $ 264,141.00 Total Adjusted Contract Amount..........................................................$ 4,242,139.42 Adjustment of Working Days.......................................................................................................+50 Prepared by: City of Temecula — Steven W. Beswick, P.E. Associate Engineer Reviewed and Concurred by: RCFC B WCD — Stuart E. McKibbin, P.E. Chief of Planning Division Submitted by: City of Temecula — Greg Butler, P.E. Principal Engineer Approved: (As directed by City Manager) City of Temecula -William G. Hughes, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Date: Date: Date: Date: We the undersigned contractor has given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above. Accepted, Date: Name: Signature Printed Contractor: Road Builders, Inc. Title: name If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written protest within the time therein specified. RACIP\PROJECTS\PW99\99-11CH WVCC Stage 2\CCO\CCO.005.doc ITEM 11 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF Fit CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Award of Construction Contract for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Project No. PW03-01 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Principal Engineer David McBride, Senior Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a construction contract forthe Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station, Project No. PW03-01 to Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. in amount of $3,298,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 2. Authorize the City Managerto approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $329,800.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 3. Accelerate the appropriation of budgeted funds in FY 2005-2006 to FY 2004-2005 in the amount of $3,782,830.00. 4. Approve an appropriation of $937,170 forthe Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station from Community Facility District (CFD) Reimbursables and County of Riverside Reimbursables. 5. Increase estimated revenues for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station in the amount of $648,585 for CFD Reimbursables and $288,588 for Riverside County Reimbursables. 6. Approve an advance of $815,000 from the General Fund to the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station. BACKGROUND: The Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station project will provide for construction of a three bay heavy urban station on a 1.5 acre site located at the southwest corner of future intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and South Loop Road (extension of Calle Chapos). More specifically, the project will include construction of the following: wet and dry utilities, precise grading, site drainage systems, erosion control, foundation systems, a new single story fire station totaling approximately 9,062 square feet, a storage structure totaling approximately 456 square feet, trash enclosure, two above ground fuel tanks (1,000 gallons each), site walkways and hardscape improvements, site landscaping, site concrete masonry unit walls and a parking lot for 22 vehicles. In addition, the project will provide for procurement and installation of certain furnishings and fixtures necessary to support the fire station. 20040914 PW03-01 AWD On July 13, 2004, City Council approved the plans and specifications for the project and authorized the Public Works Department to solicit construction bids. The Architect's cost estimate for the project is $2,600,000.00. Seven (7) bids were received from contractors and publicly opened on August 19, 2004 and the results are as follows: 1. Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc............ 2. Edge Development, Inc ....................... 3. The Augustine Company .................... 4. Howard C. Edmiston Construction, Inc 5. ProWest PCM, Inc . ......................... 6. Echo Pacific Construction, Inc............ 7. Alvarez Engineering, Inc ..................... ........$3,298,000.00 ........$3,350,024.00 ........$3,393,314.00 ........$3,420,784.00 ........$3,490,000.00 ........$3,742,447.00 ........$4,182,000.00 On August 26, 2004, Edge Development, Inc., the second lowest bidder, protested the bid results and requested that the City declare Tovey/Shultz's Construction, Inc. bid non -responsive because they perceived violations in their subcontracting procedures and failure to provide subcontractor information in the exact format that the bid form requested. Because of these issues Edge Development believed they should be awarded the bid as the lowest responsible bidder. After review of the "non -responsive" claims by Staff itwas concluded that Tovey/Schultz Construction, Inc. has complied with the subcontracting provisions of Public Contract Code, the informational format issue has no relevance to the bid and therefore Tovey/Schultz Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder. On August 24, 2004, per their request, Edge Development was provided copies of the entire of bid packages for the top three bidders. Also, we should note that Edge Development formally protested the bid results for Old Town Community Theater with the same result in February of 2004. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the Office of the City Engineer. Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. of Lake Elsinore, California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. The specifications allow Two Hundred (200) working days for completion of the project. Work is expected to begin in mid December of 2004 and be completed by mid October of 2005. As budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the funding for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station is appropriated in the fiscal year FY2005-2006. It is necessary at this time to accelerate to the FY2004-2005 appropriation to have adequate funds available to award the contract. There are committed revenues of $2,805,000.00, which are comprised of $1,275,000.00 from the Roripaugh Ranch Community Facilities District (CFD), $1,200,000.00 from the County of Riverside, and $330,000.00 from the City's Development Impact Fees (DIF) for Fire Facilities. The estimated project expenditures are $4,720,000.00. To fully fund the project additional revenue totaling $1,915,000.00 is needed to cover the cost of construction, provide for a 10% construction contingency, provide for purchase of a fire truck as well as provide the necessary professional services to properly manage, inspect and perform material testing during construction. The primary reasons for the higher than anticipated estimated cost are substantial increases in construction material costs and to a lesser extent modest price increases in general business expenses. (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE) 20040914 PW 03-01 AW D FISCAL IMPACT: The original appropriation for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station, Project No. PW03-01, is funded with the Roripaugh Ranch CFD, the County of Riverside through an existing cooperative agreement with the City and City Development Impact Fees (DIF) for fire facilities. As described above, additional revenue totaling $1,915,000 is needed to fullyfund the project. Staff recommends that the additional funds be comprised of an allocation of $1,100,000 from a deposit provided by Ashby USA, LLC and $815,000.00 in General Fund Reserves. The $815,000 appropriation in General Fund Reserves is expected to be reimbursed to the City by the County of Riverside, in January of 2005, per a Cooperative Agreement between the Cityand County approved on November 12, 2002. The exact appropriations and budget adjustments are shown in detail below as well as the detail of the available revenue for the project. With the approval of the acceleration of the FY2005-2006 appropriation, and the additional appropriations and budget adjustments shown below, sufficient funds will be available for the project. The requested acceleration, appropriations and budget adjustments will be distributed as follows: Appropriation / Budget Adjustment Detail Account No. 210-165-741- FY 04105 Appropriation FY 05/06 Appropriation Additional Appropriation / Bud et Adjustment Adjusted Appropriation 5610 FIFE $ 0 $ * 393,180 $ 0 $ 393,180 5801Admin $ 0 $ 202,000 $ 25,980 $ 176,020 5802 Design $ 0 $ 202,650 $ 350 $ 203,000 5804 Const. $ 0 $ 2,860,000 $ 767,800 $ 3,627,800 5805 Const. En $ 0 $ 125,OOOT $ 195,000 $ 320,000 Totals $ 0 $ 3,782,830 $ 937,170 $ 4,720,000 The amount of $393,180.00 is committed to the purchase of a fire truck ($330,000) and to provide a furnishings and fixtures allowance for the Fire Station ($63,180). Available Revenue Detail Actual Revenues Additional Revenues Total Revenue/ Appropriation Current Appropriation Additional Appropriation County of Riverside Reimbursables $ 1,200,000 $ 815,000 $ 2,015,000 $ 1,726,415 $ 288,585 CFD Reimbursables $ 1,275,000 $1,100,000 $ 2,375,000 $ 1,726,415 $ 648,585 DIF — Fire Facilities $ 330,000 $ 0 $ 330,000 $ 330,000 $ 0 Totals $ 2,805,000 $1,915,000 $ 4,720,000 $ 3,728,830 $ 937,170 ATTACHMENT: 1. Fire Station Project Location — From CIP Budget 2. Fire Station Project Description — From CIP Budget 3. Contract 20040914 PW03-01 AWD PROJECT LOCATION Project Title: FIRE STATION RORH'AUGH RANCH SITE 119 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Title: FIRE STATION RORIPAUGH RANCH SITE Description: Acquire, design, and construct a City Fire Station at a location to be determined at the Department: City Fire Services/Riverside County Fire Department — Account No. 210.165.741 Scope of Project: Project will include the acquisition, design, and construction of a fire station. PRIORITY: II Benefit: Project will provide fire protection and enhance response time to the northeast portion of the City. Total Project Cost: $ 3,782,830 Administration Construction Design Fixtures/Furn/Equip Construction Engineering Totals Actuals to Date 2004-05 2005-06 $ 202,000 $ 2,860,000 $ 202,650 $ 393,180 $ 125,000 $ 3,782,830 Future 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Years Future O&M Costs: $ 442,800 Annually (50150 cost sharing with the County of Riverside) Source of Funds: Reimbursement/Other - Riverside County $ 1,726,415 Community Facilities District - Proposed $ 1,726,415 Development Impact Fees - Fire Facilities $ 330,000 Total Funding: $ 3,782,830 Note: Land to be provided by the developer. 120 of the City. Cost To Complete $ 202,000 $ 2,860,000 $ 202,650 $ 393,180 $ 125,000 $ 3,782,830 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW03-01 RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 26`h day of October, 2004 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." W ITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW03- 01, RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Standard Plans and Specifications for Construction of Local Streets and Roads, (latest edition), issued by the California Department of Transportation, where specifically referenced in the Plans, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by Public Works Standards, Inc (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW03-01, RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: BNi Building News Division of BNi Publications, Inc. 1612 South Clementine St. Anaheim, California 92802 (714) 517-0970 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW03-01, RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. U nless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT C-1 Contract Tovey ShultzAgreementslContrad Tovey Shultz The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. 2. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW03-01, RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: THREE MILLION TWO HUNDRED NINETY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($3,298,000.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed two hundred (200) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS A. LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. B. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the CITY, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be CONTRACT C-2 Contract Tovey ShultzAgreements\Contract Tovey Shultz made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the CITY on forms provided by the CITY. C. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. D. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. E. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES — EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. 8. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. 9. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are available from the California Department of Industrial Relations's Internet Web Site at http://www.dir.ca.gov. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. CONTRACT C-3 Contract Tovey ShultzAgreementslContracl Tovey Shultz Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 10. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. 11. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CITY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. 12. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. 13. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. 14. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. 15. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. 16. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. 17. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and CONTRACT C-4 Contract Tovey ShultzAgmements\Contract Tovey Shultz places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. 18. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. 19. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. 20. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor/consultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non -contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 21. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT C-5 Contract Tovey ShultzAgreementslContrad Tovey Shultz IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR Tovey/Shultz Construction, Inc. 18261 Collier Ave., Unit A Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951)471-5677 Randy Shultz, President Steven H. Tovey, Secretary/Treasurer (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) DATED: CITY OF TEMECULA Michael S. Naggar, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT C-6 Contract Tovey ShultzAgreements\ContractTovey Shultz ITEM 12 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: t�Awilliam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement with Vanir Construction Management, Inc. for Construction Management, Material Testing and Special Inspections for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station, Project No. PW03-01 PREPARED BY: reg Butler, Principal Engineer David McBride, Senior Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve the Agreement with Vanir Construction Management, Inc. to provide professional construction management, material testing and special inspection services, in an amount not to exceed $273,240.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve amendments to the agreement not to exceed the contingency amount of $27,300, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. BACKGROUND: The Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station project will provide for construction of a three bay heavy urban station on a 1.5 acre site located at the southwest corner of future intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and South Loop Road (extension of Calle Chapos). More specifically, the project will include construction of the following: wet and dry utilities, precise grading, site drainage systems, erosion control, foundation systems, a new single story fire station totaling approximately 9,062 square feet, a storage structure totaling approximately456 square feet, trash enclosure, two above ground fuel tanks (1,000 gallons each), site walkways and hardscape improvements, site landscaping, site concrete masonry unit walls and a parking lot for 22. In addition, the project will provide for procurement and installation of certain furnishings and fixtures necessary to support the fire station. Because of the size and complexity of the project it requires material testing, special inspection, and a full time construction manager with recent proven experience in the construction of specialized building projects like the Fire Station. The Public Works Department requested proposals from five (5) different firms with extensive experience in construction management of specialized building projects. Three (3) firms responded to the proposal and one of the firms is currently performing work for the City. Staff rated Vanir Construction Management, Inc. as the firm providing the most qualified and cost effective proposal. Vanir Construction Management, Inc. (Vanir) has extensive experience with similar projects. They will provide all the construction management, material testing and special inspection services described in the Scope of Work shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached agreement. 20040914 M03-01 PSA CM Vanir's cost proposal is based on the estimated construction duration of ten months and breaks down as follows: Phase One (Pre -Construction Analysis and Review): $ 9,200 Phase Two (Construction Support) Construction Management $217,040 Material Testing & Special Inspections $ 42,000 Reimbursables 5,000 Total $273,240 FISCAL IMPACT: The Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Project, Project No. PW03-01, is funded by the Roripaugh Ranch Community Facilities District (CFD), the County of Riverside, the City's Development Impact Fees (DIF) for Fire Facilities, and from City General Fund Reserves that are expected to be reimbursed by the County of Riverside in Early 2005. The total cost of the original Agreement $273,240, plus a 10% contingency amount of $27,300 brings the total authorization to $300,540. Once the transfer of funds and additional appropriation detailed in the agenda item titled "Award of Construction Contract for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station, Project No. PW03-01" are authorized, adequate funds will be available in project account No. 210-165-741-5805. ATTACHMENTS: 1. CIP Project Description 2. Location Map 3. Agreement with Vanir Construction Management, Inc. 20040914 M03-01 PSA CM O h U H r-m a -1 Ala w^ O o 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 Vi CO O M O Occ N O N m v N +' 4' Cl �o 0 01 N �O N N m U U N m 69 69 69 6s vj 64 d N 7 Cl a 0 00 0 0 N O N (� H O � N a w p�p V V o O CD M CD O V d' o 00 O U N N mm 69 69 fH (H 0 0 0 0 0 o C C O O O M O O o 0 00 Oi N O N ri vi N 6v 69 v� v9 6A 6A � O N ono U � W � m o o [� 0 m F dUAk4U[. 69 :. Z AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES RORIPAUGH RANCH FIRE STATION PW 03-01 THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of October 26, 2004, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City') and Vanir Construction Management, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on October 26, 2004, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than December 31, 2005, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all time faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. Consultant shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or sub -contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 5. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Two Hundred Seventy Three Thousand Two Hundred Forty Dollars and No Cents ($273,240.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement. Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. 1 RICIRPROJECTWW03TW03-01 RR PS\Aarm ts\20040626 CM aarO mW301.Eoo C. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non -disputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, togetherwith supporting documents, shall be maintained fora period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. 2 RACIR PROJECTSTW OMM03-01 RR FSWQreemnls120040626 CM aarO Pw0301.dm b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and otherdocuments prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the Cityand maybe used, reused or otherwise disposed of bythe Citywithout the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. C. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 9. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non -owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) peroccurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000)peraccidentfor bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: One million ($2,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured's as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self -insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to complywith reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. 4 R:1CIPPROJEGTSWWMTWOM1 RR FSVgrmmen1\20040826 CM agrm pwW dm f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the Citya wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned byfailure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary' provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. s RAU"ROJECTSTW03\PW03-01 RR FSWgreem ts120040626 CM agmR pw0301.dm 14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (1) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: City of Temecula Attention: City Manager Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Street Address: 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 To Consultant: Vanir Construction Management, Inc. Attention: David R Anderson 290 North D. Street, Suite 900 San Bernardino, CA 92401 15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without priorwritten consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 16. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree thatthe laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Courts judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub -contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non -contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub -contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. 6 R:\C1"R0JECTS\PW03\PW0M1 RR FSWgreemenWN40626 CM agrt pw 301.dm 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral orwritten, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each parry's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. RACIPIPROJECTSP`MPWOB l RR FSW9reementsVW40828 CM an,r PwWl.dm IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Vanir Construction Management, Inc. David R. Anderson, Project Director 290 North D. Street, Suite 900 San Bernardino, CA 92401 MansourAliabadi, President Alex Leon, CFO (Two Signatures of Corporate Officers Required For Corporations) 08/25/2004;16:39-='909381.7534 VANIR" CM AT SBDD::i" ` _ : PAGE r 02 VAKIR Construction Management Inc. August 25, 2004 Mr. David McBride Senior Engineer — Capital Projects Department of Public Works City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 EXHIBIT A Task to be Performed Re: Proposal for Construction Management Services Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station PW03-01 Dear Mr. McBride, 290 North D street, Suite 900 San Bernardino, CA 92401 909 334-1785 909 381-7534 FAX Vans Construction Management, Inc. (VCM) is pleased to submit to you our proposal for construction management services based on our recent telephone conversation. During that conversation you indicated that bid phase services would not be required of VCM and expressed a desire for us to provide material & special inspection as required by the plans and specifications. It is also our understanding that code compliance inspection would be provided by the City building official(s). Following is our proposal based on the above directions: Construction Phase Services: Task 1— Project Validation VCM will verify public utility coordination (i.e. water, gas, sewer, power etc.) and agency permitting to assure that the project is ready to start construction and be supported as required by utility purveyors and public agencies. Task 2 — Construction Management Plan VCM will provide a customized construction management plats in coordination with the City and the architect and other team members. The CMP will provide the city, contractor, subcontractors, architect and their consultants, inspectors and testing labs with detailed information concerning the specific ";.,, .::.;.$acramento__Los Angeles- SenDiego.. San Bernardino -..$an Luis Obispo San Jose Bellevue San Francisco 08/25/2004 ".16::39. 9093817534 - VANIR CM AT SBDO.PAGE -.03 Mr. David McBride Exhibit A— Tasks To Be Performed Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Page 2 of 3 requirements, communications and procedures that will be implemented during construction of the community theater. The construction management plan is intended to supplement the contract documents and does not replace or delete the contract obligations or requirements. Task 3 — Proiect Procedures Manual VCM will provide a project procedures manual that will describe the process to be followed in controlling specific requirements outlined in the CMP. System procedures will be addressed for monitoring and controlling project costs, quality assurance, maintenance of the project schedule, method and procedures for payments, change orders, submittals, correspondence, reports, meetings, forms to be used, project acceptance and closeout procedures to name a few. Task 4 - Construction Administration Vanir will provide construction contract management administration as an agent of and representative of the City and will establish and implement coordination procedures between the City, the architect and contractor. Our fee proposal (Exhibit B) for construction administration is structured so that Vanir will be present on the jobsite whenever the contractor is working on the jobsite. Following is a listing of tasks to be performed: Construction Phase Review Plans, Specifications, Contract Documents Verify Public Utility Coordination Verify Agency Permits Photo Documentation of Existing Site Prepare Construction Management Plan (CMP) Issue Approved CMP Prepare Project Procedures Manual Pre -Construction Schedule Meeting Pre -Construction Meeting Review Contractor's SWPPP Review Contractor's Traffic Control Plan Review Contractor's Safety Plan Review Contractor's Submittal Schedule for Completeness Review Contractor's Project Schedule of Values Assist Contractor with Required Permits Assure Posting of Prevailing Wages Review Certified Payrolls for Rate Conformance Review and Monitor Contractors Weekly and Monthly Construction Schedule Prepare Monthly Report Review Contractor's RFIs Review A/B Response to Contractor RFIs 06/25/2004 16 39'_- 9093817534 ' VANIR.CM AT SBDO PAGE;; 04 Mr. David McBride Exhibit A — Tasks To Be Performed Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Page 3 of 3 Construction Phase(confinued) Review Submittals for Completeness Post As-Builts Conduct Weekly Progress Meeting Prepare/Distribute Weekly Progress Meeting Minutes Review Contractor's Payment Requests Process Project -related Invoices Review Contractor's Change Order Requests Prepare Daily Log Coordinate Start-up Activities Coordinate Final Punchlist Coordinate Final Inspections with Agency Personnel Post -Construction Phase Obtain Required Close -Out Submittals Draft Notice of Completion Request Publication of Notice of Completion Process Contractor's Final Payment Request Prepare/Distribute Final Project Cost Report Task 8 -- Code Compliance Inspections / Material & Soils Testing Services Vanir will also provide, by subcontract, special deputy inspections called for in the plans and specifications as well as material and soils testing services for the Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station project. It is understood that the developer will deliver to the City a certified pad at rough grade elevation for the fire station construction project. It should be noted that the costs of these services are highly dependent upon the contractors approved construction schedule. Since the approved construction schedule is not available for review we have based our fees for these services on an estimate of the construction schedule and our collective past experience with similar projects. Consequently, this part of our fee proposal may be subject to revision upon receipt of the contractor's proposed schedule. We look forward to working with you on this important City project. If you need any clarification of the tasks described above please do not hesitate to call. Best regards, < 2 David R. Anderson, AIA, CCM, LEBDTmAP Project Director/Associate San Bernardino Area Office 08/25/2004 16t.39 909381-7534 VANIR CM AT SBDOt� PAGE;:05 VANiR Construction Management, Inc. August 25, 2004 Mr. David McBride Senior Engineer— Capital Projects Department of Public Works City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 EXHIBIT B Fee & Pavnitent Rate Schedule Re: Proposal for Construction Management Services Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Dear Mr. McBride, 290 North D Street, Sulte 900 San aemanlino, CA 92401 909 384-1785 909 381.7534 FAX Based on Exhibit'W', Tasks to be Performed (copy enclosed), we propose a Time and Material Not -To -Exceed Fee of $273,240. Our fee will be billed according to the following division of tasks: Tasks Fees Task 1—Project Validation $ 1,840 Task 2 — Construction Management Plan $ 3,680 Task 3 —Project Procedures Manual $ 3,680 Task 4 - Construction Administration $217,040 Task 5 — Material & Soils Testing Services $ 42,000 Reimbursables (Fed -Ex, Blueprints, Photo's etc.) NTE Allowance:_ $ 5,000 Total Not -To -Exceed Fee: $273,240 The above fees are based on a construction schedule of 10 months. Sacramento Los Angeles , San Diego , San Bernardino - San Luis Obispo San Jose Bellevue San Francisco 08/25/2004 .16;39-' 909381.7534 VANIR CM AT SBDQ PAGE ;06': Mr. David McBride Exhibit B - Fee & Payment Rate Schedule Roripaugh Ranch Fire Station Page 2 of 2 Fees will be invoiced monthly, based on time and material for each task, plus any reimbursable expenses. We have read the City's Standard Consultant Services Agreement attached to RFP No.129 and agree to the terms therein. If Extra Services are required, and approved by the City of Temecula, the following rates would apply: Classification Rate / Hour Principal in Charge / Project Director $ 135 Senior Project Manager $ 120 Senior Construction Manager $ 120 Project Manager $ 115 Construction Manager $ 115 Constructability Reviewer $ 400 95 (negotiated) Estimator $ 490- 95 (negotiated) Scheduler $ 490 95 (negotiated) Assistant Project Manager $ 95 Assistant Construction Manager $ 95 Field Engineer $ 85 Field Coordinator $ 80 Project Coordinator $ 80 Clerical/Doc.Control $ 50 Consultants Cost x 1.10 Reimbursables (Fed -Ex, Blueprints, Photo's etc.) Cost x 1.10 Please call me if you have any questions or need clarifications. We look forward to working with you and other city staff on this exciting project! Best regards David R. Anderson, AIA, CCM, LEEDTMAP Project Director/Associate San Bernardino Area Office Page 2 of 2 ITEM 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Ak illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: 1-15/ State Route 79 South Ultimate Interchange, Project Number PW04-08 APNs 922-210-060, 922-210-061 & 922-210-052 Property Acquisition PREPARED BY: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council enter into a purchase agreement with Margarita Canyon, LLC for Assessor Parcel Numbers 922-210-060, 922-210-061 and 922-210- 052. The purchase price is currently under negotiation with the owner of the property. Staff expects the negotiations to be completed prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on October 26, 2004 and within the budget range. BACKGROUND: On April 16, 2004, Caltrans approved the Project study Report (PSR) for the 1-15/ SR 79 South Ultimate Interchange. The PSR is a preliminary planning document for the future interchange that identifies alternatives for improving the interchange. The preferred alternative will have an impact on the properties owned by Margarita Canyon, LLC, at the southwest corner of 1-15 and State Route 79 South. The extent of the impact will be determined at the next phase of the project, the Project Report (PR). The City is currently in the process of hiring a consultant for this phase. It is in the best interest of the City to reserve the right-of-way needed for the ultimate interchange. The property owner, Margarita Canyon, LLC has offered to sell the property to the City. The City has received an appraisal report, dated July 30, 2004, from Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal services for the valuation of the property needed for the construction of the ultimate interchange. The purchase amount will be discussed in closed session prior to action on this item. The City is working with Caltrans to obtain early acquisition authority prior to the Project Report and completion of the environmental studies. The property owner has requested an agreement to price by November 15' and close of escrow by January 15`n, 2005. The property owners have escrows pending that are pressing them for a conclusion to this matter as soon as possible. FISCAL IMPACT: The City of Temecula has Tribal Association of Sovereign Indian Nations (TASIN) Funds in the amount of $1,423,408; Crown Hill CFD funds in the amount of $1,000,000; Morgan Hill CFD finds in the amount of $1,175,000; and TUMF in the amount of $4,000,000 available for this purchase. 1 R:\agdrpt\2004\1026\PW04-O6Margarita Canyonopen Session 2 ATTACHMENT: Purchase Agreement 2 R:\agdrpt\2004\1026\PW04-08Margadta Canyonopen Session 2 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND MARGARITA CANYON, LLC. ( PROJECT) THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is dated and entered into as of October 2004 by and between MARGARITA CANYON, LLC. ("Seller"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("Buyer"), and constitutes both an agreement to purchase and sell real property between the parties and the parties' escrow instructions directed to First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"). RECITALS A. On 2004 the Buyer delivered to Seller an offer (the "Offer") to purchase the real property interests described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property") pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.). B. Buyer intends to use the Property for public purposes. C. Seller desires to sell and Buyer desires to buy, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth herein. D. The real property interests Buyer seeks to acquire consists of a fee simple interest in the real property located in the City of Temecula, California, and identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 922-210-052, 060, and 061 (referred to hereafter as "Subject Pronertv Interests"). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, operative provisions and the Recitals which are incorporated herein by this reference, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Purchase and Sale. On the Close of Escrow (as herein defined), Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy the Subject Property Interests from Seller, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 2. Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Subject Property Interests to be paid by Buyer is the sum of ($ ) (the "Purchase Price"), which sum shall be paid in full in cash on the Close of Escrow. 3. Title and Title Insurance. Upon the Opening of Escrow, Escrow Holder shall order from First American Title Company ("Title Company") a title commitment for the Property. Escrow Holder shall also request two copies each of all instruments identified as exceptions on said title commitment. Upon receipt of the foregoing, Escrow Holder shall deliver these instruments and the title commitment to Buyer and Seller. Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be insured at the Close of Escrow by a CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the 11086/0004/796087 1 October 14, 2004 Purchase Price (the "Policy"). The Policy of title insurance provided for pursuant to this Section shall insure Buyer's fee interest in the Property free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, restrictions, and rights -of -way of record, subject only to the following permitted conditions of title ("Permitted Title Exceptions"): (a) The applicable zoning, building and development regulations of any municipality, county, state or federal jurisdiction affecting the Property; and (b) Those non -monetary exceptions approved by Buyer within fifteen (15) business days after the date Buyer receives the title commitment and legible copies of all instruments noted as exceptions therein. If Buyer unconditionally disapproves any such exceptions, Escrow shall thereupon terminate, all funds deposited therein shall be refunded to Buyer (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), and this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. If Buyer conditionally disapproves any such exceptions, then Seller shall use Seller's best efforts to cause such exceptions to be removed by the Close of Escrow. If such conditionally disapproved non -monetary exceptions are not removed by the Close of Escrow, Buyer may, at Buyer's option, either accept the Property subject to such encumbrances, or terminate the Escrow and receive a refund of all funds deposited into Escrow (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), if any, and this Agreement shall thereupon be of no further force or effect. At the Close of Escrow, Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be free and clear of all monetary encumbrances. 4. Grant Deed. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the Close of Escrow a Grant Deed duly executed and acknowledged by Seller, granting and conveying to Buyer the Subject Property Interests. The Grant Deed shall be in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's counsel and shall be accepted by Buyer prior to recording. 5. Authorization to Record Documents and Disburse Funds. Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to record the documents and disburse the funds and documents called for hereunder upon the Close of Escrow, provided each of the following conditions has then been fulfilled: (a) Title Company can issue in favor of Buyer the Policy, showing the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. Escrow Holder shall use the proceeds of the Purchase Price to obtain partial reconveyance, if necessary, of any monetary liens encumbering the Property, so that the Property shall be free and clear of monetary liens and encumbrances at the Close of Escrow. (b) Escrow Holder shall have received Buyer's notice of approval or satisfaction or waiver of all of the contingencies to Buyer's obligations hereunder, as provided for in Section 11; and (c) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the Grant Deed required by Section 4. 11086/0004/796087 2 October 14, 2004 Unless otherwise instructed in writing, Escrow Holder is authorized to record at the Close of Escrow any instrument delivered through this Escrow if necessary or proper for issuance of the Policy, including the Grant Deed. 6. Escrow. The parties hereby establish an escrow ("Escrow") to accommodate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Opening of Escrow shall mean the date on which Escrow Holder shall have received a fully executed original of this Agreement from Buyer and Seller. Close of Escrow shall be the date upon which the Grant Deed to Buyer is delivered and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside. The Close of Escrow shall be on the date, which is not later than the first business day occurring sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement. Before the Close of Escrow, all risk of loss and damage to the Property from any source whatsoever shall be solely that of Seller. Buyer shall pay all escrow costs. 7. Escrow Charees and Prorations. Buyer shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance, the Escrow fees and Escrow Holder's customary out-of-pocket expenses for messenger services, long distance telephone, etc. Buyer shall pay for recording the Grant Deed and any documentary or other local transfer taxes, and any other recording fees. If the Escrow shall fail to close through no fault of either party, Buyer shall pay all Escrow cancellation charges. 8. License to Enter. Seller hereby grants to Buyer and Buyer's authorized agents, contractors, consultants, assigns, attorneys, accountants and other representatives an irrevocable license to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making inspections and other examinations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the right to perform soil and geological tests of the Property and an environmental site assessment thereof. Buyer shall give Seller reasonable notice before going on the Property. Buyer does hereby indemnify and forever save Seller, Seller's heirs, successors and assigns, and the Property, free and harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damages and costs and expenses, demands, causes of action, claims or judgments, whether or not arising from or occurring out of any damage to the Property as a result of any accident or other occurrence at the Property which is in any way connected with Buyer's inspections or non -permanent improvements involving entrance onto the Property pursuant to this Section. If Buyer fails to acquire the Property due to Buyer's default, this license shall terminate upon the termination of Buyer's right to purchase the Property. In such event, Buyer shall remove or cause to be removed all Buyer's personal property, facilities, tools and equipment from the Property. 9. Warranties and Representations of Seller. Seller hereby represents and warrants to Buyer the following, it being expressly understood and agreed that all such representations and warranties are to be true and correct as of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow: (a) That (i) on the Close of Escrow the Property shall be free and clear of any and all hazardous or toxic substances, materials, and waste, including, but not limited to, asbestos; (ii) the Property is in compliance with all applicable statutes 11086/0004/796087 3 October 14, 2004 and regulations, including environmental, health and safety requirements; (iii) all businesses on the Property have disposed of their waste in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations; and (iv) Seller has no notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or alleged violation of environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinance or regulations To this end, it is agreed that notwithstanding the conveyance of the Property to Buyer, Seller shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless Buyer from and against any and all claims, liabilities, suits, losses, costs, expenses and damages, including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of any claim for loss or damage to any property, including the Property, injuries to or death of persons, or for the cost of cleaning up the Property and removing hazardous or toxic substances, materials and waste therefrom, by reason of contamination or adverse effects on the environment, or by reason of any statutes, ordinances, orders, rules or regulations of any governmental entity or agency requiring the clean-up of the Property, caused by or resulting from any hazardous material, substance or waste existing on, under or about the Property on the Close of Escrow. (b) That Seller is the sole owner of the Property free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, easements, encroachments from adjacent properties, encroachments by improvements or vegetation on the Property onto adjacent property, or rights of way of any nature, other than those that may appear on the title commitment. Seller shall not further encumber the Property or allow the Property or to be further encumbered prior to the Close of Escrow. (c) Neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done hereunder including the transfer of the Property to Buyer, violates or shall violate any contract, agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party, or which affects the Property, and the sale of the Property herein contemplated does not require the consent of any party not a signatory hereto. (d) There are no mechanics', materialmen's or similar claims or liens presently claimed or which will be claimed against the Property for work performed or commenced prior to the date of this Agreement. Seller agrees to hold Buyer harmless from all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, charges, fees, including attorney fees, arising from or relating to any such lien or any similar lien claimed against the Property and arising from work performed or commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. (e) There are no written or oral leases or contractual right or option to lease, purchase, or otherwise enjoy possession, rights or interest of any nature in and to the Property or any part thereof, and no persons have any right of possession to the Property or any part thereof. (f) Seller has no knowledge of any pending, threatened or potential litigation, action or proceeding against Seller or any other Party before any court or administrative tribunal which is in any way related to the Property. 11086/0004/796087 4 October 14, 2004 10. FULL PAYMENT OF ALL OBLIGATIONS OF CITY. (a) It is understood and agreed between Seller and Buyer that the payments made to Seller as set forth in this Agreement represent an all inclusive settlement and is full and complete payment for just compensation for the acquisition of the Subject Property Interests and includes and satisfies any and all other payments, if any, which may be required by law to be paid to Seller arising out of the acquisition and displacement of the Seller and persons residing on the Property, and specifically includes, but is not limited to, claims for severance and other damages, attorney's fees, interest, expenses of litigation, expert's fees, pre -condemnation damages, inverse condemnation, owner participation rights under the Redevelopment Plan, relocation assistance and/or benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), if applicable, or under Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.), and loss of business goodwill under the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.510, and all costs and expenses whatever in connection therewith. Seller hereby acknowledges that Buyer has advised Seller of the possible availability of such relocation assistance rights to Seller and that the waiver of all rights by Seller herein set forth as free and voluntary. (b) This Agreement arose out of Buyer's efforts to acquire the Property through its municipal authority. The parties agree that this Agreement is a settlement of claims in order to avoid litigation. Seller, on behalf of itself and its heirs, successors and assigns, hereby fully releases Buyer, its officials, employees, and agents, from all claims and causes of action by reason of any damage which has been sustained, or may be sustained, as a result of Buyer's efforts to acquire the Property or any preliminary steps thereto. Seller further releases and agrees to hold Buyer harmless from any and all claims and causes of action by reason of any leasehold interest in the Property. (c) Seller acknowledges that it may have sustained damage, loss, costs or expenses which are presently unknown and unsuspected, and such damage, loss, costs or expense which may have been sustained, may give rise to additional damages, loss, costs or expenses in the future. Nevertheless, Seller hereby acknowledges 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 principle of similar effect. California Civil Code Section 1542 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." (d) This section shall survive the Close of Escrow. 11086/0004/796087 5 October 14, 2004 11. Buyer's Contingencies. For the benefit of Buyer, the Closing of Escrow and the Buyer's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Buyer's written waiver thereof, it being agreed that Buyer can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow: (a) That as of the Close of Escrow the representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement are all true and correct. (b) The delivery of all documents pursuant to Section 4 hereof. (c) Title Company's commitment to issue in favor of Buyer a CLTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance with liability equal to the Purchase Price showing Buyer's fee interest in the Property subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. (d) Buyer's approval prior to the Close of Escrow of any environmental site assessment, soils or geological reports, or other physical inspections of the Property or the underlying real property that Buyer might perform prior to the Close of Escrow. 12. Additional Representations by Buyer. Buyer hereby makes the following additional representations to Seller: (a) 13. Certification of Non -Foreign Status. Seller covenants to deliver to Escrow a certification of Non -Foreign Status in accordance with I.R.C. Section 1445, and a similar notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18805 and 26131, prior to the Close of Escrow. 14. Default. In the event of a breach or default under this Agreement by either Buyer or Seller, the non -defaulting party shall have, in addition to all rights available at law or equity, the right to terminate this Agreement and the Escrow for the purchase and sale of the Property, by delivering written notice thereof to the defaulting party and to Escrow Holder, and if Buyer is the non -defaulting party, Buyer shall thereupon promptly receive a refund of all prior deposits, if any. Such termination of the Escrow by a non -defaulting party shall be without prejudice to the non -defaulting party's rights and remedies at law or equity. 15. Notices. All notices and demands shall be given in writing by certified mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, or by personal delivery. Notices shall be considered given upon the earlier of (a) personal delivery, (b) two (2) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered, return receipt requested, or (c) one (1) business day following deposit with an overnight carrier service. A copy of all notices shall be sent to Escrow Holder. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party 11086/0004/796087 6 October 14, 2004 gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: BUYER: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attn: City Manager COPY TO: Richards, Watson & Gershon 355 S. Grand Avenue, 40th Fl. Los Angeles, California 90071 Attn: Peter M. Thorson, Esq. SELLER: ESCROW HOLDER 16. Broker's Commissions. Seller shall pay all claims of brokers, agents or finders, licensed or unlicensed, and all claims of real estate or other consultants which exist or may arise as a result of Seller's actions with respect to the Property. Buyer shall not be liable for any such fees or claims and Seller shall indemnify Buyer, its officers, employees and agents, from any and all costs, liabilities or judgments, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending or paying any such claims. 17. Further Instructions. Each party agrees to execute such other and further escrow instructions as may be necessary or proper in order to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 18. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be effective only when duly executed by Buyer and Seller and deposited with Escrow Holder. 19. Miscellaneous (a) Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced according to the laws of the State of California. (b) Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement, oral or written, and together with the Exhibits hereto and any agreements delivered pursuant hereto, contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller on the subject matter hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to any employee, officer, agent or representative of either 11086/0004/796087 7 October 14, 2004 party, shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby. No person is authorized to make, and by execution hereof Seller and Buyer acknowledge that no person has made, any representation, warranty, guaranty or promise except as set forth herein; and no agreement, statement, representation or promise made by any such person which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding on Seller or Buyer. (c) Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (d) Time of Essence. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Escrow company's general Escrow instructions. (e) Remedies Not Exclusive and Waivers. No remedy conferred by any of the specific provisions of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy and each and every remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of the right to pursue other available remedies. (f) Interpretation and Construction. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised this Agreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revise this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the feminine and masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, partnership, firm, trust, or association where ever the context so requires. The recitals and captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. (g) City Manager Authority. The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to execute such other documents, including without limitation, escrow instructions and amendments thereto, certificates of acceptance, agreements for payments of lost rent, or certifications, as may be necessary or convenient to implement the terms of this Agreement. 20. Attorneys' Fees. If either party hereto incurs attorneys' fees in order to enforce, defend or interpret any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or because of a breach of this Agreement by the other party, the prevailing party, whether by suit, negotiation, arbitration or settlement shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees from the other party. 11086/0004/796087 8 October 14, 2004 21. Assignment. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement or may designate a nominee to acquire title to the Property, provided, however, that any such assignment or designation shall not relieve Buyer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 22, Escrow Holder Need Not Be Concerned. Escrow Holder is not to be concerned with Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof, and Buyer and Seller release Escrow Holder from liability or obligation as to Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. SELLER: MARGARITA CANYON, LLC. 0 M BUYER CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation: Mike Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney 11086/0004/796087 9 October 14, 2004 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description of the Property TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.28627-1 BEING A DIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING: A PORTION OF LOT 11 IN BLOCK 32, OF THE TOWN OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 15 PAGE(S) 726 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF PARCEL 89 OF DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 29, 1977 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 192314 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND FURTHER SHOWN AS "REMAINDER PARCEL" AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 10814 ON FILE IN BOOK 78 PAGE(S) 5 THROUGH 8, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11 NORTH 150 39' 27" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 128.78 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 590 39' 01" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 9.69 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 756.00 FEET AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS NORTH 070 42' 41" EAST, SAID CURVE BEING ALSO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND RECORDED FEBRUARY 14, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO.50649 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 030 54' 49", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 51.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 48' 19' 13" WEST ON A NON -TANGENT LINE, A DISTANCE OF 40.01 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 461.00 FEET AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS NORTH 830 21' 12" WEST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 36' 09", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 149.68 FEET; THENCE ALONG A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE SOUTH 78° 02' 39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 78.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82° 44' 46" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 214.20 FEET; 11086/0004/796087 10 October 14, 2004 THENCE NORTH 070 15' 14" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 309.08 TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 740 20' 39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 299.94 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3739.83 FEET AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS SOUTH 690 30' 20" WEST, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 000 59' 27" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 64.67 FEET, TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 450 25' 56" EAST ON A NON -TANGENT LINE, A DISTANCE OF 258.20 FEET, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL'; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL", SOUTH 190 54' 46" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 235.93 FEET, THENCE ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL", SOUTH 700 12' 48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 135.05 FEET; THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES ARE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL"; THENCE SOUTH 38° 44' 42" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 908.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 26° 33' 52" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 424.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 09' 18' 05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 861.57 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL"; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID "REMAINDER PARCEL" SOUTH 840 02' 11" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 611.15 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE I-15; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 160 15' 39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 202.33 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT AND RECORDED SEPTEMBER 1,1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 302357 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID CERTAIN PARCEL SOUTH 730 44' 21" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID CERTAIN PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID CERTAIN PARCEL, NORTH 16015' 39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 217.80 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID CERTAIN PARCEL; 11086/0004/796087 11 October 14, 2004 THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID CERTAIN PARCEL AND SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, NORTH 73° 44' 21" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 243.66 FEET; THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES ARE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE NORTH 16' 1513911 WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1304.26 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25' 49' 55" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 283.96 FEET; THENCE NORTH 320 38' 01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 654.11 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 756.00 FEET AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS NORTH 200 10' 49" EAST, SAID CURVE BEING ALSO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND RECORDED FEBRUARY 14, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 50649 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 080 33' 19" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.88 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS ALSO SHOWN AS PARCEL °B" OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA 98-0331, RECORDED NOVEMBER 14, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO.453433 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 11086/0004/796087 12 October 14, 2004 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OCTOBER 12, 2004 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:39 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Stone, and Washington ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Roberts Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 28, 2004. 2 Veteran's Memorial. Project o. PW04-10CSD — Additional Work and Appropriation RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve an appropriation in the amount of $95,839.70, from General Fund Capital Reserves ($74,339.70) and from Contribution Revenue ($21,500) to the Veteran's Memorial Project, Project No. PW04-10CSD, to cover items of work not covered in the original contract and budget; 2.2 Increase Contribution Revenue Estimate from the VFW in the amount of $21,500. 2.3 Authorize contractual expenditure in excess of the approved 10% contingency in the amount of $44,714.11; 2.4 Approve an expenditure to Sun City Granite, 425 W. Rider #B-3, Perris, CA 92571, for a total amount of $25,125.59. RAMinutes.csd\101204 1 Community Services Recreation Brochure RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award a contract to Graphics Unlimited Lithography for the preparation and printing of four (4) issues of the Community Services Recreation Brochure over a two (2) year period with a third (3) year option to renew. The cost of printing the brochure is $40,370 annually. 3.2 Approve a contingency of 10% or $4,037 annually. MOTION: Director Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 3. The motion was seconded by Director Stone and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Director Roberts who was absent. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comments. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:40 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 26, 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] RAM!nutes. csd\101204 ITEM 2 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FII CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Boards of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Replace Pool Water Heater at the Community Recreation Center PREPARED BY: V"-y Jerry Kanigowski, Facility Maintenance Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1) Award a contract to Horizon Mechanical Contractors of California, authorize the expenditure of $33,110.00 for the replacement of the Pool Water Heater at the Temecula Community Recreation Center and approve a 10% contingency in the amount of $3,311.00. BACKGROUND: The South Coast Air Quality Management District has passed new low emissions regulations for natural gas Fred commercial pool water heaters. This rule applies to the pool heater at the Community Recreation Center. To meet the new regulation, TCSD is required to replace this water heater, by January 01, 2005. On September 3, 2004 a request for a fixed bid price to replace the pool heater was sent to nine (9) contractors. On October 1, 2004, two (2) proposals were received for the pool water heater replacement. Proposals were submitted by: 1. Horizon Mechanical $33,110.00 2. California Commercial Pools $55,000.00 Staff determined that Horizon provided the lower qualified proposal. t R:\KANIGOWA Agenda ReporMorizon Mechanical 2004 Pool Water Heatef10072004.doc FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of the contract is $33,110.00, plus an additional ten percent (10%) contingency of $3,311.00. Sufficient funds have been included in the TCSD rehabilitation budget for fiscal year 2004-05. ATTACHMENT: 1. Proposals 2. Contract 2 R:\KANIGOWJ%Agenda Report\Horizon Mechanical 2004 Pool Water Heater10072004.doc RIZ ON of California sr. uc #791826 Friday, October 01, 2004 To: Bruce Wedeking City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Fax: (909) 506-5163 Phone: (909) 694-6480 Request for Bid Sob Location: Community Recreation Center 30875 Rancho Vista Road Temecula, CA 92590 Mobile: Email: Scope of work: POOL HEATER REPLACEMENT Pursuant to your request for bid, listed is our proposal to provide and replace the swimming pool heater at the Temecula Community Recreation Center, including a full scope of work: EM LITIOK Furnish labor and material to remove and dispose of the following items: • Raypak pool heater • Vent from pool heater though roof • Gas piping from pool heater to existing 2" piping located at the ceiling • Water piping from pool heater to existing 4" Flanges at the main line near filters • Electrical from pool heater to panel P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia California 91066 661.510.2981 1 fax 661,297.2372 tarty of Ternecula Request for Bid Replacement Pool Heater Temeculae Community Recreation Center October 1 , 2004 Page 2 of 3 INSTAMON Fumish labor and material to install pool heater as follows: • Extend existing service pad as needed per supplied detail to place pool heater (CPN 1801 Only) • Anchor pool heater per supplied detail • Insttall type 8 vent from pool heater through roof using existing roof penetration. • Install gas piping from existing 2" near ceiling to pool heater complete with isolation valve • Install gas meter capable of delivering the required cubic feet per hour of gas to the pool heater per job specifications. • Install piping from existing 4" flanges to pool heater in a sub loop configuration complete with isolation valves. • Upgrade electrical wiring for additional amperage demand of new equipment . • Interlock pool heater with existing EPD filter control console to allow for firernan's delay for backwash and system shutdown BID I PRICIN The pricing below includes swimming pool heater, material, sales tax, freight, and labor to provide a turn key installation. CPN1801 Copper-Fin2 pool heater $ 33,110.00 CPN1441 Copper-Fin2 pool heater $ 31,822.00 ADDITIONAL LABOR The pricing below is the hourly rate charged for additional work that may be requested by the customer: 8:00am-5:DOpm M-F per hour per man $ 85.00 Overtime per hour per man after 5:00pm and Saturday 8:00am-5:00pm $127.50 Overtime per hour per man after twelve hours, after 5:00pm Saturday, $170.00 and holidays ADDITIONAL MATERIAL Any material beyond the base bid will be charged to the customer at cost plus 20%. Sales tax and freight will be charge In addition to the markup. P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia California 91066 661,510.2981 1 fax 661,297.2372 City of Temecula Request for Bid Replacement Pool Heater Temecula Community Recreation Center October 1, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Terms and Conditions: • Work is limited to scope outlined within this quotation. • Any additional work will be done with a separate written quotation. • Payment is due upon completion, unless noted otherwise. • Sales tax is not included, unless noted otherwise. • Freight is not included, unless noted otherwise. • Material is limited to the manufactures written warranty. • Labor is guaranteed for 30 days on repairs, unless noted otherwise. • Labor is guaranteed for one year on new installations, unless noted otherwise. Signed: n Gordon HORIZON MECHANICAL (661)510-2981 P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia California 91666 661,510.2981 1 fax 661.291.2372 . RIZON of California SERVICES Complete pool mechanical replacement retrofits Pool Stage Tank Mechanical Repairs Underwater Pool Mechanical Repairs Pool Equipments Repairs JOB REFERENCES Customer: Newport Mesa School District Scope: Pool Heaters and Pool Filters All Schools Contact: Jeff Amend Phone: (714)424-7538 Customer: Downey Unified School District Scope: Pool Heaters and Pool Filters All Schools Contact: Marvin Dykes Phone: (562) 904-3596 Customer; Perris Union School District Scope: Pool Heater and Pool Filter Penis High School Contact: Andy Regis Phone: (909) 940-5302 LOCHINVAR CERTIFICATES Commercial Pool Heater School February 1998 Energy Rite School Febnmry 1998 ._ Intelli-fin Commercial Products Service School July 2000 Commercial Pool Heater School March 2004 ' . P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia California 91066 661.510.2981 1 fax 661.297,2372 St- Lk •791826 I lb/M12U04 14:04 9093944579 CCP PAGE 02/02 CALIFO-R ; COMMERCIAL POOLS DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2004 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA — ATTN BRUCE WEDEKING FROM: CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL POOLS INC. RE: TEMECULA RECREATIO114 CENTER HEATER REPLACEMENT California Commercial Pools, Inc. is pleased to submit the following bid for the above referenced project. BASE BID • Demolition, removal, and disposal existing Ray -Pak heater and related heater piping. • Provide and pour new concrete for extension of existing heater house keeping pad • Provide and install the Lochinvar 0PN-1801 with gas meter • Provide and install piping in schedule CPVC for heater Influent and effluent connections back to the return line. • Provide and install 14" heater venting at existing roof penetration and replace roof around new venting • Electrical connections of heater, and required interlocks • Heater startup and fine tuning ■ Training for owner representative ALTERNATE BID ITEM: • Demolition, removal, and disposal existing Ray -Pak heater and related heater piping. • Provide and pour new concrete for extension of existing heater house keeping pad • Provide and install the Lochinvar C PN4441 with gas meter ■ Provide and Install piping in schedule CPVC for heater influent and effluent connections back to the return line • Provide and install 14" heater venting at existing roof penetration and replace roof around new venting • Electrical connections of heater, and required interlocks ■ Heater startup and fine tuning • Training for owner representative Bid Price $ 55,000.00 ANemate Price $ 53,400.00 Hourly labor rate $ 75.00 Overtime labor rate $ 112.50 Mark up of materials 15% Best Regards Brian Stanton 2255 E. Auto Centre Dr., Glendora, CA 91740 / ph:909.394.1280 fax:909.394.1630 / CAL LIC. No. 415172 M 10/01/2004 14: e7 `J01JJIJ447" u;r rn " 1" California Commercial Pools, Inc California Commercial Pods, Inc. specializes In all types of Commercial Aquatic Facilities. We have a broad range of experience in both recreational and competitive type swimming and water play facilities, that makes us very unique among our competitors. We complete 30-40 faciities each year, which translates to hundreds of pools in our twenty years of business. As a result of our extensive background and experience, California Commercial Pools has become the leader in Aquatic Facility Construction on the West Coast We specialize in the following types of construction and renovation: ■ 50M, 33M, and 25M competitive gutter pools • Specialty Pools, which include therapy pools and diving tanks. • Recreational and multi use pools. ■ Resort facilities with multiple pools; varied activity pools, interactive play pools, and fountains. • Water Parks with wave pools, lazy rivers, interactive pools, slide features, and specialty attractions. • Above ground concrete or stainless steel pools constructed in high-rise structures. ■ Equipment replacements and upgrades. • Fountains, water features, and special effect pools. Operating primarily in California, Arizona, and Nevada, we have completed projects in several other states including Texas, Oregon, Utah, and Idaho. Our conservative fiscal management and our measured approach to growth have shaped a stable and confident company, well positioned to dedicate the necessary resources to each individual project. Strong banking and bonding relationships, comprehensive insurance, and safety programs enhance client confidence. 10/01/2004 14:07 9093944579 U_;V 1" CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL POOLS, INC Equipment Upgrades Palm Springs Swim Center Removal and installation of new equipment, construction of new outdoor equipment area, recoating of decks Located: 401 Pavilion Dr Palm Springs, CA 92264 Completed: December 2003 Final Cost: $364,270 Owner: City of Palm Springs 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Contact Harold Good (760) 323-8225 (760) 323-8279 Designer. Design Build Benstead Plunge Rehabilitation of existing 50-meter rimflow competition pool, changed from deep gutter to dinflow, profile, also installed new plaster, the and mechanical room filter. Located: 3331Torrance Blvd Torrance, CA 90503 Completed: April2003 Final Cost: $500,903 Owner. City of Torrance 3350 Civic Center Dr Torrance, CA 90503 Contact: Diane Castletine (310) 781-7151 (310) 781-7199 FAX Designer: Aquatic Design Group Scott Ferrell — (760) 438-8400 Bellflower Aquatic Center Rehabilitation of existing facility, Replaster, installed new tile and mechanical equipment (pump and filters). Located: 14001 Bellflower Blvd Bellflower, CA 90706 Completed: August 2002 Final Cost: $247,148 Owner, City of Belltower 16600 Civic Center Dr Bellflower, CA 90706 Contact: Paul Zwiep (562) 804-1424 Designer: Aquatic Design Group Scoff Ferrell (760) 438-8400 10/01/2004 14:07 `ju9j3144bl'l Lilt-, r«ate �Y,w San Pedro YMCA Removal and replacement of new filter and pump in existing mechanical room. Located: 301 S. Bandini St San Pedro, CA 90731 Completed: June 2002 Final Cost: $148,900 Owner. YMCA of Metropolitan Los Angeles 625 S. New Hampshire Ave Los Angeles, CA 90005 Contact: Julie Tisue (310) 832-4211 (310) W-8607 fax Designer. Patrell Engineering Doug Ferrell (626) 335-4362 Bloomington Middle School Rehabilitation of existing facility. Including new tile and plaster and mechanical equipment. Located: 18829 Orange St Bloomington, CA Completed: January 2001 Final Cost: $287,232 Owner. Cotton Unified School District 1212 Valencia Dr Cotton, CA 92324 Contact (909) 580-5000 Designer: Kenneth King Civil Engineer Ken King (909) 793-3M Montebello Plunae Renovation Rehabilitation of existing 50-meter rim flow gutter competition pool, with new plumbing and mechanical equipment. Located: 1300 Olympic Blvd Montebello, CA 90640 Completed: November 2000 Final Cost: $727,000 Owner City of Montebello Address: 1600 Olympic Blvd Montebello, CA 90640 Designer, Rowley International Kirk Von Spaeth — (310) 377-6724 10/01/2004 1 4:07 9093944519 I.L:N tlm3t not no Califomia Commercial Pools Recent Projects Completed In the Temecula Area Elsinore High School Pool Construction of new 30-meter deep gutter competition pool, with new equipment, plaster, the and competition timing system. Location: 21800 Canyon Dr Wildomar, CA 92595 Completed: August 2004 Final Cost: $834,800 Owner. Lake Elsinore Unified School District Contact Edge Development — Construction Manager (909) 296-0776 Designer: Aquatic Design Group (760)438-8400 Vista MwYreta High School Pool Construction of new 25-meter deep gutter competition pool, with new equipment, plaster, the and competition timing system. Location: 28251 Clinton Keith Rd Murrieta, CA 92563 Completed: August 2004 Final Cost: $775,000 Owner Murrieta Valley Unified School District Contact Edge Development— Construction Manager (909) 296-0776 Designer: Aquatic Design Group (760)438-8400 Chaparral High School 25-meter deep well gutter pool, 2,500 sq.ft. Activity Pool, Water playground, 3,500 sq.ft. pool building, decks and hardscape, fencing and landscaping. Location: 27215 Nicolas Rd Temecula, CA 92591 Completed: Apri12002 Final Cost: $2,548,417 Owner: City of Temecula & Temecula Valley Unified School District 43200 Business Park Dr Temecula, CA 92590 Contact: Kathy McCarthy — (909) 694-6480 Designer: Aquatic Design Group — (760) 438-8400 CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CONTRACT AGREEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 MAINTENANCE SERVICES THIS MAINTENANCE SERVICES CONTRACT made and entered into as of October 26, 2004 by and between the Temecula Community Services District, ("City") and HORIZON MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS of CALIFORNIA ("Contractor'). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on October 26, 2004 and shall remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2005 unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor shall perform all of the work described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. ("Work") and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shall be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. 3. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Thirty Three Thousand One Hundred Ten dollars ($33,110.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment or change order is approved as provided in this Agreement. a. Contractor shall submit invoices monthly for actual services performed detailing the work performed in a form acceptable to the Director of Finance. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non - disputed fees. If the City disputes any of contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 4. CHANGE ORDERS. The City Manager may approve additional payment up to ten (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall the total sum of the agreement exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Change orders exceeding these limits shall be approved by the City Council. 5. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all time faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, performs all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. R:\xANIGOWJ\Contractor agreement\ANNUAL AGREEMENTMORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc 6. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives. 7. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 3., above, Contractor shall submit to City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. B. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 9. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 10. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In RAKANIGOWhContractor agree=nt\ANNUAL AGREEMENTS\HORIZON MECHANICAL1004.doc the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 11. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. than: a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. C. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. d. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. e. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: RAKANIGOWAContractor agr e=nt\ANNUAL AGREEMENTS\HORIZON MECHANICAL2004.dm "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 13. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against the City, or bind City in any manner. a. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 15. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 16. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Contractor to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. RA ANIGOWAContractor agreement\ANNUAL AGREEMENWHORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc 17. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non -contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each parry's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. BOOKS AND RECORDS. Contractor's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the City. 21. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 22. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 23. DISCRIMINATION. Contractor represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. 24. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: R:\KANIGOWJ\Contractor agreement\ANNUAL AGREEMENTS\HORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Horizon Mechanical Contractors of California P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia, CA 91066 (661)510-2981 Contact Person John Gordon 25. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. 26. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 27. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal City court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 28. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 29. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. RAKANIGOWAContractor agr ment\ANNUAL AGREEMENTMORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Chuck Washington, President Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR Horizon Mechanical Contractors of California Contact Name: John Gordon P.O. Box 661461 Arcadia, CA 91066 Phone (661) 510-2981 Fax (661) 297-2397 By: Name: Title: By:_ Name (Two Signatures Required for Corporations) RAKANIGOWAContractor agmement�ANNUAL AGREEMENTS\HORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK The Contractor will be responsible for removing existing Raypak pool water heater model # P-2100A- BEDRDEA, located at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, CA and install a new pool water heater model # CPN 1801 "Lochinvar", at the same locations. The scope of work for this agreement will include, but not limited to the following: The Contractor will be responsible for: • Remove and legally dispose of the existing Raypak heater model # P-2100A- BEDRDEA. • Provide and install a "Lochinvar" # CPN1801 Copper-fin2 heater with 1,800,000 BTU/HR input, 2" natural gas connection, 2 1/2" water influent/effluent connections and 14" diameter flue to atmosphere. • Provide complete with cupro nickel heat exchangers and flow switch. • Provide and install a gas meter on the inlet gas pipe to heater. • Provide piping/valving and electrical in accordance with manufacturers recommendations. • Adjacent panel is available for hook-up of recirculation pump and fan. • Provide all electrical interconnections within the pool systems as currently exist. • Provide extension of the existing house keep pad to allow for proper seismic holdown of the heater (see attached detail). This extension of house keep pad may require relocation of a floor sink. • Rework the existing larger roof penetration to accommodate the new 14" diameter Type B flue. • Provide new 2 1/2" type CPVC piping from existing 4" butterfly valves to the new pool heater as required for proper operation. • Check operation of final installation which includes interconnections with EPD filter system. • Provide a one year warranty on labor and material and a 5 year warranty on heat exchanger. • The City will require contractor to obtain all required permits. • Any City permits will be issued on a no -fee basis. • Work cannot start before December 1, 2004 and must be completed by December 31, 2004. RAKANIGOWEContractor agreementWNNUAL AGREEMENTMORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc EXHIBIT B. PAYMENT Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice. The fix price to remove old pool water heater and install new is $33,110.00 Additional Labor may be requested by the City of Temecula at the following rate: 8:00 am - 5:00 pm M-F per man per hour $85.00 Overtime per man per hour after 5:00pm and Saturday 8:00am-5:00pm $127.00 Overtime per man per hour after twelve hours, after 5:00pm Saturday and holidays $170.00 /// N R:\KANIGOWI\Contractor agre =nt\ANNUAL AGREEMENTMORIZON MECHANICAL2004.doc ITEM 3 APPROVA CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Agreements for Tract Map No. 29305-1 PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to improve the north side perimeter slopes and parkways within Tract Map No. 29305-1. 2. Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to improve the Wolf Valley Road Median within Tract Map No. 29305-1. 3. Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to improve the Linear Park -North within Tract Map No. 29305-1. 4. Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Standard Pacific Corporation to improve the six (6) Acre Neighborhood Park within Tract map No. 29305-1. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the conditions of approval for Tract Map No. 29305-1, Standard Pacific Corporation is proposing to improve certain perimeter slopes and landscaped parkways, a landscaped median island on Wolf Valley Road, the north portion of the Linear Park and the six (6) acre neighborhood park within the Wolf Creek Development. Once the landscaping is installed and the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has approved these landscaped areas TCSD will take over the maintenance responsibilities of the proposed landscaped improvements. To insure that all the future TCSD landscaped maintenance areas are constructed to City standards, the developer is required to post securities to improve these areas based upon the approved landscape/irrigation plans and the certified construction cost estimates for the improvements. R:\smithb\Bonds\StaffTmet 29305-1 WolfCk Bonds.doc As a result, Standard Pacific Corporation has entered into an agreement with the City and has provided surety bonds, issued by Safeco Insurance Company of America, as follows: Northern Slopes and Parkway Landscaping: 1. Faithful Performance Bond No. 6304127 in the amount of $578,557.00. 2. Labor and Materials Bond No. 6304127 in the amount of $289,279.00. 3. Warranty Bond No. 6304127-M in the amount of $57,856.00. Wolf Valley Landscaped Median Island: 1. Faithful Performance Bond No. 6304129 in the amount of $7,419.00. 2. Labor and Materials Bond No. 6304129 in the amount of $3,710.00. 3. Warranty Bond No. 6304129-M in the amount of $742.00. Linear Park North 1. Faithful Performance Bond No. 6304128 in the amount of $706,758.00. 2. Labor and Materials Bond No. 6304128 in the amount of $353,379.00. 3. Warranty Bond No. 6304128-M in the amount of $70,676.00. 6-Acre Neighborhood Park 1. Faithful Performance Bond No. 6304131 in the amount of $1,818,714.00. 2. Labor and Materials Bond No. 6304131 in the amount of $909,357.00. 3. Warranty Bond No. 6304131-M in the amount of $181,871.00. Upon completion and acceptance of the improvements by the Board of Directors, staff will recommend the appropriate release or reduction of the bonds. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost of construction for all the landscaped areas will be borne by the developer. ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity Map Project Map Agreement/Bonds. R:\snothb\Bonds\StaffTract 29305-1 WolfCk Bonds.doc Wolf Creek VICINITY MAPS 0 `N PLO O p y0 Redh 'dential m PROJECT SITE Pechanga Resort and Casino — Pechanga Legend ation esery Highways ® Centerline O city _ Pechanga Reservation 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet i INS maywm made by me city aTemxNa GeogapMc pim az syalan. Tlq maa 40wivatl fivm base dale pmduced by tlw Rlvaslde County Aseeesora Dep� arM Me Tmnepaladon and Land Mar.,e Agency a/Rivenide County. Tlie Cityaf Temecula aswmaem w Mis a legal responsibility m infannalloo Nis map pn aubjad. Dalaand lNmod lanreaasenfatlanlhismap me guyed to update and modiflmdan. ThOGeogapM1ic most atlas System arM. N mapf. slwuld to ima nacre, most wnenl lnfametlan. Thie mePbrwt far said amede. Map pmpamd Cclaba 13,20M r.IglsWel'i Iasymiab\wdfaeek_Ncimty amNua �U � a AP 410 Q� Q P oc� A. 02 CEu� dx m ma @BBfr Eg@ o� Qu oo0 CM ® a°�ia85gg8' Vey m mr -,a � E Z o gc� 8 $g c .coZ o 9 8aag $ bA 'NN K O mq Un,Q E�� �dY TW N Sma'p m-cg �€9' I�� EV§ a �9B3 Z53inaU City Of Temecula Community Services Department �qgy 43200 Business Park Drive • Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 - Temecula, CA 92589-9033 051) 694.6480 • Fax (951) 694-6488 • v .dNoftemecula.om Date of Agreement: e� Name of Subdivider. d OCAl C CO Rp Address of Subdivider (street): Address of Subdivider (c ty, state, zip): 3 8 Contact:Maw Title: A S S O C . Phone Number. (gj j) Fax Number: (9e�,j) 3 7 a —9S I C) Name of Subdivision: Wolf Creek — Perimeter Landscaping North Tract No.: 29305-1 Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans No.: CSD03-0067 Referred to as'Landscape Im rovements" Estimated Total Cost of Improvements: $578,557.00 Estimated Completion Date: 10/31/O6 (Referred to as "Completion Date"1 Name of Surety: St/l tee Address of Surety (street): WO v t - 3 0 Address of Surety (city, state, zip): l � S o w e O Ca q a ' 6 Contact: M M ll Title: v CU Phone Number. (9y�) �� 0_ ��� S Fax Number. Faithful Performance Bond d 07 $578,557.00 Labor and Materials Bond `f ) a7 $Y89,P79.00 Bond for Warranty 6 3 o t-4 ` a.7— $57,856.00 SAProject ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.do¢ This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. RECITALS A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are _collectively referred to in this. Agreement as the "Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDIVISION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required, as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement by SAProject ManagementWdann Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 2 Agreement.doc Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term "Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications.for.. the .Improvements as approved.by the -Director -of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substantial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. SAProject ManagemenhAdarn=off CreeMMSO cost estimatesTerimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 3 Agreement.doc As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligation under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOT, .THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval and recordation by the City Council of the final map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows: 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscaping Improvements SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Pursuant to the requirements of Labor Code Section 1720, SUBDIVIDER shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required by this Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file Wroject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 4 Agreement.doc with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of the City of Temecula. Subdivider shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Subdivider shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations with respect to the payment of prevailing wages. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Subdivider shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less, than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by it or by any subcontractor under it, in violation of the provisions -of .the Agreement or in violation of any applicable -laws or regulations pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages. C. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: d. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. e. Except for easements or other interested in real property to be dedicated to the Homeowners Association of the SUBDIVISION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off -site SAProjed ManagementWdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Pedmeter Landscaping North-PaWand Landscape 5 Agreement.doc rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights -of -Way. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or _b. .The .dedication to, andacceptance by, -the CITY -of •appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. C. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; and S1Project Management%darn Wolf Creek7CM cost estimatesTerimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape B Agreement.doc b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/Landscape Improvements required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and C. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated -into this Agreement.by this Reference. If any security is replaced by another approved security, the replacement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland Improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost if the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100% of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, SAProject ManagemenMdarn Wolf CreeMfCSD cost esdmatesTedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland landscape 7 Agreement.doc altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDIVISION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. 5. Inwaction.and Maintenance Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. City Council authorizes the Director of Community Services or the Director of Community Services authorized representative to accept the landscaped medians, perimeter slopes, and parks into the Community Services Maintenance System which is funded by the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. b. SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the SAProject ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek%TCSD cost estimatesTerimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 8 Agreement.doc maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and CITY standards. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and certification. 6. Release of Securities. Subject to approval by Community Services, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. b. The,Director of Community Services may release a porbornof the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25% of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50% of the total Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security, which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. C. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 9 Agreement.doc amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been filed and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonable determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements.by the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. Inlury to Public Improvements, Public Prooerty or Public Utilities Facilities SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacement or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. SAProject Management\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Pedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 10 Agreement.doc 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER'S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER a. default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure the defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after commencement .of .the work; SUBDIVIDER'S insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDIVISION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to his section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDIVIDER. The right of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be S:�Project ManagemenfAdam\wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatesTedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for an excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY without liability for so.doing,.may take possession of, and utilize in completing4he work, such materials, appliances, plan and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. C. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatas\Pedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 2 Agreement.doc d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period and final acceptance..by the.City.Council of the work and improvements,against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after CITY acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf CreektTCSD cost estimatesTerimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 13 Agreement.doc repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. 11. Subdivider Not Agent of City. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. Iniury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement. prior to the completion .and acceptance .of the .work or improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the appointment of costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligation to Warn Public During Construction Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed Pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 14 Agreement.doc 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement SUBDIVIER.further.agrees to protect and hold harmless -CITY; #s'©fficials and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the SAProject Management\Adam\wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 15 Agreement.doc particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph for Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall remain in full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability.for design and construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements -installed or work done pursuant to this Agreement and the CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph. 18. Sale or Disposition of SUBDIVISION Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDIVISION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. SAProject ManagementMarn Wolf CreeMMSD cost estimatesTedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 16 Agreement.doc 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 20. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than 10/31/06. In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. Delay, other than.delay.An.the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute. good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for an increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. SAProject Managemenf\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perinneter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 1 Agreement.doc 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Notice to SUBDIVIDER: 5�r),44 f'fK/h� s2P G'-eoA�4, cA- 9 2. f3? C( 23. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litigation or Arbitration. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. SAProject ManagementXAdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 18 Agreement.doc 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. Legal Responsibilities. The Subdivider shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The Subdivider shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Subdivider to comply with this section. 28. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representative of the parties. In the case of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. SAProject Management%darn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Perimeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 19 Agreement.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDER CITY OF TEMECULA By: M�By: Name: AUGUST BELMONT IVE Title: By: Name: 1 AEL J. WHITE REPRESENTAnvE Title: (Proper Notarization of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: 0 Name: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Herman D. Parker Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter Thorson City Attorney S:\Project ManagemenINAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Pedmeter Landscaping North -Parkland Landscape 20 Agreement.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside - SS. On _10/07/04--_---_ before me, _Brandt L. Watt Date personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White •-------- --OPTIONAL- y Public Name and Title of Officer personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) hare subscribed to the withiry )nstrument and acknowledged to me that.Ke/she/they executed the same in Jais/yier/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by W9/p6r/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 offictalseal. I Zl� Signature of Notary Public Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity((es) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: Number of Pages: ❑ Individual ❑� Corporate Officer- Title(s): Authorized Representative ❑ Partner -? Limited ?General ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: _Standard Pacific PARKWA Y PLAN WOLF CREEK OPINION OF PROBABLE COST Oct 5, 2004 ... ....... ..... ..... - ."A ... DSC. .0.17M CONCRETE MOW CURB 1,778 L.F. $18.00 $32,004.00 REDWOOD HEADER 134 L.F. $1.80 $241.20 HARDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $32,245.20 .LA A 0 kEAS - IRRIGATION I FLAT AREAS 123,154 S.F. $1.20 $147,784.80 IRRIGATION I SLOPE AREAS 8,040 S.F. $1.00 $8,040:00 FINE / FINISH GRADE 123,154 S.F. $0.10 $12,315.40 SOIL PREP. 123,154 S.F. $0.10 $12,315.40 WEED ABATEMENT ALLOW $3,700.00 HYDROSEEDED TURF 35,618 S.F. $0.07 $2,493.26 GROUNDCOVER 87,536 S.F. $0.25 $21,884.00 SPECIMEN TREES 36"BOX 47 EACH $600.00 $28,200.00 SPECIMEN TREES 24"BOX 238 EACH $225.00 $53,550.00 SHRUBS 5 GAL 9,028 EACH $15.00 $135,420.00 SHRUBS 1 GAL 2,818 EACH $4.50 $12,681.00 VINES 5 GAL 639 EACH $18.00 $11,502.00 LANDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $449,885.86 TOTAL FOR PARKWAY $482,131.06 OVERALL BOND AGREEMENT - 120% $578,557.27 CITY OF TEMECULA PARHI,AND/LANDSCAPE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Bond m :5 Premium :$,7867 786:00 WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th 20 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0067 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Perimeter Landscaping North, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to furnish a bond for the Faithful Performance of the Agreement; Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco insurancef as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $578,557.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it SAProicct Manngement\Adam\Wolf Crock\TCSD cost estrmares\Porimetes landscaping Nonh-Parkland Landaespe Faithful Performance Pond dm does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th , 20 04 SURETY Safeco Insurance Company of America ' BY: 1 �y Christine Maestas; (NAME) AttQrney—in—Fact (TITLE) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorsen City Attorney PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation. AUGUST BEI MONT AUTHOO"bWRESENTATIVE TITLE) BY: 7j MICH J. WHITE AU MORUW101g1IMPENTATIVE (TITLE) S:\P-jptt ManagemenMdamMolt Creek\TCSO Cott etttmatM\P-'MM landscaping aknMParkland Landscape Faithlkl Perfortoaom Bond.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside On _to/07/04before me, _Brandi L. Watt Notary Public_ Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRAND! L. WATT Commission # 1426406 Z Notary Public - California 5 Riverside County My Comm. Expires Jun 24, 2007 11 ❑� personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that a/yTe/they executed the same n / heir a�thodzed capacity(ies), and at by pis/far/their signature(s) on the instrument the erson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and offs ' se — .......... of Notary Public Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signers Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s): _ ❑ Partner —? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATEOP California COUNTY OF Orange I Ss on October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pmSONALLYAPPEARED Christine Maestas personalty known to me (or proved to me on the basis afsatisfaclary evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshelihey executed the sarmeinhWhent eirauthorittdcnpaeity(msXandthatbyhisRtefiheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon hehalf of which the persons) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL_ AII ESTHER A. STEPIEN Commission i 1361358 Notary Public— CaitruNa zz Ora County wmycwmr-l*p w� Jri 17, 2006 This area for Ofcial Notarial Seat Though Bte data below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relyhtg on the doctarlent and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INOMDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIANICONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER:__ SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: tweE of PUMMq ion BMI Safeeo Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304127 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT TWO NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Cora, a Delaware Ialzsz (rev. story ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND Bond Ro.:6304127 Premium :Included in Charge for Performance Bond WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacifc.Coap., a Delaware corporation , (hereinafter designated as "Principal') have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6t:h_ 20 04 and identified as Project CSD 03-0067 Project Description: Wolf Creck - Perimeter Landscaping North, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the term of said Agreement, Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Temecula, to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California; and Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and -safeco Insurance / as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Agreement and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of $289,279.00, lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount set forth. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. s.\Projcer Magge is Adam\Wolf Crwk\TCSD war estiw&ta\Puimeter lmndccaping Ncnh•pvk1wd landscape Itbw and ne7terialc bond.doc It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. If the condition of this bond is fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terns of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such changes, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terns of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. S:\Project M2n'9cmmAAd&m\Wulf Cmk1'rCSDsost aum¢taUPaimext tandsciping North-pgkland landacape labor and mturiuls bond.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th 2004 (Seal) (Seal) SU PRINCIPAL S o s r c Company of America Stanch P fic rp., a Delaware corporatio B BYE Christine Haestas (Name) Attoffie9—in—Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney AUTHORIri5*PRESENTATNE (Title) S:\Prclect Monagemrnt\Adam\Wolf Crcck\TC.SD cost esnmotcs Pc rncmr I.Andscaping Northporkund landscape labor and mwhals bond.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside ____ Ss. On _10/07/04 _ _ before me, Brandt L. Watt Notary Public _ __ Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L. WAIT Commisdon#t426406 r. Notary Public - California y� Riverside County My Comm. ExplfesJun 24, 2007 2] personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) �//are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that/�Ffe/they executed the same in high/fyf€r/their a}}wthonzed capacity(ies), and / t t by / r/their signature(s) on the instrument the p rson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature Notary �� --- -OPTIONAL-- Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(tes) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer— Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATEOF California SS. couwyoF Orange on October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Steplen, Notary Public pERSONALLYAPPEARED Christine Maestri personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) islare submi-ibed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshelthey executed the same inhidherA draudwriredcnpaci)(ies).and that byhiAerAheir signature(s) on the instrumenr the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL ESTHERA. STEPIEN Commis3lon i 1361366 Notary Public — Ca6romla Orange County My Comte 80m Jun 17, 200s This area for Official Notarial Seal Though the data below Is not rewired by law, it may prove valuable to persons retying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER D INDMDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER sITLEP) ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAWCONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: Nose OFPSMNtAORFta WOM Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304127 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware Corporation OTHER THAN ID-12M(PEV. %1) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No.:6304127 H Premium :Included in charge for Performance Bond CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as a Delaware corporation "City"), andSStandard Pacific Corp.,/ (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6, 20 04 and identified as Project CSD 03-0067 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Perimeter Landscaping North is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; America NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco Insurance Company/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $57,866.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save S:\Frojcol Mwgemcnt%Adam\Wolf Crcck\TCSD eoet aonutca\Pcnm w Landscaping Nosh -parkland landawpc Wananty Bond I .dm harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. S:Trgat MsnogemenMdam\Wolf Crock\TCSD cunt c3d=WS\Pe MtCr landscaping North parkland latdscape Warr.ny Bond I.dae IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on 2004 (Seal) SUR S c Incur ce Company of America By. Christine Maestas (Name) Attorney -in -Pact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney October (Seal) PRINCIPAL St�pia� paciafic Corp., a Delaware corporation By: r// �Lz./�i AUGUST BELMONT AUTHOR IZOOMOP ESENTATIVE (Title) (Title) S:tPrgcct Manogem Md,m\Wnif Crcck\TCSD coat estimalaNaimwcr tanduaping NtxOtyarklmd 1ad6ccpc Wwany Bond I.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside ---------------- SS. On - 10/07104---- before me, Brandi L. Watt Notary Public ----------------------------' Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L. WATT Commisslon # 1426406 Notary Pubilc so Notary California Riverside County My Comm. Expires Jun 24, 2007 0 personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) jbl//are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that Xs)fe/they executed the same in Pis/I;Wr/ eir authorized capacity(ies), and ( tKat by hil /It�r/their signature(s) on the instrument the Persdn(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and offi ' seal. 46_ Signature of Notary Public -- -- -OPTIONAL-- - -- Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer - ❑ Partner -? Limited Title(s): ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATEOF California SS. COUNTY OF Orange On October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONALLYAPFEARED Christine Maestas personally known to me (or prmed to me on the basis of satisjaclory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshe they executed the some in hLdherMuiramhoriwdeapacityties), and dmtby his/hentheir signature(s) on the instrument the persmt(s), or the entity upon behWf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal OPTIONAL ESTMERA.STEPIEN CommiWon / 1361368 Notary Ptblic— CeBMrnla r; Orange County QMyComm.F0raa JuR 17,?DO/ This area for Official Notarial Seal Though the data below Is riot reciuIred by law, It may prove valuable to persons relit on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this torm. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL Il CORPORATE OFFICER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) GUARDIANICONSERVATOR Il OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: were or rya on MMYOM Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304127 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th. 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware Corporation OTHER ID-IM (REV 501) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT City Of Temecula Community Services Department 1989 43200 Business Park Drive • Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 • Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (951) 694-6480 • Fax (951) 694-6488 • www.citvoftemecula.om Date of Agreement: I I (-1- %n - Name of Subdivider: I Address of Subdivider (street): a n C 0`n Sk tie a 60 Address of Subdivider (city, state, zip): C u q 8 7 Contact: yn Title: C . PrOeJ N61694& Phone Number. 460 „) A7;)— -(RSOn Fax Number: (9Si ) --� —7l— 5e", i n Name of Subdivision: Wolf Creek — Wolf Valley Road Median Tract No.: 29305-1 Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans No.: CSD03-0066 Referred to as "Landscape Improvements") Estimated Total Cost of Improvements: $7,419.00 Estimated Completion Date: 10131/O6 Referred to as "Com letion Date" • e Name of Surety: 5 4 Address of Surety (street): i a U Q n r0( T O o rR Address of Surety (city, state, zip): Al li'so V itqn Ca 90 asG Contact: m Title: C R2 Phone Number: (qy9) S6 0_ 5 Fax Number: (q) g6 0 - 6 6 Q 0 Faithful Performance Bond $7,419.00 Labor and Materials Bond a q $3,710.00 Bond for Warranty a q - rn $742.00 SAProject ManagementlAdamr Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape Agreement.dQc This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY. and the SUBDIVIDER. RECITALS A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are .collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDIVISION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required, as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement by SAProject ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland landscape 2 Agreement.doc Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term 'Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any .specifications -for -the Improvements as -approved by the Director of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substantial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. SAProject ManagemenhAdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 3 Agreement.doc As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligation under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOT, .THEREFORE,.in,consideration of the approval and Feoordation by the City Council of the final map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows: 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscaping Improvements. SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Pursuant to the requirements of Labor Code Section 1720, SUBDIVIDER shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required by this Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file SAProject Management%darn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 4 Agreement.doc with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of the City of Temecula. Subdivider shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Subdivider shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations with respect to the payment of prevailing wages. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Subdivider shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less, than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by it or by any subcontractor under it, in violation of the provisions of the Agreement or _jn violation of. any applicable laws or regulations pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages. C. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: d. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. e. Except for easements or other interested in real property to be dedicated to the Homeowners Association of the SUBDIVISION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off -site SAProject ManagemenPAdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 5 Agreement.doc rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights -of -Way. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or b. The dedication -to, .and acceptance by, . the CITY of appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. C. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; and S:Troject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek%TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 6 Agreement.doc b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/Landscape Improvements required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and C. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated into thjs Agreement by this Reference. If any security isfeplaoed by another approved security, the replacement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland Improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost if the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100% of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 7 Agreement.doc altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDIVISION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. 5. Inspection and Maintenance Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. City Council authorizes the Director of Community Services or the Director of Community Services authorized representative to accept the landscaped medians, perimeter slopes, and parks into the Community Services Maintenance System which is funded by the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. b. SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 6 Agreement.doc maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and CITY standards. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and certification. 6. Release of Securities. Subject to approval by Community Services, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. h. The.Director of Community Services may release a-portjon•of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25% of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50% of the total Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security, which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. C. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an SAProject ManagemenhAdarnMolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape g Agreement.doc amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been filed and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonable determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements.by.the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. Iniury to Public Improvements, Public Property or Public Utilities Facilities SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacement or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. SAProiect Management\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 10 Agreement.doc 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER'S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER a. default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure the defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after _commencement .of the .work; SUBDIVIDER'S _insolvency, -appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDIVISION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to his section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDIVIDER. The right of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSO cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 11 Agreement.doc used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for an excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY without liability.for..so doing, may take possession of, -and -utilize in•completing-the work, such materials, appliances, plan and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. C. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. SAProject ManagemenhAdarnMolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 12 Agreement.doc d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance - period ..and final -acceptance. by the -City Council of the work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after CITY acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary SAProlect Managemenmdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 13 Agreement.doc repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. 11. Subdivider Not Agent of City. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. Iniury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement prior to the_completion and acceptance of the work or improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the appointment of costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligation to Warn Public During Construction Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 14 Agreement.doc 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement SUBDIVIER further agrees to protect and hold harmless CITY, its-Offidals and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the S:\Prolect ManagementAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 15 Agreement.doc particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph for Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall remain in full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability for design -and construction of the-Parkland/Landscape lmprovements4ristalled or work done pursuant to this Agreement and the CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph. 18. Sale or Disposition of SUBDIVISION. Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDIVISION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. SAProject ManagemenAAdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 16 Agreement.doc 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 20. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than 10/31/06. In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown. to entitle SUBDIVIDER to _an _extension. . Delay, other than delay in the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for an increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. SAProject ManagemenMdann Wolf CreekITCSD cost estimates\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 1 Agreement.doc 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 [.SIM9 *11791ZAD-l":il SRW44krD Pf1taL7G EaQ® 2 �5 £ RIN"Al sTE -zc:o E, n'&WA, cl} 528?9 23. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litioation or Arbitration. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. SAProject ManagemenfAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\wotf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 18 Agreement.doc 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. Legal Responsibilities. The Subdivider shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The Subdivider shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Subdivider to comply with this section. 28. Entire Aoreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this .Agreement must be in writing and signed by the .appropriate representative of the parties. In the case of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. S:Wroject ManagementAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatas\Wolf Valley Road Median -Parkland Landscape 19 Agreement.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDER By: �it1 J Name: AUGUST BELMONT AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Title: By: ;A Name: AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE By: 'L•]-&tdTIx*11L Name: Title: (Proper Notarization of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Name: Herman D. Parker Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter Thorson City Attorney S:\Project ManagemenhAdarnMolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatesMolf Valley Road Median -Parkland landscape 20 Agreement.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside ---------- I Ss. On 10/07/04 _—------- before me, _Brandt L. Watt Notary_ Public__ Dale Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White SRANDI I. WATT Commkelon M 1426406 -m Notary Public - California Riverside County WCo mr.8q*esJln24.2007 ❑� personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s).49lare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that/*Ate/they executed the same in fir/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by tjisr/jar/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 Public Though the Information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this forth to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signers Name: Number of Pages: ❑ Individual ❑� Corporate Officer-Title(s): Authorized Representative ❑ Partner -? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: _Standard Pacific Corp MEDIAN ISLAND PLAN WOLF CREEK OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 22-Jul-04 ...... ......... ............. LAN P00R PN:i9 IRRIGATION / FLAT AREAS 711 S.F. $1.50 $1,066.50 FINE / FINISH GRADE 711 S.F. $0.10 $71.10 SOIL PREP. 711 S.F. $0.10 $71.10 TREE 36" BOX 6 EACH $600.00 $3,600.00 SHRUBS 5 GAL 174 EACH $15.00 $2,610.00 LANDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $7,418.70 E - M, . p . p. . L . � FIRM. a .�* _�L:d F; 1, TIMM. CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND ssond No.:6304129 Premium: $100.00 WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation (hercinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th 20 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0066 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Wolf Valley Road Median, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to famish a bond for the Faithful Performance of the Agreement; insurance Company NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco insurance/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $7,419.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it SAProjat Mana6entent\Adam\WolfCeek\TCSDweteeumates\WolfValley Rocd Median-Perkland IAndswpe Fatdtrol Perromu aond.da does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the work or to the specifications. W IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th SURETY Safeco Insurance Company of America BY: Christine Maestas (NAME) Attorney —in —Fact 20 04 PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., a. Delaware corporation i AUGUST BELMONT J[ , RESENTATNE (TITLE) (TI ) BY: MICHA I WHITE AUTHORIZ(R SENTATIVE (TITLE) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorsen City Attorney SAProIect ManateMWAAdem\wolf CceoktTCSD cost esummea\Wolf Vsllcy Rod Mcaian•Pukiand IandsoW PaithNl Perfmn ance Bond.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside On 10/07/04 _ ___-__--- before me, _Brandi L. Watt Notary Public --_ Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J_White BRANDI L. WATi Commission # 1426406 � , -a Notary Public •California r ` � � Riverside County My Comm. Expires Jun 24, 2007 ❑� personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that /s#Se/they executed the same in ttf9/ r heir authorized capacity, ies), and at by Wq>4'r/their signature(s) on the instrument the persorl or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public ---OPTIONAL— --- Though the information below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer- Title(s): _ ❑ Partner -? Limited ? General ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: _ Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATE OF Califomia S.S. COUNTYOF Orange on October 71th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONALLYAFPEARED Christine Maestas personally known to me (or proved to me on the basic of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are .su&scribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/tltey executed the same in hidherhheir authorized capaciry(ies). and that by hivkwlthetr signatures) on the instrument the persan(s), or the entity upon behalf of'which the person(s) acted executed the hurrument WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL ESTHER A. SMPIEN Camaasalon 01361366 Notary Pul ie — Calffomla Onrpa CW"b yfCa"M EXI*ft Am 17, 200 This area for Off kial Notarial Seat Though the data below Is not recptired by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of thts form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDMDUAL ❑ CORPORATE Oman ❑ PAR7NER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATToRNEY-plfACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIANICONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: MUM OF FsMWM OR BmrvgM Sateco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304129 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT TWO NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Padflc Corp., a Delaware MGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAME! ID-12W (REV. W'DI) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No.: 6304129 Premium: Included in charge fnr Performance Bond CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation , (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th , 2004 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0066 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Wolf Valley Road Median, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the term of said Agreement, Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Temecula, to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California; and Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and Safeco Insurance > as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Agreement and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal stun of $3,710.00, lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount set forth. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. S \Project ManagemenMdam\WolfCrcck\t'(:SD cost estimates\Wolf Vallcy Road Median -parkland landscape labor and mstenab bond.doc It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Pan 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. If the condition of this bond is fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such changes, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. 5:Vroieet MenagemmMdamMolfCmck\TCSD cost allmetec\WOlf valley Road Mcdim-p.rklmd IaMwpe labor and mends bmd.dm IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th 1 20 n4 _- (Seal) SIJ> Saf c6 Ynsur ¢e any of America 4-7 Christine Maestas (Name) Attorney —in —Pact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney (Seal) PRINCIPAL Stand aci Corp., a Delaware corporation By: AUGUST BELMONT AUTHOR(€PRESENTATIVE (Title) By: MICHAEL . WHITE AUTHORIZRESENTATIVE (Title) S?Projcei ManaEemenMdam\Wolf CreekNTCSD cove anrrelcAwolf Vallcy sad MWim-parkland ludaeape labor and numnala bond.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside - SS. On _10/07/04 _ _ before me,-Brandi L. Watt Date personally appeared August Belmont and Michael-J. White BRAND! L. WATT Commission # 1426406 Notary Public - Callfornia Riveide County amycomm.,Zxplres Jun 24, 2007 ---------------OPTIONAL ry Public____ Name and Title of Officer 0 personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that K e/they executed the same in / /,Wir/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by is 6r/their signature(s) on the instrument the per on(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ��ature of NoPublic � Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer- Title(s): ❑ Partner-? Limited ?General ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATE OF California Ss COUNTyOF Orange On October 7th. 2004 . before me. Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONAUXAFPBARED Christine Meestas personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons) whose name(s) is/am subscribed to the within insrmnwnf and acknowledged to me that hdsh&Ihey executed the same in hi0herAheiraudrorizedrnpacity(iesl and that by hhAerhheir 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 OPTIONAL ESTHER A. STEPIEN Commission 91361 W - Notary Public— C8ltfom'a orange County Comm, ExO ms Jun 17.2006 This area for Ofircia! Notarial Seal Though the data below Is not requited by law, It may prove valuable to persons n?lyirtg on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFRCER MTWR ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -INTACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIANICONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: e0W E Or F8;9WR On FArt[[vfea), Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304129 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware ID-1M2 (REV_ %n) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No. 6304129-14 Premium: Included in charge for Performance Bond CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as a Delaware corporation "City'), and Standard Pacific Corp.,/ (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th 20 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0066 Project Description' Wolf Creek - Wolf Valley Road Median is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco Insurance Company/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $742.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save SAProjca MungammMdam\WolfCrcck\TCSD war esrimaeAWolf Volley Rood Median -parkland landscape Warranty Bond I.doc STATEOF CalHomia SS CounyoF Orange on October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pFMONALLyAFFEARM Christine Maestas pert, onally known to me (orproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persat(s) whose names) idare subscribed to the within infra neat and acknowledged to me that helshelthey executed the same in hivIterldwrauthorized capadry(iesj and dim byhislhentheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity span behalf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and qffcial sear. i OPTIONAL 9 ESTHERA.SWPIEN CananYabnit�atJaa y Plabua — caxrornia Om pa ca rstr aiycnam F�Iraa.kn n, 2no6 Thit area for Ofeial Notarial Sea! Though the data below la not requked by law, It may prove valuable lo persons Retying on the docu nest and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this tom,. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER MILE l ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIANICONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS NAME OF PMON sl On Eum'tPM Safeeo Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304129 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware 0-12W (REV, 9i01) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT POWER S A F E C a OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: SAFECO MSUtANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA HOME OFFICE: SAFE:OPLAZA SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98185 No. That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, each a Washington corporation, does each hereby appoint rrnrrnararrrrrwrrrrrrrrnrrg77NE MAPSTASI DANA LOUIS DOWERS: SANDRA LEE SIKORA; Irvine, Glifomisrrrrrrrrrnrrrwrrrrrrrrrnrror 9s the and lawful afinmey(s}infad, with full authority to execute on its behalf fidelity and surety bonds or undemakings and other documents of a similar character issued in the course of he business, and to bind the respective company thereby. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA have each executed and attested these presents this 201h day of August 2004 CHRISTINE MEAD, SECRETARY ICN, PRESIDENT CERTIFICATE Extract from the By -taws of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA: "Article V. Section 13. - FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS ... the President, any Yee President, the Secretary. and any Assistant Vice Resident appointed for that purpose by the officer in charge of surety operations, shall each have authority to appoint Individuals as attomeys-Iniact or under other appropriate llftas with mSoft to axes le on behalf of On company fdefty and suety bonds and other documents of atria character issued by the company in the course of its business... On any Instrument making or evidencing such appointment, the signatures may be affixed by facsimile. On any instrument conferring such authority or on any bond or undedalft of the commpaly, the seal, or a faesbdle tersot may be impressed or affixed or in any other manner reproduced; provided, however, That the seal shah not be necessary to the validity of any such instrument a undertaking! Extract from a Resolution of the Board of Directors of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPARYOF AMERICA adopted July 28,1970. 'On any certificate executed by the Secretary or an assistant secretary of the Company setae out, W The provisions of Ar ide V, Section 13 of the Bylaws, and (1) A copyof fire poaerdath m ry appokdnnent, executed pun uam t erefo, and (hp Certifying fiat said powercf-etamey appointment Is in full force and effect the signature of the cethying officer maybe by aeshNle. and the seal of the Company may be a facsimile thereof." I, Christine Need, Secretary of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, do hereby certify that the foregoing extracts of the By -Laws and of a Resolution of the Board of Directors of these corporations, and of a Power of Attorney issued pursuant thereto, are true and conect, and that both the By -Laws, the Resolution and the Power of Attorney are still in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the acsinils seal of sad corporation this 7th day or October 2004 CHRISTINE MEAD, SECRETARY 5-09741SAEF 20 ® A registered eaAirark of SAFECO Corporation 08=01)34 PDF IMPORTANT NOTICE TO SURETY BOND CUSTOMERS REGARDING THE TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE ACT OF 2002 As a surety bond customer of one of the SAFECO insurance companies (SAFECO Insurance Company of America, General Insurance Company of America, First National Insurance Company of America, American States Insurance Company or American Economy Insurance Company), it is our duty to notify you that the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 extends to "surety insurance'. This means that under certain circum- stances we may be eligible for reimbursement of certain surety bond losses by the United States government under a formula established by this Act. Under this formula, the United States government pays 90% of losses caused by certified acts of terrorism that exceed a statutorily established deductible to be paid by the insurance company providing the bond. The Act also establishes a $100 billion cap for the total of all losses to be paid by all insurers for certified acts of terrorism. Losses on some or all of your bonds may be subject to this cap. This notice does not modify any of the existing terms and conditions of any bonds issued for your account, the underlying agreements guaranteed by those bonds, any statutes governing the terms of those bonds or any generally applicable rules of law. At this time there is no premium change to any of your bonds resulting from this Act. Dated: SBY/7 3/03 City Of Temecula Community Services Department tssy 43200 Business Park Drive • Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 • Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (951) 694- i480 • Fax (951) 694-6488 • vnv v.citvoflemerula.om Date of Agreement: Name of Subdivider: I5 C O R Address of Subdivider (street): oC5 OVl Address of Subdivider (city, state, zip): ( Q a 7 Contact: Q Title: 4SSDC. Phone Number: (Rr j�) 4� a Fax Number: A7,2 _ e? O Name of Subdivision: Wolf Creek — Linear Park North Tract I 29305-1 Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans No.: CSD03-0051 Referred to as'Landscape Im rovements" Estimated Total Cost of Improvements: $706,758.00.00 Estimated Completion Date: 10/31 /O6 (Referred to as "Completion Date.) Name of Surety: 5 ct q e YAaAmh Le Address of Surety (street): Ia0 Address of Surety (city, state, zip): I� e Q a. &6-6 Contact: {t Tit e: a � Phone Number. 8 (o () 6&6S 1 Fax Number. (tq q) R _(o(o O 0 Faithful Performance Bond 6,30Y113$706,758.00 Labor and Materials Bond 30`1 Id $353,379.00 Bond for Warranty 6 309E a 8 -- $70,676.00 SAProject ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 1 This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. Iz4-*i ifc1161 A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are _collectively.referred to in this Agreement as -the !Subdivision -Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDIVISION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required, as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement by SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estlmatesUnear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 2 Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term "Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications .for the Jmprovements as approved by the Director of C wrWMnity Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substantial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. SAProject ManagemenAAdarn Wolf Creek7CSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreementdoc 3 As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligation under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOT, _THEREFORE,.in.consideration of the. approval .and.recordation by the City Council of the final map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows: 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscaping Improvements SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Pursuant to the requirements of Labor Code Section 1720, SUBDIVIDER shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required by this Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file SAProject Managemenf\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 4 with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of the City of Temecula. Subdivider shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Subdivider shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations with respect to the payment of prevailing wages. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Subdivider shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less, than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by it or by any subcontractor under it, in violation of .the -provisions .of the .Agreement or in violation ..of any .applicable .Jaws or regulations pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages. C. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: d. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. e. Except for easements or other interested in real property to be dedicated to the Homeowners Association of the SUBDIVISION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off -site SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 5 rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights -of -Way. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or b. The dedication to, .and acceptance .by, the CITY.oVaWgyjate rights -of -way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. C. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; and SAProject ManagemenAAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 6 b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/Landscape Improvements required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and C. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated into this Agreement by this Reference. If any security is replaced by another approved security, the replacement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland Improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost if the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100% of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, SAProject ManagemenMdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estlmates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 7 altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDIVISION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. 5. Insoectionand Maintenance -Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. City Council authorizes the Director of Community Services or the Director of Community Services authorized representative to accept the landscaped medians, perimeter slopes, and parks into the Community Services Maintenance System which is funded by the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. b. SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the SAProject ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland landscape Agreement.doc 8 maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and CITY standards. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and certification. 6. Release of Securities. Subject to approval by Community Services, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. b. The Director of Community Services may release a,portion.of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25% of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50% of the total Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security, which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. C. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an SAProject Management\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatesLLinear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 9 amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been filed and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonable determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements -by the . City.Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. Iniury to Public Improvements, Public Property or Public Utilities Facilities. SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacement or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. S:\Project ManagementWdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 10 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER'S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER a. default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure the defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after -commencement of the work; SUBDIVIDER'S insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDIVISION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to his section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDIVIDER. The right of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be SAProlect Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 11 used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for an excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances, plan and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. C. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatesM inear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 12 d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period and -final -acceptance by the City Council of the work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after CITY acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary SAProject ManagementWdarnMolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreementdoc 13 repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. 11. Subdivider Not Agent of City. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. Iniury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement.prior to the completion and acceptance of the -work or -improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the appointment of costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligation to Warn Public During Construction. Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimatesUnear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 14 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement.--SUBDIVIER-further agrees -to -protect and hold harmless CITY, its -officials and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the SAProject Management\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 15 particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph for Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall remain in full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability. for. design and construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements -installed or work done pursuant to this Agreement and the CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph. 18. Sale or Disposition of SUBDIVISION. Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDIVISION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreementdoc 16 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 20. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than 10/31/06. In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. Delay, other than -delay .in _the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for an increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreementdoc 17 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Notice to SUBDIVIDER: SiANOr�rtp PAT-tF(L 6&tP �S� f• I2r.Jct9,I/, b9� Zoo cve �.v9 C-A 9 2-9 7 4 23. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litigation or Arbitration. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. S:\Project Management\Adarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 18 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. Legal Responsibilities. The Subdivider shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The Subdivider shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Subdivider to comply with this section. 28. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of.. this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appnWiate representative of the parties. In the rase of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. SAProject ManagemenNAdarn Wolf Creek7CSI) cast estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreementdoc 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDER CITY OF TEMECULA By: (fit/ By: Name: AUGUST BELMONT Name: E Title: Title: By: Name: MIC AEL J. WHITE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Title: (Proper Notarization of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC, City Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: 0 William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Herman D. Parker Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: 0 Peter Thorson City Attorney SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\Linear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 20 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside __— On-10/07/04--------- ------ before me, _Brand! L. Watt Notary Public -- Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L WAIT Commission N 1426406 Notary Public • California Riverside County @,My Comm. Fxpires Jun 24, 2007 personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) j�/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that /§Ke/they executed the same in hfs"r/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by O#r/their signature(s) on the instrument the erson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. �l --- Signature of Notary Public OPTIONAL -- Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons retying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑� Corporate Officer -Title(s): Authorized Representative ❑ Partner-? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: -Standard Pacific Corp Number of Pages: LINEAR PARK PLAN WOLF CREEK OPINION OF PROBABLY COST Oct. 5, 2004 ;., �v�wrzr� v�vtr ;�rvrr�xxc�: rvr� I—— ............. ....................... ...................... HARDSGAPEITEMS CONC. WALKWAY @ ACTIVITI 851 S.F. $4.00 $3,404.00 TOT LOT RUBBER SURFACE - 1.125 S.F. $17.00 $19,125.00 PAR COURSE RUBBER SURF/ 430 S.F. $17.00 $7,310.00 TOT LOT CURB 122 L.F. $12.00 $1,464.00 PAR COURSE CURB 129 L.F. $12.00 $1,548.00 CONCRETE MOW CURB 2,533 L.F. $18.00 $45,594.00 PARK BENCHES 4 EACH $750.00 $3,000.00 TRASH RECEPTACLES 8 EACH $750.00 $6,000.00 GAZEBO W/ STONE VENEER F 1 EACH $46,000.00 $46,000.00 PICNIC TABLES 4 EACH $1,000.00 $4,000.00 PAR COURSE FITNESS & TOT -LOT PLAY EQU ALLOW $34,000.00 COOL TOPPER FOR TOT -LOT ALLOW $6,000.00 DRAINAGE SYSTEM ALLOW $15,000.00 SAFETY PATH LIGHTING ALLOW $50,000.00 HARDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $242,445.00 LiNISCARERGF2EEN IYF2E4S IRRIGATION / FLAT AREAS FINE / FINISH GRADE SOIL PREP. WEED ABATEMENT HYDROSEEDED TURF GROUNDCOVER SPECIMEN TREES 48" BOX SPECIMEN TREES 36" BOX SPECIMEN TREES 24" BOX SHRUBS 5GAL SHRUBS 1GAL VINES 5 GAL 103,441 S.F. $1.20 $124,129.20 103,441 S.F. $0.10 $10,344.10 103,441 S.F. $0.10 $10,344.10 ALLOW $3,100.00 48,744 S.F. $0.07 $3,412.08 54,697 S.F. $0.25 $13,674.25 2 EACH $1,250.00 $2,500.00 46 EACH $600.00 $27,600.00 124 EACH $225.00 $27,900.00 7452 EACH $15.00 $111,780.00 1964 EACH $4.50 $8,838.00 161 EACH $18.00 $2,898.00 LANDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $346,519.73 OVERALL COST OF ALL ITEMS OVERALL BOND AGREEMENT • 120% $588,964.73 $706,757.68 CITY OF TEMECULA Bond No.: 6304128 PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Premium : $7,068.00 WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp.. a Delaware corporation (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6, Z0 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0051 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Linear Park North, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to furnish a bond for the Faithful Performance of the Agreement; Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and SafPen rnamaranee/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $706,758.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the S Pr0JW ManaacmmMitam\Wolf Creek=SD cost otimatcsWilear Park Nora -Parkland Landaeepc Faithful Parrormame Bond.dw terms of the Agreement or the work or to the specifications. N/ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th , 20 04 SURETY Safeco Insurance Company of America BY: Ch Stine Maestas (NAME) Attorney -in -Fact (TITLE) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorsen City Attorney PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation M ce::�2& / AUGUSTBELMONT a . • .,tW. (TITLE) S:V'rgeet Mae¢aan"AAdam\Woif Cmek\TCSD cost c timate\Linty Park North -Parkland Land"pc Faithful Perfo mince Bond.dw CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside ____ SS. On _10/07/04 _ __ before me, _Brandi L. Watt Notary Public o ats Name and Title of officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White tiaArta L. WATT Commission N 1426406 a Notary Public - California _5 Rhferslde County 10,MyComm. fxplies Jun 24. 2007 E] personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) Aare subscribed to the with*ry instrument and acknowledged to me that jats/§f%/t executed the same in er/their authorized capacity(ies), and hat by "r/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 Public Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer— Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: sTATEOF California ss. COUNTYoF Orange On October 7th. 2004 , before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONALLYAPPEARED Christine Maestas personally known to me (or proved to me on the bans of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whore name(s) tslare .subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshe/drry erecured the some in hillher/dwir authorized capacity(ksl and that by his&eeolhew signature(s) on the htrtrummt the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument WTTNESY my hand and ofieiat seal. ESTHERALSTEPIEN L Co mnisebn t 1351366 i Notary Pubic — California Oranpe County 10MycwmE0%@jun17.20MP OPTIONAL This arm for Official Notarial Seat Though the data below Is not required by low, it may prove valuable to persons retying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ [NoIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL IN ATTORNEY-W-FACT ❑ TRIISTEE(S) ❑ QUARDIAWCONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: — SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: M$Ae OF POWORq aRB Rrfg= Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304128 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Two NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware Corporation 12VTOM 161232 (`EV.5/07) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1 Blind No.: 6304128 "Premium : Included in charge for Performance Bond CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Coro. , a 10101avare_-corooration , (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th , 2004 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0051 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Linear Park North, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the term of said Agreement, Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Temecula, to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California; and Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and Safeco Insurance 9 as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Agreement and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of $353,379.00, lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount sefforth. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. S'\PrgJwt MangemenWsmlWolfCruk\TCSD cost estirmmUtntar Park North -parkland landscape labor and materials bond.doc- I - It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. If the condition of this bond is fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terns of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such changes, extension of time, alteration or addition to the teens of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. S.\Projwl Managtmrnl\Amm\WOIfCrttk\TCSD wat estlmmeoWnear Park Nonh.parkland londic•pe Lbw &nd m wmals bond.dm- 2 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th (Seal) SU — Saf c an Company of America By Christine Maestas (Name) Attorney —in —Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney 20 04 - (Seal) PRINCIPAL Standar 'fic Carp., a Delaware corporation 0 MICHAEL (Title) „n. S:\Projce. ManagemenBAdam\Wolf CrcckVl CSD con ewumataALAnear Park No4-parkland landampc labor Slid mammals bo d.doc. 3 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside _ SS. On _10/07/04---- — _ before me, _Brandi L. Watt Notary Public Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J_White BRANDI L WATT ._ Commission # 1426406 Notary Public - California • Riverside County - My Comm. Expires Jun 24, 2007 ❑r personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) ys/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me tha / e/they executed the same in I' / rRheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by XjYfer/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 Public -- - OPTIONAL--------- — Though the information below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer - Title(s): ❑ Partner -? Limited ?General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATEOF California coutYrYoF Orange I SS on October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Steplen, Notary Public pERSONAUXAFFFe1RED Christine Maestas personally brown to me (or proved to me an the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the personO) whose name(s) is/are sahwr bed to the within instrument and acbtawledged to me that he(shehhey esecuted the same inhic/herAmrauthorized cnpacirXies) and that byhiolienhhew signatures) on the hurrionent the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted eseeured the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal. I �24 1 l� r� r OPTIONAL ESTHER A.STEPIEN _ ComrW"ont1361366 No" PuWk— CeGbmts Oranm Cow" 1yCouran Figir Jos t7, 2006 This area for Ofciat Notarial Seal Though the data below Is not required by law, It may prove valuable to persons relM on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDmoUAL ❑ cORPoRAT£omc£R nnem ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL IN ATTORNEY-W-FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIANICONSERVATOR 17 OTHER:__ SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: WANE OF Pe=$M OR BMWO :at Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304128 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware OTHER THAN ID-1=(PEV. WI) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No.: 6304128 M Premium : Included in charge for Performance Bond CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE WARRANTY BONY WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as "City'), a Delaware corporation and Standard Pacific Corp.,/ (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th 20 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0051 Project Description: Wolf Creek — Linear Park North is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and .safaco Insurance Company/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $70,676.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above - bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. S Vroject Managemmt\Adam\WolrC=k\TCSD cost estim lesUrtar Park Northyrorkland landscape warranty Bond I.dm As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and It does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on __ October 7th 20 04. SAPraiml ManagomenMdam\WolfCrmkMSD OR aumoln\[iner Park North-patrland landscape War ty good IAA (Seal) SURE Saf Tn ti.r'Afic any f America By: Christine Hasetas (Name) Attorney —in —Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney (Seal) PRINCIPAL Standa ifi orp., a Delaware corporation By. AUGUST BELMONT AUTHORIZE08"ESENTATIVE (Title) S:Wrojecl Managcnwnl\Wdam\Wolf Crcek\TCSD coaxealimat"\Unar Park Nonh•parkiand landaape Wamnty Bond I.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside SS. On-10/07/04— __ ______ before me,-BrandiL. Watt Dale personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L. WATT Commission # 1426406 `z .p Notary Public - California �` i . Riverside County aMy Comm. Expires Jun 24, 2007 ry Public Name and Title 2] personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) /are subscribed to the withi9.- instrument and acknowledged to me thaj 0/,s etthey executed the same in hit/Mer/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hs/46r/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 o 'jseal. Signature of Notary Public ----------•--_---- OPTIONAL -- Though the Information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer— Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ?General ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATE OF California SS. COUNTYOF Orange On October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public P ASONALLYAPPEARED Christine Maestri personalty known to me (or proved to me on the bads of sati*ctory evidence) to be the persan(s) whose name(s) Ware subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helsh&*ey executed At same inhiilherMar authorized capaci0fies). and that by hivIierhheir sigmature(s) on the instrument the persou(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL E37fiFRA.STEPIEN Comm issioni13613st1 ¢ Notary Pubft — California z Orange CeuMy rAp Lbrnn� Fs¢ivae Jan 17, 70g6 Thit area for Ofcial Notarial Seal Though the data below Is not required by law, It may preve valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFicER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -INTACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAWCONSERVATOR L1 OTHER: SIGNER IS NAME OF raasogsi OR BamvPM Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304128 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware Corporation T0*61L� 167232 (REV. sloe) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SAF ECa POWER � OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMEtICA HOME OFFICE SAFECO PLAZA SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98185 No. 13111 That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA. each a Washington corporation, does each hereby appoint urnrnrrrrarararnorrrrrrrCIMISTINE MARSTAS; DANA LOLLS DOWERS; SANDRA LEE SMORA; him, Califomienrrrurrruwowrruruorurr Its true and lawful atlomsy(syinied wth full authority to execute on Its behalf fidelity and surety bonds or undedeldngs and other documents of a similar character issued in the course of Ile business, and to bind the respective company thereby. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA have each executed and attested these presents this 201h day of Augert 2004 CHRWnNE MEAD, SECRETARY ICK PRESIDENT CERTIFICATE Extract from the By -Laws of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA: 'Article V, Section 13. - FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS ... the President, any Vice Resident, the Secretary, and any Assistant Vice Resident appointed for that purpose by the officer in charge of surety operations, shall each have allthortLy to appoint individuals as aftomeys-In-fact or under other appropriate Wes with suthodly to execute on behat of the company tideft and suety balls and other documents of strider character issued by the company in the course of its business... On any bntrunherd waling or evidencing such appointment the signatures may be affaed by facsimile. On any instrument conferring such andhortty, or on any bond or undertaking of the company, the seal, or a feashnge thereof, may be impressed or affixed or In any other manner reproduced; provided, however, Out the seat shag not be necessary to the validity of any such Instrument or undertaking.' Extract from Resolution of the Board of Directors ofSAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA adopted July 28, 1070. 'On any certificate executed by the Secretary or an assistant secretary of the Company salting out, () The provisions of Article V, Section 13ofthe By -Laws, and QD A copy of the powerofatsmeyappotrdrrent, executed pursuant thereto, and M Certifying tut said powerof-ettomey appointment Is in fug force and effect the sipnabse of the certifying officer may be by tsesinr fie, and the reel of the Company may be a facsimile thereof.' 1, Christine Mead, Secretary of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, do hereby certify that the foregoing extracts of the By -Laws and of a Resolution of the Board of Directors of these corporations, and of a Power of Attorney issued pursuant thereto, are true and correct, and that both the By -Laws, the Resolution and the Power of Attorney are etl0 In fun force and effect. IN WIMESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affored the facsimile seat of said corporation SEAL this 7th day of October , 2004 CHRISTINE MEAD, SECRETARY S-W748AEF 201 ® A m&emd trademark of SAFECO Corporation 0820Q004 PDF IMPORTANT NOTICE TO SURETY 660 CUSTOMERS REGARDING THE TERRORISM RISK INSdRANd ACT OF 2002 As a surety bond customer of one of the SAFECO insurance companies (SAFECO Insurance Company of America, General Insurance Company of America, First National Insurance Company of America, American States Insurance Company or American Economy Insurance Company), it is our duty to notify you that the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 extends to "surety insurance". This means that under certain circum- stances we may be eligible for reimbursement of certain surety bond losses by the United States government under a formula established by this Act. Under this formula, the United States government pays 90% of losses caused by certified acts of terrorism that exceed a statutorily established deductible to be paid by the insurance company providing the bond. The Act also establishes a $100 billion cap for the total of all losses to be paid by all insurers for certified acts of terrorism. Losses on some or all of your bonds may be subject to this cap. This notice does not modify any of the existing terms and conditions of any bonds issued for your account, the underlying agreements guaranteed by those bonds, any statutes governing the terms of those bonds or any generally applicable rules of law. At this time there is no premium change to any of your bonds resulting from this Act Dated: S 6247 3/03 City Of Temecula Community Services Department 43200 Business Park Drive • Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 • Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (951) 694-6480 • Fax (951) 694-6488 • www.dNoRemecula.om Parkland/Landscape • •Agreement Date of Agreement: _ y • i 6" - • a a a a a Name of Subdivider: n I' Address of Subdivider (street): 6 5 C S� 0p Address of Subdivider (city, state, zip): u r-b YA Q C a g l Y 7 Contact: Title: rt ssoQ- f Ct aria Phone Number. a -,VS Oo Fax Number. Name of Subdivision: Wolf Creek - 6 Acre Neighborhood Park Tract No.: 29305-1 Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans No.: Referred to as "Landscape Im rovements" CSD03-0057 Estimated Total Cost of Improvements: $1,818,714.00 Estimated Completion Date: Referred to as "COm letion Date" 10/31106 Name of Surety: sajpec0 1� Q Address of Surety (street): r� 0 Q Address of Surety (city, state, zip): , ; e a C155 Contact: i m �`Ime Title: & f Phone Number. (( �j ��G . ��S Fax Number. OW) g(o0 — (� 00 Faithful Performance Bond G3 Oq 131 $1,818,714.00 Labor and Materials Bond � 3040 $909,357.00 Bond for Warranty '-131- $181,871.00 SAProject Management\Adann Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape Agreement.goc This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. RECITALS A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are .,collectively.referred.to.in.tWs.Agreement-as the "Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDIVISION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required, as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement by SAProjed Management%darn Wolf Creek\TCSO cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 2 Agreementdoc Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term 'Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications..for..theJmprovements-as approved -by -the. Director -of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substantial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 3 Agreement.doc As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligation under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOT, THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval and recordation by the City Council of the final map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows: 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscaping Improvements SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Pursuant to the requirements of Labor Code Section 1720, SUBDIVIDER shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required by this Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file S1Project ManagemenMdarn Wolf CreeMMSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 4 Agreement.doc with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of the City of Temecula. Subdivider shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Subdivider shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations with respect to the payment of prevailing wages. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Subdivider shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less, than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by it or by any subcontractor under it, in violation of the .provisions .of .the Agreement or in violation of any applicable Aaws or regulations pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages. C. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: d. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. e. Except for easements or other interested in real property to be dedicated to the Homeowners Association of the SUBDIVISION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off -site SAProject ManagementAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost esdmatW6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 5 Agreement.doc rights -of -way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights -of -Way. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or b. The dedication to, and acceptance by, ,the, CITY, .of.appropriate rights -of -way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. C. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; and SAProject ManagemenhAdamOoff Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape s Agreement.doc b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/Landscape Improvements required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and C. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated -into this.Agreement.by.this Reference. If any security -is replaced by another approved security, the replacement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland Improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost if the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100% of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, SAProject Management\Ndam\Wolf CreeMTCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park-Parldand Landscape Agreement.doc altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDIVISION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. 5. Insi)ectionand.Maintenance,Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. City Council authorizes the Director of Community Services or the Director of Community Services authorized representative to accept the landscaped medians, perimeter slopes, and parks into the Community Services Maintenance System which is funded by the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. b. SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the S1Project ManagemerrhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 6 Agreement.doc maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and CITY standards. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and certification. 6. Release of Securities. Subject to approval by Community Services, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. b. The Director of Community Services may release a portion,of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25% of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50% of the total Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security, which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. C. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an SAProject ManagemenMdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape g Agreement.doc amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been filed and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonable determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements by the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. Inlury to Public ImDroyementS Public Property or Public Utilities Facilities SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacement or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. SAProject ManagemenhAdam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 1 Agreement.doc 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER'S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER a. default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure the defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after commencement of the work; SUBDIVIDER'S insolvency, appointment of -a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDIVISION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to his section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDIVIDER. The right of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be S:\Project Management\AdarnMoti Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 11 Agreement.doc used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for an excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY without liability for_so..doing, may take possession of,,and.utilize in.completing the=work, such materials, appliances, plan and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. C. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. SAPro)ect Management%dam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 2 Agreement.doc d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period..and.final acceptance by.the City.Council of She work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after CITY acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary SAProject ManagementWdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 13 Agreement.doc repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. 11. Subdivider Not Agent of City. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. Injury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement prior .toAhe-completion and acceptance of the work or -improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the appointment of costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligation to Warn Public During Construction. Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. SAProject Management\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 14 Agreennent.doc 16. Final Acceotance of Work. Acceptance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement .SUBDIVJER.further.agrees .to protect and hold harmless -CITY, -its officials and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the SAProject ManagemenhAdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park-Paridand Landscape 15 Agreement.doc particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph for Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall remain in full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability for design and -construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvementsinstalled or work done pursuant to this Agreement and the CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph. 18. Sale or Disposition of SUBDIVISION. Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDIVISION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. SAProject Management\Hdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 16 Agreement.doc 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 20. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than 10/31/06. In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. Delay,, other -than delay .in the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by'storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for an increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. SAProject Management\Adarn Wolf CreeMMSp cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 1 Agreement.doc 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Notice to SUBDIVIDER: 5?f3NDA-2 r�, P%-C/`/4- 6-NC P ZS37 C Q NC 7�1� STE 2Zo 23. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litigation or Arbitration. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. S:\Project ManagemeneAdarn Woff Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape 18 Agreement.doc 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. Legal Responsibilities. The Subdivider shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The Subdivider shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Subdivider to comply with this section. 28. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this .Agreement -must .be .in .writing and .signed by the apprgxiate representative of the parties. In the case of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. SAProject ManagementWdarn Wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland Landscape g Agreement.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDER CITY OF TEMECULA By: By: Name: AUGUST BELMONT Name: AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Title: Title: Title: (Proper Notarization of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: 22 M Name: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Name: Herman D. Parker Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson City Attorney SAProject Managemenf\Adam\Wolf Creek\TCSD cost esfimatesUnear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 20 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside ______ ___ _ SS. On—10/07/04 _ ___ _ before me, _Brandi L. Watt cafe personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L. wAtt S Commbrlon # 1426406 tOMVCMn.&DhlMJM91A Nosy Pui - CaWwft RNanlde ,2007 y Public Name and Title of Officer Q personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) hare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me th t�/s'tthey executed the same in Wer/t air authorized capacity(ies), and that by Rr/their signature(s) on the instrument the p rson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. i Signature of Notary Public — -------------------OPTIONAL--• -- Though the information below is not required by law, It may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: Number of Pages: ❑ Individual El Corporate Officer —Title(s): Authorized Representative_ ❑ Partner —? Limited ?General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: _Standard Pacific Corp EXHIBIT A (Attach the basis for the estimate of the cost of improvements.) SAProject ManagementlAdarnMolf Creek\TCSD cost estlmateslLinear Park North -Parkland Landscape Agreement.doc 21 6.0 ACRE PARK TCSD MAINTAINED AREAS WOLF CREEK OPINION OF PROBABLE COST Oct 05, 2004 IIF 1 QUANTI.T .uNiT': UH/� PRICE Y rTAL "Ilkb AP0lfgm8 ASPHALT PARKING LOT 19,050 S.F. $1.50 $28,575.00 CONCRETE WALKWAY 54.697 S.F. $3.25 $177,765.25 TOT LOT RUBBER SURFACE 1,140 S.F. $15.00 $17,100.00 FOREST FIBER JOEL4VERY 4NCLO.) 7;555 S.F. $2.68 $20,247.40 RAISED STAGE 1,830 S.F. $7.00 $12,810.00 HANDICAP RAMP 140 S.F. $6.00 $840.00 6" THICK CONC. PAD @TRASH EN( 394 S.F. $6.00 $2,364.00 CONCRETE STEP 170 L.F. $24.00 $4,080.00 TOT LOT CURB 420 L.F. $22.00 $9,240.00 SPLIT RAIL FENCE 440 L.F. $20.00 $8,800.00 CURB AND GUTTER AT PARKING L 1,000 L.F. $12.00 $12,000.00 CONCRETE MOW CURB 1,736 L.F. $18.00 $31,248.00 GAZEBO @ PLAZA 12 EACH $15,000.00 $180,000.00 BIKE RACKS 2 EACH $500.00 $1,000.00 PICNIC TABLES 17 EACH $1,000.00 $17,000.00 PARK BENCHES 15 EACH $750.00 $11,250.00 TRASH RECEPTACLES 25 EACH $750.00 $18,750.00 SHADE STRUCTURE OVER PICNIC 1 EACH $15,000.00 $15,000.00 FULL COURT BASKETBALL 1 EACH $20,000.00 $20,000.00 PAR COURSE W/FITNESS EQUIPMI 1 EACH $5,000.00 $5,000.00 DRINKING FOUNTAINS 1 EACH $3,500.00 $3,500.00 RESTROOM BUILDING ALLOW $90,000.00 PARK SITE SIGNAGE -1 TOTAL ALLOW $5,000.00 TOT LOT PLAY EQUIPMENT (INSTALLATION INCLD.) ALLOW $115,772.00 GAZEBO @AMPHITHEATER ALLOW $20,000.00 PARKING LOT LIGHTING ALLOW $15,000.00 SAFETY PATH LIGHTING ALLOW $25,000.00 DRAINAGE SYSTEM ALLOW $50,000.00 TRASH ENCLOSURE ALLOW $4,800.00 COOL TOPPER AT TOT -LOT ALLOW $12,000.00 WATER PLAY EQUIPMENT (INSTALLATION INCLD.) ALLOW $150,000.00 HARDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $1,084,141.65 (6.0 ACRE PARK CONTINUED) E.AN415C11PEp Glt�EN AR�►S .....:;'. IRRIGATION / FLAT AREAS FINE / FINISH GRADE SOIL PREP. WEED ABATEMENT HYDROSEEDED TURF G.C. SPECIMEN TREES 48" BOX SPECIMEN TREES 36" BOX SPECIMEN TREES 24" BOX SPECIMEN TREES 15 GAL SHRUBS 15 GAL SHRUBS 5 GAL SHRUBS 1 GAL VINES 5 GAL 195,701 S.F. $1.20 $234,841.20 195,701 S.F. $0.10 $19,570.10 195,701 S.F. $0.10 $19,570.10 ALLOW $5,871.00 157,553 S.F. $0.07 $11,028.71 38,148 S.F. $0.25 $9,537.00 5 EACH $1,200.00 $6,000.00 55 EACH $600.00 $33,000.00 117 EACH $225.00 $26,325.00 0 EACH $85.00 $0.00 7 EACH $75.00 $525.00 3,848 EACH $15.00 $57,720.00 1,609 EACH $4.50 $7.240.50 3 EACH $75.00 $225.00 LANDSCAPE SUBTOTAL $431,453.61 TOTAL FOR 6 ACRE PARK OVERALL BOND AGREEMENT • 120% $1,515,595.26 $1,818,714.31 Bond No.: 6304131 Premium : $18,187.00 CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation(hereinafter designated as "Principal') have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated October 6th 20 04 , and identified as Project CSD 03-0057 Project Description, Wolf Creek — 6 Acre Neighborhood Park, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to furnish a bond for the Faithful Performance of the Agreement; Company of America NOW" THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco Insurance/ as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $1,818,714.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the S \Project Managcmcn(WareNalf CrwkvrCSD cost esnmatcs\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -Parkland L al3apc Faithful PerMmanoc Bond.doc specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th SURETY Safeco Insurance Company of America BY;, Christine Maestas (NAME) Attorney —in —Fact (TITLE) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorsen City Attorney 20 04 PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation NAWS AUGUST BELMONT AUTHOTIOMFRESENTATIVE (TITLE) 5.\Pmjecj Manage e,t\A&m\Wolf Crock\TCgD coil erummn\6 Acre Neighborhood Park•Pukland l.Andecapc Faithful Performvicc aond,doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside On 10/07/04 [ate personally appeared I SS. before me, Brandi L_Waft Belmont and Michael J. White BRANDI L. WATf Commission # 1426406 .m Notary Public - California Riverside County L�� My Comm.Explres Jun 24, 2007 ---_- -- OPTIONAL ry Public Name and Title [E] personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) jd/are subscribed to the within nstrument and acknowledged to me that , e/they executed the same in I /her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hid/;r/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 Public Though the information below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document:: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(Ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ?General ❑ Attorney -in -Fad ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: BTATEOF California SS. coumyoF Orange on October 7th, 2004 . before nu; Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONALLYAFFEARED Christine Maestas permaily brown to me (orproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persan(s) whose name(s) islaresubscribed to the within instmment and admowiedged to me that helshol hey executed the same inhidhffAbdraudwritedcapactry(tes} and that byhiAethheir signature(s) on the instrument the p erson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seat. OPTIONAL — EMERA-STEPIFII Comm"on i 1361368 IZL Notary Public — Catltonnia Orange County Mr Comm. EtgnrLn 17, 7006 This area for OffkW Notarial Seat Though the data below Is rot required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this brm. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDrnOUAL ❑ CORPORATEomcm ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY -INTACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAWCONSERVATOR 0 OTHER: -- SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME Or PER90NI87 OR OMWOM Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304131 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Two NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th. 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Paeft Corp., a Delaware ID-1232 (Res. srol) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No. Premium: CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND 6304131 Included in charge for arformance Bond WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation , (hereinafter designated as "Principal') have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated Octoher firh , 20-g, and identified as Project CSD 03-0057 Project Description: Wolf Creek — 6 Acre Neighborhood Park, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the term of said Agreement, Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Temecula, to segue the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California; and Company of America NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and Safeco Insurance / as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Agreement and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of $909,357.00, lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any land, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount set forth. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attomey's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. SAProject ManagernentW*m\Wolf CreckkTCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Ncighborhoud Park parkland landatepc labor and mmtrials bond.duc It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. If the condition of this bond is fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such changes, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terns of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. S:\Projcet ManaganertiWamlWolf Creek\TCSD cost tstimatcs\6 Acre Neighborhood Perk -parkland landscape labor and materials bond doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th (Seal) SURETY_ S c '1 or a any f Atderica By: Christine Maestas (Name) Attorney —in —Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney 2004 (Seal) PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., Delaware dorporation By: AUGUST BELMONT AUTHORIZ041MOIESENTATIVE (Title) S \Project M,n,gcment\Ad►m\Wolf Crock\TCSD cost esurtutes\6 Acre Neighborhood Park•pukUnd landscape labor and nutchais bond doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Riverside I SS. On _10/07/04 _ before me, Brandt L_Waft Notary Public____ Date Name and Title of Officer personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White hAlled BRANDI L. WAR Commission # 1426406 < 0MyComm. Notary Public - CaliforniaRiverside County Expires Jun 24, 2007 --OPTIONAL E] personally known tome ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) /s/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that �/sq'e/they executed the same in )aisor/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by IXr/their signature(s) on the instrument the erson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and o lal s I. Signature of Notary Public Though the information below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capactty(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: — ... _.......... ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer— Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ? General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATE OF Caffomia SS. COUNTYOF Orange On October 7th, 2004 . before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSOIVAL,LYAFFFARED Christine Maestas personally known to me (orproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persae(s) whose name(s) Ware subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/shddwy executed the same in ha4wAheir authorizedcapacity(iesA and that by his/henRheir signature(s) on the instrument the prrson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal, r OPTIONAL 0 ESTHER A. STEPtEN Commission tf 1361368 3 Notary Public — Cslifomla ge s OranCounty My Comm. lBVkft,lun 17, 7D08 7Ut area for Official Notarial Seat Though the data below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons retying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ® ATTORNEY-WACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) O GUARDIANfCONSERVATOR 11 OTHER: -- SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF Prnea+IS) on ENT"P ) Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304131 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 T DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware ID-12M (REV. 5101) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Bond No.: 6304131—M premium : Included in chhrge for Performance ji,.i CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLANDILANDSCAPE WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as a Delavare corporation "City'), and Standard Pacific Corn.,/ (hereinafter designated as `Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated Ontrkb r Orb 20-DA_, and identified as Project CSD 03-0057 Project Description: Wolf Creek — 6 Acre Neighborhood Park is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials fumished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and Safeco Insurance Compare /oa�erica surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $181,871.00, lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above -bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save S:\PrDjwtMmsgemmt\Adam\WolfCnekkTCSD coot c3timde9\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -parkland landscape warnnry eond I.doc harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. S \Projmt MsnsgcrncnlWdsm\Wolf Creek\TCSD wn wtimncs\6 Acre Neighborhood Pak•pirklsnd Iwdscope Warranty Bond I.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on October 7th 20 04 . (Seal) (Seal) SUM�j PRINCIPAL Standard Pacific Corp., a isa Ca y of America lavarg corporation By.�-�—�— Christine Maestas (Name) Attorney -in -Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney AUGUST BELMONT AUTHORIft99l@4RESENTATIVE (Title) By: ,z�e_ MICHAEL J. WHITE ALITHORIZE B9SENTATIVE (Title) S:Wrortct Manogemmt\Adam\wolf Creek\TCSD cost estimates\6 Acre Neighborhood Park -parkland lmdscapt Worranty Bond I Aoc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of _Riverside SS. On_10/07/04 before me, Brandi L. Watt Date personally appeared August Belmont and Michael J. White BRAND' L. WAR Commission # 1426406 z @MYNok2FY Public-Cal'fornin1, RiversideCounty COMM Expires Jun 24. 200, / ry Public__ Name and Title of officer personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) j /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me thpt I0/*f5e/they executed the same in i"V r/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by f1iis"r/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 my hand and�eal. Signature of Notary Public Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(iss) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: _______________ ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner —? Limited ?General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Number of Pages: STATEOF CallfOrnia SS COUNTYOF Orange On October 7th, 2004 , before me, Esther A. Stepien, Notary Public pERSONALLyAFFEARED Christine Maestas personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are suhscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me Ad he/sholhey executed the same in hidherMeeir arahorindcapaci)(ies), and that by hiAerldmw signatures) on the instrument the persons), or the entity span behalf of which the persons) acted executed the instrument. WIIN= my hand and official seal. 4k OPTIONAL ESTHER A STEPIEN Commission i 1961068 z 5 Notary Public—Cal'rtomia i o ' Orange County My Comm. Emma Jun 17, 2006 This area for Official Notarial Seal Though the data below Is not required by law, it may prove valuable W persons retying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this lonn. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER mrt ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL (N ATTORNEY -IN -PACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAWCONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER:_ SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: unre Or aeasaryat OR e¢my1M Safeco Insurance Company of America DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Bond Number 6304131 TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT Three NUMBER OF PAGES October 7th, 2004 DATE OF DOCUMENT Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware Corporation ABOVE ID-1232 (REV. 501) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SAF EGa POWER � OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA HOME OFFICE SAFECOPLAZA SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98185 No. That SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, each a Washington corporation, does each hereby appoint rr»arrrrwnarrnrrrrrrrrrur ISTINE MAESTAS; DANA LOUIS DOWERS; SANDRA LEE SIKORA,Irvine, CabfomurrsrrrrrHUrrrrrrrtrrrrrrVYrrrr as hue and lawful altomey(s)-m-fad, with Kill authority to execute on its behalf fidelity and surety bonds or undertakings and other documents of a similar character issued in the course of its business, and to bind the respective company thereby. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA have each executed and attested these presents this 20th day of August 2004 cle, CHRISTINE MEAD, SECRETARY PRESIDENT CERTIFICATE Extract from the By -Laws of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA: 'Article V, Section 13. - FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS ... the President any Yee President, the Secretary, and any Assistant Vice President appointed for that purpose by the officer in charge of surety operations, shall each have authority to appoint individuals as ahomeys-in-fad or under other appropriate Was with authieft to execute on behalf of the company fidefily and surety tends and other documents of similar character issued by the company in the course of its business... On any Instrument mating or evidencing such appointment, the signatures may be affixed by facsimile. On any Instrument conferring such authority or on any bond cr undedaidrig of the comparry, the seal, or a facsbnde thereof, my be brpressed or affixed or in arty other manner reproduced; provided, however, that the seal shall not be necessary to the validity of any such instrument or undertokirhg.' Extract from a Resolution of the Board of Directors of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA adopted July 28,1970. 'On any certificate executed by the Secretary or an assistant secretary of the Company setting out, n Tho provbtons of Arfick V, Secbon 13 of the WLaws, and (u Acopyofthe powsrof4domeyappoiWrherd, executed pumuanttrerelo. and (d) Certifying that said poweroRatfomay appointment is in fug tome and effect the signature of the codifying officer may be by facsimile, and the seal of the Company may be a facsimile thereof.' I, Christine Mead, Secretary of SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and of GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, do hereby certify that the foregoing extracts of the By -Laws and of a Resolution of the Board of Directors of these corpoatiorn, and of a Power of Attorney issued pursuant thereto, are true and correct, and that both the By -Laws, the Resolution and the Power of Attorney are atlg In fug force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the facsbNle seal of said corporation SEAL S-0974/SAEF 2/01 this 7th day of October , 2004 CHRISTINE MEAD, SECRETARY ® A Mortared trademark of SAFECO Corporation IMPORTANT NOTICE TO SURETY BO�pD:CUSTOMERS REGARDING THE TERRORISM RISK INStfRIW6E ACT OF 2002 As a surety bond customer of one of the SAFECO insurance companies (SAFECO Insurance Company of America, General Insurance Company of America, First National Insurance Company of America, American States Insurance Company or American Economy Insurance Company), it is our duty to notify you that the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 extends to *surety insurance'. This means that under certain circum• stances we may be eligible for reimbursement of certain surety bond losses by the United States government under a formula established by this Act. Under this formula, the United States government pays 90% of losses caused by certified acts of terrorism that exceed a statutorily established deductible to be paid by the insurance company providing the bond. The Act also establishes a $100 billion cap for the total of all losses to be paid by all insurers for. certified acts of terrorism. Losses on some or all of your bonds may be subject to this cap. This notice does not modify any of the existing terms and conditions of any bonds issued for your account, the underlying agreements guaranteed by those bonds, any statutes governing the terms of those bonds or any generally applicable rules of law. At this time there is no premium change to any of your bonds resulting from this Act. Dated: 56247 3103 TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FI CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service%/:4� DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gail L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary Harveston Community Park is located in the Harveston Development, a large Specific Plan development in the northern part of the City east of Interstate 15. The park site will include two dedicated full size lighted soccer fields; 2 lighted ball field with 90' bases; age appropriate play areas; a group picnic area; community building; restroom/concession/maintenance building; parking with approximately 300 spaces; benches; tables; drinking fountains and walkways. This park site is currently in the 90 day maintenance period and staff anticipates dedicating this park site in November of this year. RHA Landscape Architects has prepared the construction documents for the improvements to Vail Ranch Park Site "C" Pablo Apis Park adjacent to Pauba Elementary School. This project is identified in this year's CIP. The new amenities will include a tot lot, picnic shelter, tables, benches and walkways. A contract for the construction project was awarded on May 11, 2004. The improvements are near completion. The conceptual Master Plan for the Wolf Creek Sports Complex is complete. The 43 acre park will offer parking, restroom/concession buildings, maintenance building, four lighted basketball courts, four lighted soccer and four lighted softball/baseball fields, tot play equipment, picnic areas and walkways. This project has been bid and a contract has been awarded for construction, which should begin in approximately 45 days. A Ground Breaking Ceremony for the Veteran's Memorial was held on July 4, 2004. Construction of the memorial is currently underway. The design of the memorial includes the installation of pre - ordered engraved pavers. Over 700 pavers have been ordered to memorialize It is anticipated this project will be complete November 11, 2004. RAZIGLERGVCDEPTRPT\ I004.doc In August 2004 the City Council approved the conceptual design for a Japanese Garden at the Temecula Duck Pond. The project is currently under construction and staff anticipates completion of the project in November 2004. On October 28, 2003, the City of Temecula was awarded the library grant application in the amount of$8,500,000. Public Works has begun the pre -qualification process for construction bidders and a pre -bid meeting was held on October 14, 2004 with 11 contractors present. Currently the architect is preparing responses to the Office of Library Construction's comments. The Erie Stanley Gardner exhibit at the Temecula Valley History Museum has completed the plan check process. This project recreates Erie Stanley Gardner's office in his Temecula residence known as Rancho Del Pisano. The exhibit area will also include other Erie Stanley Gardner artifacts and memorabilia. Staff anticipates this project will go out to bid in November 2004. The Development Services Division continues to participate in the development review for projects within the City including Wolf Creek, Roripaugh, Villages of Old Town and Harveston, as well as overseeing the development of parks and recreation facilities, and the contract for refuse and recycling, cable television services and assessment administration. The Maintenance Division continues to oversee the maintenance of all City parks and facilities, and assist in all aspects of Citywide special events. The Recreation Division currently is preparing for the annual Halloween festivities, the Holiday Parade, Holiday Lights and Festive Sights, the Tree Lighting Ceremony, Winter Wonderland and more. R:\ZIGLERG\XDEPTRPT1I 004. doe REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 12, 2004 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:40 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, and Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS Naggar, Stone, Washington, and Comerchero ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Roberts Also present were Assistant Executive Director O'Grady, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 28, 2004. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Washington and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Stone who was absent. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No comment. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. RWnutes.rda\101204 ADJOURNMENT At 7:40 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 26, 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] RAMinutes. RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT ITEM 14 APPROV CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/Cit4irector oun5iI FROM: Debbie Ubnoske of Planning DATE: October 26, 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: Don Hazen, Principal 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 finalreport.doc 1 BACKGROUND: On September 14, 2004, the City Council considered the above -referenced appeal and voted unanimously to continue the item to the October 12th meeting, pending adjacent property owner and applicant agreement on a condition of approval to resolve the view impacts of the proposed development. The City Council formed a subcommittee comprised of Mayor Naggar and Councilmember Washington to help coordinate the resolution of this issue. On October 121h, the City Council voted to continue the item to the October 26th meeting, in order to allow sufficient time for the Council subcommittee to complete its work and have the City Attorney draft a condition of approval for City Council review. The City Council subcommittee met with the neighbors and applicant on two occasions and the issue appears to have been resolved. ANALYSIS: Six out of the seven adjacent residents have agreed to a condition that will involve back -filling their sloped rear yards, construction of a combination stucco/wrought-iron wall at the rear property line, and payment of $1,500 to each property owner as mitigation for miscellaneous impacts such as removal of existing landscaping, irrigation, new fences, etc. The seventh property owners are out of town, but a friend of theirs has kept them informed of the process and they appear to be in support of the plan as well. With the added condition of approval #98, the roles and responsibility of the applicant and property owners have been stipulated. The final landscape plan will also be modified to accommodate a 2:1 sloped, 20-foot wide landscape planter along the easterly property line. The Director of Planning will oversee the successful completion of each task specified in the conditions of approval. Failure on the part of the adjacent property owners to comply with the conditions as stipulated, will result in reverting to the original condition of approval, which required a maximum six-foot high block wall along the east property line. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Resolution No. 04-_ Exhibit A — Conditions of Approval (Conditional Use Permit) Exhibit B — Conditions of Approval (Development Plan) 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-024 (Conditional Use Permit) 3. PC Resolution No. 2004-025 (Development Plan) RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC finalreport.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04 RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC finalreport.doc 3 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. PA03-0027, 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 14, 2004, and October 26, 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 October 26, 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 Pt2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.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 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 (VL) 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. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC 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 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. 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, and upholds the 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 subject to the attached conditions (Exhibit A and Exhibit B). 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 261h day of October, 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 26h day of October, 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 Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC 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.: 955-050-017 Approval Date: October 26, 2004 Expiration Date: October 26, 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. 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 tatter 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 by the 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 P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal CUP Reso.doc 6 EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Council Reso to Deny Appeal & Approve PA.DOC EXHIBIT B CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA03-0027 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.: 955-050-017 Approval Date: October 26, 2004 Expiration Date: October 26, 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. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc 4 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 SaintsWinal 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 and the slope comments from the City's Consulting Landscape Architect. 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 SaintsWinal 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 property. 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 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 P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal 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 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. 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\Final 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 may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix III -A) 46. 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 off - site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsWinal 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 24 1-4.1) 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 Latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc 10 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) 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 additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) RAC U P12003%03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.doc I 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 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. Prior to the first building permit or installation of additional street lighting, the developer shall 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.doe 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 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 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, 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 Christ of latter Day SaintsTinal 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 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 98. Applicant shall improve the east side of the Site as follows: a. A 2:1 slope shall be constructed in the 20 foot wide buffer zone on the eastside of the Site as designated on the Site Plan with the crest of the slope on the property line. The slope on the Applicant's property shall be landscaped with trees pursuant to a landscaping plan approved by the Planning Director. The slope shall be supported by fill to be placed on the Residential Properties adjoining the eastern boundary of the Site by a contractor made available to the owners of the Residential Properties by Applicant (under separate contract between such contractor and the owners of the Residential Properties) as described below, and the new fill shall be graded by such contractor to join the existing level portions of the yards of the Residential Properties. The Applicant shall make available to the Residential Properties the excess dirt from the Site for the fill and grading of the Residential Properties required by this Condition. Due to varying elevations of the existing level portions of the yards of the Residential Properties, there will be some slope from the top of the new slope to the existing level portions of the yards. For the purposes of this Condition, the "Residential Properties" shall be defined as the seven residential properties adjoining the eastern boundary of the Site and consist of Riverside County Assessor Parcel Nos.: 955-091-002; 955-091-003; 955-091-004; 955-091-005; 955- 091-006; 955-091-007; and 955-091-008. b. The Applicant shall construct a six-foot high stucco wall along the eastern boundary of the Site at the top of the new slope. The wall shall be a combination of block wall and wrought iron fence and satisfactory to the owners of the Residential Properties and the Applicant. The contractor hired by the owners of the Residential Properties shall be responsible for installing the stucco on the residential property side of such wall. The owners of the Residential Properties shall be responsible for maintaining the wall on their side. The Applicant, all of the owners of the Residential Properties, and the Planning Director shall approve the plan for the wall, which approvals shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event of disagreement, the decision of the Planning Director shall be final and binding. C. The "v-ditch" running along the western property lines of the Residential Properties shall be replaced by an appropriate drainage system designed by the off -Site engineer and approved by the Director of Public Works. The owners of the Residential Properties shall maintain the new drainage system and the Applicant shall have no responsibility to maintain it. d. The Applicant shall engineer and construct the slope on the 20 foot wide buffer zone on the site at its sole cost and expense. The Applicant shall pay for the engineering and construction of the fill and grading on the Residential Properties, including demolition of landscaping, fences and irrigation on the Residential Properties as necessary for the work, and pay for the engineering and construction of the new RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 14 drainage system to replace the "v-ditch" on the Residential Properties. The Applicant shall have no responsibility or liability for actual engineering or construction work on the Residential Properties. e. The owners of the Residential Properties shall retain the same engineer and construction company as retained by the Applicant to perform the engineering and grading work on the Residential Properties consistent with the terms of this Condition. The engineering firm and the construction firm shall enter into separate agreements with the owners of the Residential Properties. The Applicant shall not be a party to the engineering and construction agreements for the work on the Residential Properties. This will ensure appropriate coordination of the work to be performed adjoining the boundary of the Site and the Residential Properties. f. The proposed cost of the engineering and the bid cost of the construction work to be performed on the Residential Properties shall be deposited by the Applicant into an escrow account. The payments to the engineering and construction firms performing the work on the Residential Properties shall be paid from this escrow account. The Director of Finance shall approve the escrow holder and the escrow procedures. g. The Applicant shall also deposit into the escrow account, the sum of $1,500 for each of the Residential Properties. This amount shall be a credit for the owners of the Residential Properties to use for demolition and/or relocation of existing improvements to accommodate backfill operations, and installation/modification of landscaping, irrigation, or fencing upon completion of backfill. h. Work on the 20 foot wide buffer slope on the site and work on the Residential Properties as required by this Condition shall proceed in accordance with the following schedule: i. October 27, 2004. All of the Owners of the Residential Properties shall formally approve this Condition of Approval on a form approved by the Planning Director on or before this date. ii. Within twenty (20) days of written notice from Applicant to the owners of the Residential Properties and the Planning Director that Applicant has retained an engineer for the improvements on the Site, all of the Owners of the Residential Properties shall execute a formal written agreement with the engineer who will engineer the work required on the Residential Properties by this Condition, which agreement shall provide reasonable and customary provisions for the work to be performed. A copy of the signed agreement shall be delivered to the Planning Director to verify that this task has been successfully completed as of the date of the notice described above. iii. Within twenty (20) days of written notice from Applicant to the owners of the Residential Properties and the Planning Directorthat Applicant has retained a contractor to construct the improvements on the Site, all of the Owners of the Residential Properties shall execute a formal written agreement with the contractor who will construct the work required on the Residential Properties by this Condition, which agreement shall provide reasonable and customary provisions for the work to be performed. A copy of the signed agreement shall be delivered to the Planning Director to verify that this task has been successfully completed prior to the close of business on the 30th day. iv. Within thirty (30) days following the Planning Director's verification that the task ii above has been successfully completed, Applicant, all of the Owners RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of latter Day SaintsWioal DP Reso.doc 15 of the Residential Properties, and the Planning Director shall approve the plans for the combination block/wrought iron wall on the top of the slope adjoining the Residential Properties, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event of any disagreement, the decision of the Planning Director shall be final and binding. Not less than twenty-one calendar days prior to the commencement of work on the 20 foot buffer slope on the Site, Applicant or its contractor shall give written notice of commencement of the work by mail to each of the owners of the Residential Properties. Thereafter, Applicant or its contractor shall use reasonable efforts to keep the owners of the Residential Properties apprised of the progress of the work. If at points h. i, ii, iii, and iv, of the time schedule described in subsection h, the event has not occurred as required by the Condition, the Applicant may elect to be relieved of the obligations concerning the slope and the grading of the yards of the Residential Properties described in this Condition on ten (10) day's prior written notice to the Planning Director. Upon such date, the Applicant shall then only be obligated to landscape a 20 foot wide buffer area on the eastern boundary of the Site adjacent to the Residential Properties and construct a varied six-foot to eight -foot high block wall as shown on the site plan approved by the Planning Commission on May 19, 2004. k. Additionally, if litigation is filed challenging the City's approval of the Project or challenging the validity of the City's environmental approvals under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") the Applicant may elect to be relieved of the obligations concerning the slope and the grading of the yards of the Residential Properties described in this Condition on ten (10) days prior written notice to the Planning Director. Upon such election, Applicant shall then only be obligated to landscape a 20 foot wide buffer area on the eastern boundaryof the Site adjacent to the Residential Properties and construct a varied six-foot to eight -foot high block wall as shown on the site plan approved by the Planning Commission on May 19, 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 Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc 16 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-024 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC finalreport.doc 4 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 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 ratter Day Saints\Pinal 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 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. RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal CUP Reso.doc 2 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19th day of May 2004. John lehesio, Chairperson ATTEST: Deb ie U noske, Secretary [SE -AL] 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: NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso Telesio Chiniaeff None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal CUP Reso.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-025 DEVELOPMENT PLAN RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\CC finalreport.doc 5 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 1 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 17.05.01 OF 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 VeryLow 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 PU003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints\Pinal DP Reso.doc WK 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 bT Cit of TeIrnecula Planning Commission this 19n' day of May 2004. John 11plesio, 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: NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson,Olhasso Telesio Chiniaeff None None ccoo Del5bie Ubnoske, Secretary RAC U P\2003\03-0027 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsTinal DP Reso.dce 2 ITEM 15 Revised Resolution Item No. 15 User Fees Revisions RESOLUTION NO. 04=_�1Q�� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF CITYWIDE FEES WHEREAS, The City Council approved a contract with the Maximus, Inc. in August 2002 to conduct a detailed cost of services study of user fee activity throughout the city. The Maximus study determines the full cost of providing services and provides the City with a true representation of what it costs to provide services to the public and create a fair and equitable basis to determine the rate of recovery/subsidy. WHEREAS, On May 25, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-56 adopting the Schedule of Citywide Fees. WHEREAS, the City now desires to amend the Resolution by adding fees previously omitted from the Nexus Study, reduce fees being collected at a rate higher than a reasonable cost for providing the services, as well as eliminate fees not consistent with the results of the Nexus Fee Schedule. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council hereby approves the Revised Nexus Fee Items as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated in full. The fees shall be effective as of October 27, 2004, except the Major and Minor Temporary Use Permits for non profit organizations which shall be effective as of July 1, 2004. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26"' day of October 2004. Michael S. Nagger, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 04-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2e day of October, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVAL )�,r CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Anthony J. Elmo, Director of Building and Safety DATE: October 14, 2004 SUBJECT: User Fees Revisions PREPARED BY: Mark Harold, Deputy Building Official RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF CITYWIDE FEES BACKGROUND: On May 25, 2004, the City Council approved Resolution No. 04-56 adopting user fees utilizing a nexus methodology prepared by Maximus, Inc. Upon implementation of the new Users Fees on July 1, 2004, it was discovered by departments within Community Development that certain fees were being collected at a rate higher than a reasonable cost for providing the services. Additionally, certain categories for fees in the City of Temecula's previously adopted fee structure were erroneously omitted from the Nexus study; therefore, not adopted by Resolution No. 04-56. These fees were previously collected by ordinance, and are not new fees, but additions to the recently adopted Nexus Fee Schedule. The exhibit will demonstrate that in most circumstances these fees are being reduced or eliminated based on a reasonable cost for providing the service that is consistent with the Nexus methodology. FISCAL IMPACT: The actual costs of providing these services are fully recovered at these revised rates. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 04- Revised Nexus Fee Items RRiaro1MStaR Reports\SWH Report - User Fees, October 26, 2004.doc RESOLUTION NO.04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF CITYWIDE FEES Whereas, The City Council approved a contract with Maximus, Inc. in August 2002 to conduct a detailed cost of services study of user fee activity throughout the City. The Maximus study determines the full cost of providing services and provides the City with a true representation of what it costs to provide services to the public and create a fair and equitable basis to determine the rate of recovery/subsidy. Whereas, on May 25, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-56 adopting the Schedule of Citywide Fees. Whereas, The City now desires to amend the Ordinance by adding fees previously omitted from the Nexus Study, reduce fees being collected at a rate higher than a reasonable cost for providing the services, as well as eliminate fees not consistent with the results of the Nexus Fee Schedule. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of October, 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, California, 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 thereof held on the 26t" day of October, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2004/Resos 04- Revised Nexus Fee Items Work Item Description of Revision Unit Nexus Fees Fee as Revised ADDS Gas Piping Fixtures Existing fee omitted from study < 5 $0.00 $16.25_ Each Additional Fixture Existing fee omitted from study > 5 each $0.00 $3.00 Electrical Fixtures Existing fee omitted from study $.035 s.f. residential only $0.00 Based on Calculation Mobile Homes 1 Existing fee omitted from study each $0.00 Fees Per State Title 25 Signs Monument Add Item each $0.00 $142.00 each additional each $0.00 $19.08 Pole Add Item each $0.00 $107.00 each additional each $0.00 $20.00 Wall Add Item each $0.00 $120.15 each additional Add Item each $0.00 $39.02 Massage Establishment Permit - Renewal Existing fee omitted from study each $0.00 $200.00 Massage Practitioners License Existing fee omitted from study each $0.00 $50.00 Home Occupation Permit Existing fee omitted from study each $0.00 $20.00 Planned Development Overlay 2 PW omitted from study each $1,086.00 $1,137.00 Home/Small Family Child Care 3 In Home was omitted from study each $0.00 $71.00 DELETES 6R4&2tieas N/A $44-W $7g459 Demolition Fup4e-3990-s€y Drop up to 3000 sf each $166.00 N/A anal 2000 sf $466-.W N/A 4-2-Bataetef45 42 deE $495-00 east $69.09 These Categories are in the Occupancy Table earl $449-00 earl} $546-00 Rils4 euadatiGR N/A Cast in PkanA cAngrete44st—� e-40 $245-00 Rash 40 $;3-00 Additional Piles(inGFements of 10)$2400 east 48 $72.00 $444.00 CADocuments and Settings\Michaela.Ballreich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2FA\REVISED USER FEES 10-26-04 Page 1 of 3 Revised Nexus Fee Items Work Item Description of Revision These categories are in the Occupancy Table Unit Nexus Fees Fee as Revised each 390 sf $263-W $527-09 sash 300 sf $341-09 Signs MlIhn2rd N/A each $224.09 N/A sash $166 each $432-W VVa4 A Acoustical Review $98.00 Single Family HameADup4*-New, Acoustical Review will$98-W be charged hourly$4Q-W iW-7-00 $98-99 Multi FamilyiGemmamial Geologic Review $98.00 Geologic Review will be charged hourly $99-W $98 00 Al -� $9 $99-W $9>i 00 $98-09 RredystR6View N/A P8F h961F $99-W CHANGES Partition - Commercial, Interior (up to 30 I.f. 0 I.f. Reach $132.00 Additional Partition Modification of fee 0 I.f. $59.00 $16.25Patio Cover Wood / Metal / Other Frame 00 sf $117.00 Additional Patio Modification of fee each 100 sf $83.00 $12.16 Enclosed, Wood / Metal /Other Frame up to 300 sf $141.00 Additional Enclosed Patio Modification of fee each 100 sf $83.00 $27.67 Retaining Wall Concrete or Mason Standard (up to 50 I Modification of fee u to 50 If $205.00 $142.25 Additional Retaining Wall Modification of fee each 50 If $93.00 $19.04 Reroof u to 5000 s Changed from Roof Structure Replacement and corrected s.f. u to 5000 sf each 1000 sf $146.00 $34.00 $145.18 $3.13 Each Additional 1000 sf Storage Racks < 8' -up to 100 I.f. up to 100 If $132.00 Each additional 100 I.f. Modification of fee each 100 If $83.00 $27.89 >8' - up to 100 I.f. Modification of fee up to 100 If $215.00 $195.85 Each additional 100 I.f. Modification of fee each 100 If $117.00 $48.47 Temporary Use Permit - Minor Modification of fees each $598.00 $150.00 Temporary Use Permit - Major each $1,628.00 $300.00 Temporary Use Permit - Major - Non Profit each $444.00 $100.00 Temporary Use Permit - Minor - Non Profit each $172.00 $75.00 C:\Documents and Settings\Michaela.Ballreich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2FA\REVISED USER FEES 10-26-04 Page 2 of 3 Revised Nexus Fee Items Work Item Description of Revision Unit Nexus Fees Fee as Revised Subdivision Precise Grading Base Fee 4 Modification of fees each $202.00 $101.00 €encesF Freestanding Wall (masonry) Modify Description Only Up to 6' in height up to 100 I.f. $146.00 Each Additional 100 If each 100 I.f. $20.00 Special Design up to 100 I.f. $215.00 Each Additional 100 If each 100 I.f. $20.00 Inert Gas Extinguishing Systems Plan Check (3) Modify Description Only each $431.00 Inert Gas Extinguishing Systems Plan Insp (3) Modify Description Only each $453.00 Minor High Rise Annual Insp (3) Modify Description and Change Fee Recovery to 0% each $800.00 $0.00 Residential Sprinkler Plan Check 3 Change Fee Recovery to 50% each $697.00 $348.50 Residential Sprinkler Ins 3 each $310.00 $155.00 K-12 Public School Ins 3 Change Fee Recovery to 0% each $376.00 $0.00 K-12 Private School Ins 3 each $524.00 $0.00 Tem. One/POP Ins 3 each $397.00 $0.00 Major High Rise Annual Ins 3 each $1,561.00 $0.00 Fence or Freestanding Wall non -mason 3 Modify inspection time 6 - 10 feet in height, Each additional 100 If each 100 I.f. $71.00 $10.00 Over 10 feet in height, Each additional 100 If each 100 I.f. $71.00 $10.00 Fence or FreestandingWall mason 3 Std 6-8 ft high), Each additional 100 If each 100 I.f. $71.00 $10.00 Special Design 6-10' hi h , Each add'] 100 If each 100 I.f. $71.00 $10.00 Special Design over 10' high), Each add'1 100 If each 100 I.f. $71.00 $10.00 Partition - Commercial, Interior (up to 30 I.f. 3 Additional partition each 30 I.f. $202.00 $10.00 Items to be removed from the Fee Schedule are in RED, items to be changed are in GREEN, and adds are in BLUE. (1) Fee Item relates to Building and Fire Department 2 Fee Item relates to Public Works Department. (3 Fee Item relates to Fire Department (4) Fee Item relates to PlanningDe artment C:\Documents and Settings\Michaela.Ballreich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2FA\REVISED USER FEES 10-26-04 Page 3 of 3 ITEM 16 �6 CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FI CITY MANAGER_ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/CitylCoynciI FROM: Debbie Ubnoskee,, (D/iirrector of Planning DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Zone Change from L-1 to L-2 (PA02-0372), and Tentative Tract Map to create seven residential lots ranging from .5 to .82 acres in lot area (PA02-0371). PREPARED BY: Matt Peters, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA02- 0372, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 04_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING 4.57 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 1 BACKGROUND: This is an application to change the zoning designation of a 4.57-acre site from L-1 (Low Density Residential; one acre minimum lot size) to L-2 (Low Density Residential; one-half acre minimum lot size), and a tentative tract map to subdivide the site into seven (7) residential lots (.5 acres to .82 acres in area). The Planning Commission initially denied this application May 7, 2003 based on concerns that the zone change would result in a higher density and lot pattern that is incompatible with the larger lots in the general vicinity. On August 12, 2003, the City Council decided to continue the application and refer the matter to the General Plan Community Advisory Committee (CAC) for policy input prior to taking formal action. Based on input from the CAC, an Interim Chaparral Policy was developed. One of the four policy statements that was developed directly addresses this application as follows: The gross density in the Chaparral Area shall be one dwelling unit per acre, except for the tier of lots adjacent to and approximately 700 feet east of Ynez Road, where two dwelling units per acre may be allowed. On April 21, 2004 the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the Interim Chaparral Policies. On June 22, 2004 the City Council approved the Interim Chaparral Policies. On August 18, 2004 this application was reconsidered by the Planning Commission. Staff noted for the Commission that the project is consistent with the Chaparral Policies. The applicant and one individual spoke in favor of the project. However, the applicant requested a modification to Condition of Approval No. 10b ii, that three (3) rail equestrian fencing be added as a fencing option, and also requested deleting Condition of Approval No. 10b iii, regarding wood fencing. Three individuals spoke in opposition to the proposal, and another opposition letter was read. Their concerns dealt primarily with density and land use compatability. The Planning Commission voted 3-2 to approve the project. Commissioner Guerriero and Chairman Telesio spoke in opposition to the zone change because of the density that would be created. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An initial study has been prepared and indicates that the project will not have any potentially significant environmental impacts. Staff has circulated its environmental findings in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and no public or agency comments were received. Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration, approve the zone change, and approve tentative tract map with a modification to Condition of Approval No. 10b ii, that three (3) rail equestrian fencing be added as a fencing option, and delete Condition of Approval No. 10b iii, regarding wood fencing. FISCAL IMPACT: None RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 2 ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Resolution (Negative Declaration) — Blue Page 4 Exhibit A — Initial Study 2. City Council Ordinance — Blue Page 5 Exhibit A — Map of Proposed Zoning 3. City Council Resolution (Tentative Tract Map) — Blue Page 6 Exhibit A — Final Conditions of Approval 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-046 (Zone Change) — Blue Page 7 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-047 (Tentative Tract Map) — Blue Page 8 6. Minutes for Planning Commission Hearing of August 18, 2004 — Blue Page 9 7. Agenda Packet for the August 18, 2004 Planning Commission Hearing — Blue Page 10 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION (NEGATIVE DECLARATION) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 4 RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING 4.57 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006. 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. Marchand -Way Development Inc. filed Planning Application Nos. PA02-0372, Zone Change, and PA02-0371, Tentative Tract Map, for the property generally located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadows Road, approximately 473 linear feet north of the center line of Santiago Road, a 4.57 acre parcel known as Assessor Parcel No. 945-060- 006, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code and an initial study was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines; and, B. The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act; and, C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2004 to consider the application of the Project and environmental review, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; and, D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-047, recommending the City Council approve a Negative Declaration for the Project. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an initial study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial Study, and Negative Declaration are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Planning Department, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92589. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso Nag Dec.doc 1 C. The City Council reviewed the Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration. The Project and the Negative Declaration were discussed at a public hearing of the City Council held on 2004. D. The Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA. E. There is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment. F. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Negative Declaration for the Project as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this _, day of , 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk SEAL] RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso Neg Dec.doc 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 2004 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso Neg Dec.doc 3 EXHIBIT A INITIAL STUDY RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso Neg Dec.doc 4 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Marchand Way Development Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner 909 694-6400 Project Location East side of Ynez Road, between Pauba Road and Santiago Road Project Sponsor's Name and Marchand -Way Development Address 31530 Railroad Canyon Road Ste. 9 Canyon Lake, CA 92587 General Plan Designation Low density residential L Zoning Low density residential L-1 Description of Project PA02-0371: A Tentative Tract Map application to subdivide 4.57 gross acres into 7 single-family residential lots averaging 0.5 net acres; and PA02-0372: A Change of Zone application to change the zoning designation and map from L-1 to L-2. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Ynez Road serves as the west boundary of the project site, with single-family residential uses located to the north, south and east. An area to the south of the subject property consists of a culdezac, with full street improvements, approved by the City for single-family residential uses. Low -density single-family residential homes and vacant residential lots will be served by existing infrastructure. Other public agencies whose Eastern Municipal Water District for sewer service. approval is required Rancho California Water District for water service R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.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 Agriculture Resources Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geology and Soils Transportation/Traffic Hazards and Hazardous Materials I Utilities and Service Systems Hydrology and Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance Land Use and Planning None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X t ind=tbatthexp�oposed pofecttCdlJ4a1�1OT ha+re a-slgriificanteffectoriihe envrr"'onment `anb a NEGATIVE DECW ARATIONzw(lhbe ' [e aced_ 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. 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. Signatur Rolfe Preisendanz Printed name l'r O% 2Uv? bat e -�--l— Assistant Planner Title RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Ouiet Meadow Rd\CEOA INITIAL S, JDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 2 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 1.a. The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The project site is vacant and is surrounded by SP-2 (Rancho Highlands Specific Plan) zoned properties to the north that include single family residential housing, Low Density Residential (L-1 and L-2) zoned property to the east, north, and south. The development of this site will be consistent with the surrounding properties. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1.b. The project will not conflict with applicable General Plan designations and environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (L). The approval of a change of zone from L-1 to L-2 would increase the desired target dwelling units per acre from 1.3 to 1.5, but stay within the low -density residential range of 0.5 to 2 dwelling units per acre as established by the General Plan Land Use Element. Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project where necessary. 1.c. The proposed project will have a less than significant impact with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The site is located within the County of Riverside Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, which will require site disturbance mitigation fees to be paid prior to grading activity. The site has been continuously grubbed for weed abatement and fire protection. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 3 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either 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 construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: 2.a. The proposed tentative tract map is for seven (7) total single-family residential lots and is within the allowed General Plan Land Use Element density range of 0.5 to 2 dwelling units per acre. Even with the approval of a zone change from L-1 to L-2 the property would still be within the allowed density range for low density residential land uses and therefore would have no impact on the surrounding area. 2. b. The proposed project involving a single-family residential subdivision would have no impact on the displacement of existing housing. 2.c. The proposed project involving a single-family residential subdivision will have no impact on displacing any residents within the surrounding area. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitgalion Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially X to an existing or projected air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any X criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X of people? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 4 Comments: 3.a-c. The project will not conflict with applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The project proposes to subdivide for residential lots a 4.5-acre vacant site, zoned for low -density residential development. The proposed tentative map and zone change is anticipated to be within the threshold for potentially significant air quality impact 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. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.d. There are no known sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, no impacts to sensitive receptors will occur as a result of this project. 3.e. The proposed tentative map and zone change approvals will not create any significantly objectionable odors and will not create an impact to the surrounding community. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 5 Comments: 4.a-d. The project site for the proposed tentative map and zone change applications is not located within an environmentally sensitive habitat or wetlands area as indicated on the City of Temecula General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element Figure 5-3 and the Potentially Sensitive Environmental Habitat Areas map. 4.e-f. 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 prior to the issuance of a grading permit. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorponated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 5.a, b The project site is not located in an area of sensitivity for archaeological resources pursuant to the General Plan (Source 1, Figure, 5-6). The Eastern Information Center of the University of California at Riverside (UCR) recommended in its response dated July 22, 2002, that a Phase Cultural Resource Management Report be prepared to identify the potential for historical, or cultural resources at the project site. The applicant submitted a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by a Cultural Resources Consultant in October 2002. The results of this assessment determined that no archaeological sites of either prehistoric or historical origin had been recorded within the property boundaries. A field survey conducted by the consultant on October 1, 2002 confirmed that no significant prehistoric or historical cultural resources were observed within the property boundaries. 5.c., d. The project site is located in an area that has high paleontological sensitivity pursuant to the General Plan (Source 1, Figure, 5-7). Therefore, at least one Paleontological Monitor will be present on the site at the commencement of and during all grading operations as a condition of approval to evaluate any significant cultural or historical resources encountered. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 6 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on X the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv. Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: 6.a. (i-ii) The City of Temecula General Plan Fault Hazard Zone map Figure 7-1 and Environmental Hazards map show that there is an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone through the eastern section of the project site; therefore, ground shaking impacts are possible as a result of this project. The Fault Hazard Investigation prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc. reported that no evidence of faulting was identified within the exploratory Fault Trench-1 (FT-1), which was excavated across the existing State of California Fault -Rupture Hazard Zone. Additionally, based on the findings of the Fault Trench-2 (FT-2), no restricted use zones for habitable structures are considered necessary for the northeast corner of the subject property. 6.a. (iii-iv) The project site is not located within an area delineated as a liquefaction hazard zone and is not within an area of potential subsidence as indicated on the General Plan Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards map Figure 7-2. 6.b. The minimal amount of grading required for the proposed seven lot residential tentative tract map will be surficially and grossly stable if constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and will therefore not result in any significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil, and therefore will not have a significant impact. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 7 6.c. The project site is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. 6d. An expansion index test was performed on representative on -site soil samples collected for the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. The results of that test indicated that the expansion index for on -site soils were equivalent to a very low expansion potential and would therefore have no impact on creating substantial risks to life or property. 6.e. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be served with connection to the existing Eastern Municipal Water District public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 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 or loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 8 Comments: 7.a. The proposed project will have no impact in creating a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 7.b, c. The proposed project will have no impact involving the release of hazardous materials, substances, or emissions within the environment or one -quarter mile from an existing or proposed school site. 7.d. This project site is not nor is it located near a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7.e, f. 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 proposal. 7.g. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Th. This project site is not adjacent to wild lands and therefore would be susceptible to high fire danger. However, during development review the proposed project will be required to comply with Fire and Building Codes to assure that all development is safe from fire danger. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 9 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 Ei.g. ma ? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures X which would impede or redirect flood flows? 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. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The subdivision, and subsequent development, will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Regional Water Quality 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 less than significant. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b.,f. 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. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c, d. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on -site 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 hard scape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff, which is created. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.e. Due to the small scale of the proposed residential subdivision, the project will not 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 will be conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the subject site. In addition, the project will be conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.g-i. 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 and the dam inundation area as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.j. The project site will not be 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. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 10 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 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 useplan? Comments: 10.a. There are neither mineral resource designations nor any known mineral resources on this project site. 10.b. Development of the site has no potential to lose access to known and available mineral resources since none occur on the project site, nor is access required across the site to such resources. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incor omted Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X 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: 11.a. This project site is designated for the development of single-family residential housing units. The site is currently vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run. However, the proposal to divide the land will not create noise. No impacts will result from this project. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 11 11.b. This project site is designated for the development of single-family residential housing units. There will be no activities related to this subdividing of the property that would lead to exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Future residents of the homes will not be exposed to high levels of noise according to the noise contours shown in the General Plan. No impacts are anticipated. 11.c. Since the project site is designated for low -density residential development per the City's General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps, the proposed residential tract map is consistent with this land use designation. No unanticipated noise impacts will result from this project. 11.d. The future grading and home construction activity 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 very 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 in residential areas. No significant noise impacts are anticipated. 11.e, f. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public or private use airport, therefore, people working in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supportinn Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: 13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in an area where there is a scenic vista. The City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.b. No scenic resources will be damaged or altered as a result of this project. 13.c. The City's residential performance standards and General Plan Community Design Element and Subdivision Ordinance will ensure that the proposed land division residential properties is consistent with the goals and policies established by these documents. 13.d. The proposed project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare to adversely affect the day or nighttime views within the project area. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 12 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associated 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 - f. The proposed residential tract map will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The later development of the parcels created by this project will incrementally increase the need for these services. However, those projects will contribute their fair share through the City's Development Impact Fees, park and recreation fees, and school district fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated from the proposed division of land. 14. RECREATION. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing 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. The project will have a less than significant impact on the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. The proposed residential tract map would eventually add a small number of single-family homes to the vacant property, which would likely increase the use of existing local parks and recreational facilities, but not to a significant level. The proposed subdivision will have a less than significant impact. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 13 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in X relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: 15.a-b. The proposed residential tract map with up to seven (7) single-family homes and slightly higher residential density above the target density will have no impact on increased vehicle traffic and levels of service on the local street system. 15.c. The proposed project will have no impact on a change in air traffic patterns to pose any risk to the public. 15.d. The proposed project will have no impact to substantially increase traffic hazards or risk to the public due to a design feature or incompatible uses. 15.d. The proposed project will have no impact on emergency vehicle access. The project will be reviewed and conditioned by City staff to provide proper emergency vehicle.access. 15.e. The proposed project will have no impact on parking capacity. The project will be reviewed and conditioned by City staff to provide adequate parking capacity. 15.f. The proposed project will not conflict with nor impact adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation plans or programs. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 14 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Infonnation Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate theproject's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 16.a., b. and e. The development of the property 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, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Moreover, the project will be conditioned to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards that will be monitored by the Department of Public Works. No significant impacts are anticipated. 16.c. The proposed residential tract map would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. No impact to existing water facilities is expected. 16.d. The proposed residential tract map and single-family homes will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. No impact to existing water supplies is expected. 16.f,g. The proposed residential tract map and single-family homes will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs and will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 15 17. AGRICULTURE 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: 17a,c. The project site is not currently in agricultural production. In addition, this property is not considered prime or unique of Farmland of statewide importance pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue. 17b. The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. As a consequence, there are no impacts related to this issue. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? R:\T M\2002NO2-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 16 C. Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: 17.a. This site is surrounded by low -density residential development and does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is a residential land division project and change of zone application and it does not have the potential to: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore the proposed project would not have an impact on fish and wildlife species. 17.b. The cumulative effects from the project are not considered significant because the subject site is being subdivided in conformance with the City of Temecula's General Plan, Development Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. 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. Given the project's consistency with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impact related to the development of a seven (7) lot subdivision and a minor density increase with approval of a zone change from L-1 to L-2 will not have a significant impact. 17.c. The proposed residential tract map and zone change entitlements would not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The project is designed and will be developed consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. 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. a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. C. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 18.a. Earlier analyses specifically related to this project site were not used because they were outdated. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study 18.b. All impacts related to this proposed project were adequately addressed and analyzed within this environmental initial study document. 18.c. No mitigation measures were required with this proposed project since there are no issues identified in the checklist that would be considered potentially significant unless mitigation was incorporated. R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 17 SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan, dated November 9, 1993. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, dated July 2, 1993. 3. City of Temecula Development Code. 4. City of Temecula Subdivision Ordinance adopted August 24, 1999. 5. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 6. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Jean Keller, Ph.D, October, 2002. 7. Fault Hazard Investigation, prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc., January 29, 2003. 8. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc., February 10, 2003 R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 18 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 5 ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA02- 00372, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. Marchand -Way Development Inc. filed Planning Application Nos. PA02-0372, Zone Change, and PA02-0371, Tentative Tract Map, for the property generally located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadows Road, approximately 473 linear feet north of the center line of Santiago Road, a 4.57 acre parcel known as Assessor Parcel No. 945-060-006 ('Project). B. The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2004 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-047 recommending approval of a Negative Declaration for the Project and approval of the tentative tract map, and Resolution 2004-046 for the Zone Change. E. On October 26, 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. F. On October 26, 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Negative Declaration for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 04-. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following findings: A. The Project, including the zone change and tentative tract map, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project, including the zone change and tentative tract map, has been reviewed and determined to be in RAT Mt2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow RdtCC Ord Zone Change. DOC conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. B. The Project, including the zone change and tentative tract map, is compatible with surrounding land uses. C. The Project, including the zone change and tentative tract map, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. Section 3. The City Council hereby amends the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as follows: A. For the parcel identified as APN # 945-060-006, change the zoning designation from Low Density Residential (L-1) to Low Density Residential (L-2), as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of October, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Ord Zone Change.DOC STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-_ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of October, 2004, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of November, 2004 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Ord Zone Change.DOC EXHIBIT A MAP OF PROPOSED ZONING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Ord Zone Change.DOC City of Temecula Proposed Zoning V A N "IN \ \ PI / IT -, rZ \\ J It icey l �\ PI �I I r L-a C31 H; tt -SPB Dismep wum b/Ne C40ffenm�a GegraKc _= Infome6m System. lla map u debed hom base tlela April 16, 2003 andma�rwtwnaoo, em Mamgwnamo�gw.y N otgv ,Ja County 1 04YOTenealaaammesno 300 0 300 600 Feet warreny orlegal responsibliry Mlhe iMmfation oxitairietl c A A on Nis map. oats mk i�dmr . repressntetl m his map /Y■\ ® .\ are suhw to uptlakan ffii,,tics. The Geographic �� Infonnarim System and of moan should be queried kr Ne most wireMloonnoicn. This map is no for regint m resale. r! JaNai4�vnp�mMre rnsq rAaga 0l zey ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP) RAT Mt2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 6 RESOLUTION NO. 04_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS ON 4.57 GROSS ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006. 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. Marchand -Way Development Inc. filed Planning Application Nos. PA02-0372, Zone Change, and PA02-0371, Tentative Tract Map, for the property generally located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadow Road, approximately 473 linear feet north of the center line of Santiago Road, a 4.57 acre parcel know as Assessor Parcel No. 945-060-006 ("Project"). B. The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. C. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2004 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. D. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-047 recommending approval of a Negative Declaration for the Project and approval of the tentative tract map, and Resolution 2004-046 for the Zone Change. E. On October 26, 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. F. On October 26, 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Negative Declaration for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 04-_. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following findings: A. The tentative tract map, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The tentative tract map, has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso TPM.doc B. The tentative tract map, is compatible with surrounding land uses. C. The tentative tract map, will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find determine and declare that: A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative tract map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Based on the Initial Study, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. E. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. City staff have reviewed the latest title report and all required easements and dedications will be required as conditions of approval. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Section 4. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Tentative Tract Map No. 30169, Application No. PA02-0371, subdividing one single-family residential lot into seven single-family lots on 4.57 gross acres, generally located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadows Road, approximately 473 linear feet north of the center line of Santiago Road, known as Assessor Parcel No. 945-060-006, subject to the specific conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso TPM.doc PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of October, 2004. Michael S. Nagger, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CIVIC, 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 261" day of October, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso TPM.doo EXHIBIT A FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Ouiet Meadow Rd\CC Reso TPM.doc EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA02-0371 Project Description: A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 4.57 gross acres of land into seven single-family lots, located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadow Road and approximately 473 linear feet north of the centerline of Santiago Road. DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Residential Detached Residential Detached 945-060-006 August 18, 2004 August 18, 2007 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 Fourteen Dollars ($1,314.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements 2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. 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 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 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. 4. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasino plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 5. This project shall be contingent upon the approval of Planning Application PA02-0372 (Zone Change). 6. If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work shall be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. In addition, the developer will coordinate with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians to allow a representative of the Pechanga Band to monitor and participate in archaeological investigations if and when resources are encountered, including participation in discussions regarding the disposition of cultural items and artifacts. This should be added as a note on the Grading Plans. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 7. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 8. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 9. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: i. This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. ii. This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone. iii. This project is within a Subsidence Zone. C. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow RMCC COAs.doc i. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. ii. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. iii. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 10. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: a. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: i. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). ii. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. iii. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). iv. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). V. The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. vi. Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc b) Private common areas prior to issuance of the first building permit. c) All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to private slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. vii. Hardscaping for the following: a) Pedestrian trails within private common areas b. Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: i. Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a public right- of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. ii. Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. iii. Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by i. and ii. above. C. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 11. Roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Director of Planning approval. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 12. If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 13. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 14. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 15. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. 16. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 4 17. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency shall complete all conditions. General Requirements 18. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 19. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained road right-of-way. 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, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 22. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho California Water District C. Eastern Municipal Water District d. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau e. Planning Department f. Department of Public Works g. Riverside County Health Department h. Cable TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doe 5 k. Southern California Edison Company I. Southern California Gas Company 23. The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Ynez Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 24. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. C. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. h. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. i. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground 25. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Minimum road widths of 32-ft. paved with 50-ft. right-of-ways or easements (shown on typical section). b. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards (200- ft. minimum). RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 6 C. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. d. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required (all centerline radii should be identified on the site plan). e. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn -around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. f. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). 26. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 27. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. 28. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 29. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 30. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: 31. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 32. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The City prior to commencement of the appraisal shall have approved the appraiser. 33. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 34. A 32-foot easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 35. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 36. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On -site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating, "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 37. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department C. Department of Public Works d. Community Services District 38. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. 39. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 40. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 41. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off -site or on -site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 42. 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 R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 8 project is shown to be exempt. The final NPDES requirement shall be address at the right-of-way prior to the water exiting into the street. 43. 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. 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 47. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 48. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutter's rights of access along Ynez Road as shown on the approved Tentative Map. 49. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. A registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation shall certify the building pad, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 50. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 51. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 52. 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 Certificates of Occupancy 53. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District C. Department of Public Works 54. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 55. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 56. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 57. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at the time of building, plan submittal. 58. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix III.A) 59. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix 111.6, Table A-III-13-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 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) 60. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be thirty-seven (37) feet for residential and forty-five (45) feet for commercial. (CFC 902.2.2.3, CFC 902.2.2.4) 61. 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) This will include all internal roads, connecting roads between phases, and construction gates. All required access must be in and available prior to and during ALL construction. 62. 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 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 10 roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 Ibs GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 63. 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 and Ord 99-14) 64. 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 and Ord 99-14) Roads on this map being less than 32' will require both sides to be painted Red, and marked "Fire Lane -No Parking CVC. 22500A". 65. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 66. 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 local water company signs the plans, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) 67. 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) 68. Firefighting personnel shall provide all manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access. (CFC 902.4) Special Conditions 69. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wild land -vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II -A) 70. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II -A) 71. Prior to recording a final map a binding agreement for the maintenance and repair of any and all existing underground Fire Department Water Systems, including all fire sprinkler supplies and all fire hydrants and supplies will be in place as a condition of this division to maintain available water in perpetuity. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 11 72. Prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 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. All perimeter parkways (including within the ROW along Ynez Road), the portion of Lot 1 on the north side of the private road, slopes, retaining walls, drainage facilities, street medians and residential street lighting on the private street shall be maintained by the established homeowners association. 75. Any damage done to existing Class II bike lanes along Ynez Road during construction shall be repaired to the satisfaction of Public Works. Prior to Final Map 76. TCSD shall review and approve the CC&R's. 77. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in -lieu fees equivalent to .10 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit 78. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. 79. If additional arterial street lighting is to be installed along Ynez Road then prior to the first building permit or installation of the street lighting, the developer shall 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. OTHER AGENCIES 80. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated October 21, 2002, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc 12 81. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated July 24, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 82. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated July 18, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 83. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in The Gas Company transmittal dated August 8, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 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 Planning Department approval. Applicant's Signature Applicant's Printed Name Date RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CC COAs.doc t3 DAVID P. ZAPPE o`w�prr rr0°e General Manager -Chief Engineer 6 OC,T RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention:kllf,yAwEL ML t`_oy Ladies and Gentlemen The District does not normally cities. The District also does n other flood hazard reports for s to items of speck interest to control and drainage facilities w and District Area Drainage Piai provided. 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 51180.1 Re: TA'0-2 — 031(,0372 ,0373 a 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 3d a logical componenf 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. 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/ a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership o suc act 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 f es will be required. This project is located within the limits of the District's Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adop e ; appp ica a ee sou a pa i y c hier's check or money order only to tFie Flood Control District prior to issuance o building or grading permits whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the 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 approvall 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 (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies calculations, plans and o er information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require thaj the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR) pnor to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR� prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impaced by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California 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 project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Qualityy Certification be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of tFre Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, ��"A � V" STUART E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer 1 c: Date: i.v - ZI - &0Z 3M 0 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • HEALTH oERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July 24, 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 ATTN: Michael McCoy: RE: TRACT MAP NO. 30169 (7 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tract Map 30169 and recommends: a A water system shall be installed in accordance with plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Environmental Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the County Surveyor's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 30169 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such "Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. A responsible official of the water company shall sign this certification. The plans 2. This Department has no written statement from Rancho California Municipal Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 4065 County Circle Drive • Riverside, CA 92503 • Phone (909) 358-5316 • FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 • Riverside, CA 92513-7600) m n Page Two Attn: Michael McCoy July 24, 2002 3. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed in accordance with plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor's Office and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be singed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 30169 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. 4. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. 5. It will be necessary for the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. f l J Sin rely, am�, upe� ronmental Health Specialist (909)955-8980 July 18, 2002 .%UL 2320 't ft Michael McCoy, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department Rsara er D�rertora 43200 Business Park Drive IJaa D. Herman President Post Office Box 9033 Jeffrey L. Mlnuer Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Sr. vice President Stephen J. a Ralph H. Daily Daily SUBJECT: WATERAVAILABILITY Ran R. Drake TRACT NO. 30169 John E Hoagland APN 945-060-006 Canha F. Ra PLANNING APPLICATIONS NO. PA02-0371, NO. PA02-0372, AND NO. PA02-0373 Officers; Jahn P. Heonigar Dear Mr. McCoy: Crowd Manager Phillip ecttor4ofBin � Please be advised that the above -referenced property is located within the 'i*�e boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, &PR°h'Leanona Director ofErigincervig therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements Rmneth C. Desly between RCWD and the property owner. DiteeWrof CPerations At Maintoosses Para R. Lunch If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees Controller and requirements. Linde M. F Wceo District Secretary/Administrative serereaMaaam Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an C. Michael Cow tt Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Bert Best a Mager LLP General Conned If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 4 <5 Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 02iSB:atl79T0l2-T6TCF Rancho California Water District 017 . Temeenla_ Cnlifnrniw esfige-ei The Gas Company - August 8, 2002 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Michael McCoy Santhem Caatmais Gss Company 1981 Lugwia Aa w Redlands CA 91374-9710 MailingAddma: B" 3003, SC8031 Re: Proposal to Subdivide 4.57 Acres Into 7 Residential Lots with 1 Open Space Lot — PA02- Redlands, CA 0371, 0372 and 0373, Quiet Meadows Tentative Tract Map Change of Zone and Variance 91373-0306 to Tract Map 30169 Dear Mr. McCoy: Southern California Gas Company owns and operates a gas pipeline beneath the portion of street that is proposed to be vacated. In accordance with Section No. 8330 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Gas f l Company hereby requests that an easement be reserved to ensure the continued operation of this pipeline. l / The Gas Company is requesting a copy of the recorded vacation document upon its completion. If you have any questions, please call Gertman Thomas at (909) 335-7733. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, L Steve Dunivin Technical Services Supervisor SDAjr ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-046 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 7 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-046 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION, PA02-0372, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. WHEREAS, Marchand -Way Development Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA02-0372 (Change of Zone), 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 August 18, 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 City Council approval of Planning Application PA02-0372 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 RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings, Zone Change. The Planning Commission, in recommending City Council approval of Planning Application No. PA02-0372, hereby finds that the amendment to the Official Zoning Map is consistent with the adopted General Plan goals for the City of Temecula, because the zone change from L-1 to L-2 is consistent with the City's General Plan land use policy for the Chaparral area because it "provides an opportunity to transition down from the larger lots found in the Los Ranchitos and Santiago Estates areas to the south and west" (General Plan, pg. 10-29). RAT W002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Resl w Draft Ord).doc Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of August, 2004. ra+�— John Velesio, Chairman ATTEST: �D66t� 4<6AT2 - 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. 2004-046 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of August, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Olhasso Guerriero, Telesio None None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Resl w Draft Ord).doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-047 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Ouiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.d0C 8 PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-047 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT INTO .SEVEN SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS ON 4.57 GROSS ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR---- - FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. WHEREAS, Marchand -Way Development Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA02- 0371 (Tentative Tract Map No. 30169), 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 August 18, 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 Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of Planning Application PA02-0371 subject to the attached conditions 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 RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The seven -lot subdivision of a 4.57 gross acre site will result in a density of 1.53 units per acre and is within the allowable density range of .5 to 2 units RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc per acre specified in the General Plan land use element for the Low Density Residential designation. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965; The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land and has never entered into any Williamson Act contracts. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The Initial Study and special reports prepared for the application indicate that the project will not have any significant impacts to the environment. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the recommendations of the cultural resource, fault hazard, and geotechnical reports have been incorporated as conditions of approval. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, because development will be inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building and fire codes prior to occupancy. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. During review of the design of the homes, staff will ensure that all setbacks have been met and that light and air access is available to the extent possible. The construction will be required to conform to all state energy efficiency codes as well. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, because the City staff have reviewed the latest title report and all required easements and dedications will be required as conditions of approval. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow RMtaff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc 2 H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby), because the Temecula Community Services District has conditioned the project to have appropriate Quimby fees paid prior to issuance of building permits. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based on a finding of no significant environmental impact, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve a Negative Declaration for the application. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of Planning Application PA02-0371 according to the specific conditions set forth in 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 18" day of August, 2004. Joh Telesio, Chairman 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. 2004-047 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of August, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Olhasso NOES: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Telesio ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA)Aoc 3 ATTACHMENT NO.6 MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING OF AUGUST 18, 2004 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 9 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, August 18, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Chiniaeff led the audience in the Flag salute. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Chiniaeff Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, and Chairman Telesio. Absent: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Agenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of August 18, 2004. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of June 16, 2004. 2.2 Approve the Minutes of July 7, 2004. 3 Director's Hearing Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for July 2004. RAMinutesPC\081804 MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Mathewson who abstained on Item No. 2.2. COMMISSION BUSINESS Continued from August 4, 2004 0 performance standards regulating office use in Light Industrial Zones Associate Planner West presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That at the August 4, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission expressed concern with the clarity of the performance standards indicating that several standards were in conflict with one another; • That the Planning Commission also expressed concern with the uses occupying space in the LI zone that do not create substantial local employment opportunities within the City; at this time, staff has not addressed this concern and that currently the City Attorney is working to find a reasonable resolution; • That based upon the Planning Commission's comments, staff has made the following changes: o That it was specified that larger office buildings are preferred but not required in the LI and BP zones; o That the performance standards was revised to achieve a campus -like design when multiple office buildings are being proposed; o That the performance standards were revised to achieve a campus -like design when multiple office buildings are being proposed. At this time, Associate Planner West pointed out two corrections as follows: • That on Page 3 of the PC Reso., Section 1, that the words urgency and standards be deleted; • That on Page 6, Ordinace, that the first three lines be deleted; Commissioner Mathewson suggested revising the language in the Performance Standards No. 4 to read: Landscaping in pedestrian scaled... vs Landscaping and pedestrian. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Phil Oberhansey, representing RM Pacific, relayed concern with the language in E. Performance Standards. RAMinutesPC\081804 2 For Mr. Oberhansey, Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that the Planning Commission and staff are encouraging the large building on the proposed site and/or if the will is to have multiple buildings, the desire would be to have a campus -type setting. For the Commission, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that if the language in E. Performance Standard is a concern and the Planning Commission concurs, E. Performance Standards could be deleted. Mr. Oberhansey noted his appreciation and relayed that the proposed project will be a great benefit to the Community. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve staff's recommendation based on modification to the language on Paragraph 4 as directed by the Planning Director and clarification to E. Performance Standard in regard to business growth opportunity language and the two changes to the language of the ordinance. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-042 A RESOLUTION OF HTEPLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITYOF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY OCUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR MULTIPLE OFFICE BUILDINGS IN BUSINESS PARK AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONES". (PLANNING APPLICATION 04-0477) Drive and Margarita Way Associate Planner Harris presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That the Planning Commission expressed concerns at the August 4, 2004 meeting, noting the following; o That because the subject property is located at a prime intersection, the street elevation of the building should consist of enhanced architecture; o That the proposed buildings turn their backs to the street frontages and should have store fronts with down lighting; o That the man -doors are visible from the street frontages; and that enhanced articulation, canopies and/or landscaping should be used to screen; o That a row of signage should be discouraged along street frontages; RAM1nutesPC\081804 o That the type of retail uses proposed could be problematic; At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Ms. Vandana Kelkar, representing the applicant relayed the following: • That since the August 4, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has made great effort to address the Commission's concerns noting the following revisions: o That some man -doors have been relocated to achieve greater screening; o That arched vegetated trellis structures have been added on top of abutting retaining walls to achieve screening of man -doors; o That secondary wall offsets have been provided on portions of the elevations with greater length and deeper 3400twide columns have been incorporated to achieve enhanced articulation and screening or doors; o That decorative elements have been added along upper portions of parapets to break up stucco wall planes; o That signs have been consolidated and/or relocated to reduce row or signage" appearance; o That wider metal canopies with support bars have been added to screen doors and provide interest. For Commissioner Guerriero, Ms. Kelkar relayed that retail -type tenants have been approved for the zone but that the applicant will also be encouraging restaurant -type tenants. Commissioner Chiniaeff expressed concern with the "row of signage" type appearance and would strongly encourage that the applicant explore the possibility of monument signage. Mr. Allan Abshez, representing OCC, noted that there is a restriction in the CC&Rs for the center that limits the monument signage; and that the applicant is willing to buy back individual signs to the Planning Commission as the applicant acquires tenants. Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that he is not desirous of individual signs for individual tenants spread across the building; but rather monument signage for each frontage with the listing of tenants. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Abshez relayed that he would need to consult with the applicant to inquire if grouping the tenants on monument signage would be a possibility. For Commissioner Guerriero, Associate Planner Harris relayed that staff has not reviewed the CC&Rs but that there is a sign program that has freestanding signs permitted. Mr. Harris also relayed that staff has a condition that the applicant would need to return to the Planning Commission with a sign program noting that a sign program has not been analyzed at this time. Mr. Jeffrey Ostromel, representing Schultz Financial Group, relayed the following information: • That there will be two retail buildings within the Overland Corporate Center do have an overall sign program; • That CC&Rs limit where signs can be placed; RAMinutesPC\081804 4 • That the applicant could possibly explore the possibility of the clustering concept, adding a cluster on each building; • That the applicant is not concerned with the name of the building but rather it is more important that the tenants acquire recognition. For Mr. Ostromel, Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that most CC&Rs have a provision whereby the applicant can request for something different and queried if the applicant has gone down this avenue. In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Ostromel noted that the sign program has been in place for sometime and that the applicant is only a minor member, advising that there are five other owners; and that the applicant has not requested monument signage from CC&R. For Mr. Ostromel, Commissioner Chiniaeff noted that he understands that the applicant is only a minority holder of the complex but suggested that he return to the Board and explore the possibility of obtaining monument signage on both sides of the entrances. Commissioner Chiniaeff also relayed that he would be inclined to move forward with the architecture only and that this would give the applicant an opportunity to explore the possibility of adding monument signs. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Ostromel relayed that it would be his opinion that there is no language in the CC&Rs that would prohibit landscaping from blocking the site line but rather it is an issue that would be negotiated with every tenant. For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske noted that staff is requesting approval of the Development Plan. Mr. Harris further clarified that the approved site plan indicated that either a motel or restaurant would be developed on the pad; and that if the uses were to change, the applicant would need to return to the Planning Commission for approval; and that the Commission would be acting on the condition to change the land use as well. Commissioner Olhasso noted that she would be desirous of bronze lettering for signage and would not want to see any colors, lights, or channels noting that this would only lessen the esthetically pleasing architecture of the building. Commissioner Telesio relayed suggested that signage be consistent in shape and color and queried why the applicant would be installing signage in the back of the building noting that in time it would be screened by mature trees. For Chairman Telesio, Mr. Ostromel noted that the applicant will ensure that all signage is consistent. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Mathewson relayed that he appreciates the applicant's efforts in responding to the comments raised at the last Planning Commission meeting, but that he would desire more enhancements; and suggested that there be uses that do not turn their back to the street but rather embrace it, such as pedestrian access and activities along Overland and Margarita Road; relaying that he cannot support the proposed project at this time. RAM1nutesPC\081804 Commissioner Guerriero echoed Commissioner Mathewson's comments noting that more enhancements are necessary and cannot support this project at this time. Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that due to the grade, it is a site specific problem, and is of the opinion that the applicant has already made great effort to address the Commission's concern and would approve the architecture subject to the applicant returning to the Planning Commission with a sign program that addresses the Commission's concerns i.e. monument signage. Chairman Telesio echoed Commissioner Chiniaeff's comments in regard to the site and noted that he would prefer to see enhanced landscaping in the back of the building, the use of uniform signage and is also willing to approve the proposed project as is with the condition that the applicant returns with a sign program. At this time, the Public Hearing was reopened. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Ostromel relayed that the applicant is prohibited from adding another restaurant in the Red Lobster Building; that currently the applicant has not signed any leases for the project; that the applicant has parking spaces at a maximum; and that the intent of the applicant was to have uses that would service the users. Mr. Vincent Dedonado, landscape architect clar'rfied that the landscaping that has been reviewed is already existing landscape; that no other landscaping is being added; that when the project was designed, it was to give a back -drop to the monument sign that currently exists. At this time, the Planning Commission took a five minute break. Ms. Vandana Kelkar per Power Point Presentation, presented photo simulations of the front of the building, noting that the applicant has gone to great effort to carry the front elements of the building to the back. For Mr. Ostromel, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that by what is currently being proposed, the applicant is already excluding a single -user. Ms. Kelkar relayed that because the way the site is laid out, it dictates that it be one " L' shaped building or two smaller buildings. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Ostromel relayed that the project was never set up as a pad lease like the Red Lobster building, and that the brokers are seeking multi-user and single -user tenant. For the Commission, Mr. Ostromel relayed that the applicant did explore other possibilities of trying to design the use of the overall site and that the proposed project is what seemed to be the best plan; and that in regard to the back elevation, Mr. Ostromel is of the opinion that the applicant has made great efforts to address the Planning Commission's concerns stating that the proposed is a high quality building and respectfully requests action be taken. In response to Mr. Ostromel, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that he has never referred to the proposed building as a low -quality building and relayed that there are many examples that display rear buildings that carry front -building elements and is of the opinion that the proposed project is not where it could be and is not inclined to move forward at this time. RAMinutesPC\081804 At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. With respect to Commissioner Mathewson's concerns, Commissioner Chiniaeff is of the opinion that the trellis' that were added to screen man -doors, the terracing along the wall on the street, metal canopies with support which screen doors and provide interest, and the existing landscaping are enhancements to the back of the building. Commissioner Guerriero reiterated that his concerns were that the back of the building will be seen from Overland down to Winchester Road and is of the opinion that more can be done to enhance the rear of the building. Chairman Telesio noted that he does not see the gain by sending this item back and is in favor of approving this project as presented with the condition that the applicant returns to the Planning Commission with a sign program. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve the proposed project subject to a sign program returning to the Planning Commission for approval; that the applicant explores the possibility of monument signage; and that consideration is taken to single letter brass lettering. Chairman Telesio seconded the motion (at this time, Ms. Kelkar was asked to step forward). Ms. Kelkar relayed that the applicant would be in agreement with the Conditions of Approval. And voice vote reflected denial with Commissioner's Guerriero, Mathewson, and Commissioner who opposed. Per the request of Ms. Ubnoske, the Public Hearing was reopened. For the record, Mr. Ostromel reiterated that he appreciates the Commission's comments but will be pursuing the appellate process. Commissioner Olhasso noted for the record that the Commission was in acceptance of the site plan, understanding of the market conditions, and the overall restrictions for single retail use. New Items Associate Planner Kitzerow presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: That the Wolf Creek Specific Plan requires Planned Development Guidelines be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission when courtyard homes are proposed; RAMinutesPC\081804 • That typical cluster for the courtyard includes six units with primary access from the private court drive, and two units with access along the street frontage; • That the proposed units have been designed so that those units (typical Plan 1) with access fro the courtyard and frontage along the street integrate two "front -sided" architectural element; • That the Planned Development Guidelines require the following minimum setbacks; o That front yard 15 feet average to structure, except when structure fronts onto a courtyard, when minimum setback is 5 feet; o Corner side yard: 10 feet; o Interior side yard: On feet o Rear yard: 10 feet; • That the above standards are proposed to achieve the intent of the court yard design illustrated in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (SP); • That design lot configuration created challenges for visitor parking and trash pick-up; • That trash bin pick-up will be along the internal loop; • That on -street guest parking spaces total 82 spaces for the site, which staff is of the opinion is adequate; Architectural Review • That the applicant is proposing four (4) two-story plans proposed, three elevations each; and that the elevations include Spanish Colonial. Craftsman, and Cottage, which are consistent with the early California theme identified in the Specific Plan (SP); • That there will be four (4) color schemes for each elevation: • That staff has conditioned that garage windows be provided for all plan three (3) units that front onto the internal loop street and that the conditions also occurs on a plan two (2) adjacent to the recreation area; • That a condition was added to require side windows at the front entry on the lots that front the internal loop street; • That the units have been plotted to avoid repetition on the streetscape; • That staff is also conditioning for an additional enhancement at the rear of lot 77 which will be visible to the public right-of-way; • That staff is requesting to modify Public Works Condition for the MAP, eliminating Condition of Approval No. 60 and modifying Condition of Approval No. 61 as provided in staff's memo submitted to the Planning Commissioners. RAMinutesPC\081804 Deputy Director of Public Works clarified that Public Works Condition of Approval No. 61 should be deleted and No. 60 be modified; and that Condition of Approval No. 32k, regarding underground utilities No. change from 33 to 34 per the underground ordinance. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Mel Mercado of William Lyon Homes noted that he was available for questions. Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested adding more enhancements to side and rear elevations that would be visible to the interior motor court and adjacent (interior) properties. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Mercado concurs with comments made and will explore the possibility of adding more enhancements to side and rear elevations. Commissioner Olhasso relayed that she understands that the lots are small but has concern with the proposed architectural elements of the proposed project and is of the opinion that more enhancements could be added. Mr. Mercado reminded the Planning Commission that the intent of the proposed project is high density, small lot detach homes, advising that this is the nature of a courtyard cluster; and that it is an intimate area that will only be utilized by six (6) homeowners. Mr. Rick Rush, representing William Lyon Homes, noted that the applicant is in concurrence with all the Conditions of Approval and with the deletion of Condition No. 61 and modification of No. 60; and that would also request the deletion of PA 06-0603, Nos. 13 and 14. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Olhasso relayed the following concerns: • That the Craftsman in general, does not have any signature windows for design element and would requested that this be incorporated; • That Residence one (1), Craftsman front -entry is too narrow; • That all the plans have blank walls and are esthetically unpleasing; • That there are no arched windows on the Spanish Colonial; • That she would request to add a stone cover on the front portion of the Cottage; • That the enhanced elevations do not appear to be enhanced; • That units should not be viewing black back walls. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that there was no language in the Specific Plan requiring four-sided architecture. RAMinutesPC\081804 For Ms. Ubnoske, Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested that four-sided architecture be required for future projects that are high density, Commissioner Mathewson queried if there would be any landscaping between homes to break up massing. At this time, the Public Hearing was reopened. Mr. Mercado relayed that a 5 foot high wood fence will be separating the homes. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Mercado relayed the he will explore the possibility of adding some relief, and/or additional enhancements to the rear of the homes. Mr. Gus Casillas, architect for Lyon Homes, reiterated that the applicant would be willing to explore the possible addition of windows to break-up the massing on the rear of the homes. MOTION: Commissioner Olhasso moved to approve the MAP subject to the changes in the Conditions and have the architectural review be continued to September 15, 2004. Commissioner Chiniaeff seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 7 Associate Planner Fisk presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That for the sale of beer and wine, the Development Code requires that all uses other than restaurant must obtain a CUP from the Planning Commission; • That the Development Code requires that any businesses selling beer and wine shall be no closer than 500 feet from any public park, religious institution, or school which has been verified by maps provided by the GIS Department; • That staff has verified through the department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) that the project site is within Census Tract 0432.14; • That a total of 11 licenses currently exist in the tract for off -sale consumption; and that 12 are allowed before it is considered 'over -concentrated'; and that since the census tract is not over -concentrated, public convenience or necessity findings are not required; • That the Police Department has indicated that there have been no crimes or complaints filed within the past year with respect to the operation of the existing retail fueling facility and that the addition of beer and wine sales from the premises are not anticipated to significantly impact the need for police services. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Robert Simmons, representing Exxon Mobile Corporation relayed the following: RAMinutesPC\081804 10 • That the applicant is of the opinion that the project is in full compliance with the General Plan and Development Code for the City of Temecula; • That the objective would be to provide beer and wine sales for the convenience of existing customers; • That 10 percent of sales figures is based on other existing facilities. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Simmons is of the opinion that the applicant would be willing to invest in a training program through ABC for personnel at the Mobile gas station and is not aware of what types of wines would be sold. For Mr. Simmons, Commissioner Olhasso noted that the outside of the Mobile gas station is in need of clean-up. For Mr. Simmons, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that the signage on the property appears to be in need of maintenance. Mr. Larry Markham, representing Mr. Raymond, the underlying ground owner relayed its support for the proposed project. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Guerriero expressed concern with the request for beer and wine sales in the area and relayed that before he would approve the proposed request, a condition would need to be implement stating that the applicant will provide and training program for personnel from ABC. For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that staff is at ease with the proposed findings of the proposed project. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff's recommendation with the condition that the applicant provide a training program for personnel working in the facility through ABC. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-045 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA03-0609, A REQUEST FOR A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE (TYPE 20 LICENSE, OFF -SALE) FROM AN EXISTING GAS STATION LOCATED AT 44520 BEDOFRD COURT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND BEDFORD COURT, KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.922-210-041. RAM1nutesPC\081804 11 Associate Planner Peters presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That the subject property consists of 4 1/2acres; • That the applicant is requesting a change in the zone from L-1 which is a one -acre minimum lot size to L-3 which would allow the half -acre; • That the applicant is also requesting a tentative tract map to create seven (7) lots ranging in size from .5 acres to .S acres; • That the approval of the map is dependent on approval of the zone change; and that there would be action taken on two different items; • That staff determined that the request to reduce the lot sizes by changing the zone from L-1 to L-2 is consistent with the General Plan, and interim Chaparral Policies adopted by the City Council on June 22, 2004; and that the current Development Code requires that the design of each new home obtain Planning Commission approval prior to issuance of building permits. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant noted that the applicant is in concurrence with the Conditions of Approval but would request a modification to Condition of Approval No. 10b ii, that three (3) rail equestrian fencing be added as on option as well and would be at ease deleting Condition of Approval No. 10b iii, regarding wood fencing. Ms. Chris Herman spoke on favor of the proposed project. The following individuals spoke in opposition of the proposal. Ms. Dianne Tanna Me. Ralph Neimeyer Mr. Robert Burns Dr. Lis (letter read by Ms. Tanna) At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Guerriero spoke in opposition of the proposed project. Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that given the current policy in place, the applicant has the right to request a zone change. Chairman Telesio spoke in opposition to the zone change. RAMInutesPC\081804 12 For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that it was the direction of the City Council that the interim policy could allow half -acre lots through the entire policy area; and that the intent was to not have people come in and grade the hillside away, relaying that this would enable to have half -acre lots and retain some open space; and that the City Council and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) felt that half -acres were approved. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to deny staff's recommendation. Chairman Telesio seconded the motion. This motion died. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff's recommendation. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero and Chairman Telesio who voted No. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS Commissioner Guerriero apologized for his absence of 08-04-04 Planning Commission meeting and CounciVPlanning Commission Workshop on 08-10-04. Commissioner Mathewson welcomed Associate Planner Peters to the Planning Department. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Ms. Ubnoske relayed that Kevin committed himself to an in-house Specific Plan amendment for Roripaugh and to include as part of the amendment a percentage of single -story homes in the pan area; and that the City Council has directed staff to bring back a matrix that shows minimum lot sizes and that based on the minimum square footage of the lot, the Commission could relay what percentage of single-family homes could go on those lots. For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske will explore the possibility of hiring an architect to work with staff on product review. ADJOURNMENT At 9:35 p.m., Chairman Telesio formally adjourned this meeting to next regular meeting to be held on Wednesday. September 1, 2004. John Telesio Chairman Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning R:\MinutesPC\081804 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 AGENDA PACKET FOR THE AUGUST 18, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report CC.doc 10 STAFF REPORT —PLANNING ORIGINAL CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Date of Meeting: August 18, 2004 Prepared by: Matt Peters Title: Associate Planner File Number PA02-0371 & PA02- Application Type: Zone Change, Tentative Tract 0372 Map Project Description: Change of Zone from Low Density Residential (L-1, One -acre minimum lot size) to Low Density Residential (L-2, One-half acre minimum lot size), and Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 4.57 acre site into seven single family residential lots ranging from .5 acres to .82 acres, located on the east side of Ynez Road, approximately 470 feet north of Santiago Road (APN 945-060-006). 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 ❑ Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan ❑ EIR PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Applicant: Marchand -Way Development Completion Date: June 22, 2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: August 18 2004 General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (L) 5-2 Dwelling Units Per Acre Zoning Designation: L 1 (Low Density Residential one acre minimum lot size) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: North: South: East: West: Lot Area: 4.27 acres Net Lot Sizes: Parcel One:.82 acres (35,756 sq.ft.) Parcel Two:.61 acres (26,644 sq.ft.) Parcel Three:.61 acres (26,644 sq.ft.) Parcel Four:.61 acres (26,915 sq.ft.) Parcel Five:.59 acres (25,877 sq.ft.) Parcel Six:.50 acres (21,831 sq.ft.) Parcel Seven:.50 acres (21,792 sq.ft.) Total Floor Area/Ratio Landscape Area/Coverage N Parking Required/Provided BACKGROUND SUMMARY Im The Planning Commission initially reviewed these applications on May 7, 2003. The Planning Commission determined that the application would create a residential density that would be incompatible with the surrounding properties and voted to recommend City Council denial. On August 12, 2003, the City Council reviewed the application and expressed concern about taking action on a zone change request while the General Plan update was in progress. The City Council voted to continue the application and refer the matter to the General Plan Community Advisory Committee (CAC) for policy input prior to taking formal action. On October 14, 2003, the CAC discussed the application in the context of the overall land use goals for the Chaparral area. The CAC determined that the zone change request to one-half acre minimum lots on this site would be consistent with the existing General Plan policies for the Chaparral area (Pg. 10-29). The site does not have any of the environmental constraints referred to in the General Plan for the Chaparral area, and the resulting density would be compatible with the surrounding land use densities. In a broader context, the CAC viewed the Chaparral area as transitioning from one -acre lots to half -acre lots if visual and environmental considerations were addressed. In order to address development and clarify densities in the Chaparral area, staff had discussions with an ad hoc City Council Subcommittee consisting of Councilmembers Naggar and Comerchero, as well as the CAC. An Interim Chaparral Policy was developed as follows: RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc The gross density in the Chaparral Area shall be one dwelling unit per acre, except for the tier of lots adjacent to and approximately seven hundred feet east of Ynez Road, where two dwelling units per acre may be allowed. In areas with one unit per acre gross density, half -acre (20,000 square feet) lots may be allowed when the remaining property is set aside and preserved for open space and habitat purposes. All project approvals shall include conditions of approval and requirements to ensure the long term protection and maintenance of these open space and habitat areas. 3. In areas with two units per acre gross density, project shall incorporate and support, to the maximum extent feasible, an internal road network intended to minimize internal vehicle trips using, and vehicular turning movement conflicts along, Ynez Road. 4. As part of the design review process, all future developments shall provide trail right-of- way dedications and/or easements for, as well as construct or agree to fund the future construction of, the approved citywide trail network in and adjacent to particular development project. At the March 23, 2004 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the policy direction received from the Subcommittee and CAC and referred the matter to the Planning Commission for a formal recommendation. At that meeting, the Council had questions regarding who would construct and/or maintain the trails that are proposed to run through this area and who would be responsible for the potential liability. At the April 21, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, Principal Planner David Hogan presented the Interim Chaparral Policy in relation to the two planning applications that brought this issue into the spotlight. The first application is the subject proposal consisting of a seven lot subdivision (Tentative Tract Map 30169) on Ynez Road. The second is an active application for •a 30-lot subdivision (Tentative Tract Map 30434) in the middle part of the Chaparral Area. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Interim Chaparral Policies. The voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At the June 22, 2004 City Council meeting, the Council approved the Interim Chaparral Policies. ANALYSIS Zone Change The application will create seven residential parcels between .5 and .8 acres in net lot area. Public testimony previously given at the first Planning Commission was mixed (one resident speaking in favor, and six residents opposed). However, the General Plan CAC found that the Y2 acre density is appropriate in this area, creating a compatible transition with the higher suburban densities to the west. Staff concurs with the analysis of the CAC and finds no underlying environmental or policy basis to deny the zone change request from L-1 (one acre min. lot size) to L-2 (one-half acre minimum lot size). Tentative Tract Map The map will create seven residential lots fronting on a private street to be sited along the northerly edge of the site and terminate into a cul-de-sac. The entrance to the subdivision will be RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc aligned with the Quiet Meadow Road intersection to the west. The lot sizes will range from .5 to .8 acres and complies with the minimum half -acre lot size requirement of the L-2 zoning district. The topography rises from the west to east; however slopes are minimal when compared to the rest of the Chaparral area. The pad elevation of Lot 1, which will side onto Ynez Road, will be approximately five feet above Ynez Road, and twenty two feet lower than the highest pad (Lot 7) at the rear of the site. As conditioned, the proposed map will conform to all applicable City Code requirements and staff recommends approval. Included as a condition of approval is a requirement that all sloped areas and the private street be maintained by a homeowners association. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ® 1. An initial study has been prepared and indicates that the project will not have any potentially significant environmental impacts. Staff has circulated its environmental findings in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and no public or agency comments were received. Special studies submitted with the application included a Fault Hazard Investigation (T.H.E. Soils Co., January 29, 2003), a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (T.H.E. Soils Co., February 10, 2003), and a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment (Jean Keller, PhD., October 2002). Those documents were distributed, reviewed, and accepted by the relevant agencies. The specific conditions and recommendations of those studies have been incorporated as conditions of approval. Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration for the project. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the request to reduce the lot sizes by changing the zone from L-1 to L- 2 is consistent with the General Plan, and Interim Chaparral Policies adopted by the City Council on June 22, 2004. The Tentative Tract Map has been conditioned to ensure that all required public and private improvements are constructed and maintained, and the current Development Code requires that the design of each new home obtain Planning Director approval at a public hearing prior to issuance of a building permit. FINDINGS Zone Change The zone change request from L-1 to L-2 is consistent with the General Plan policy for the Chaparral area because it provides an opportunity to transition down from the larger lots found in the Los Ranchitos and Santiago Estates areas to the south and west (General Plan pg. 10-29) Tentative Tract Map (Code Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are RAT MQ002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The seven -lot subdivision of a 4.57 gross acre site will result in a density of 1.53 units per acre and is within the allowable density range of .5 to 2 units per acre specified in the General Plan land use element for the Low Density Residential designation. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965; The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land and has never entered into any Williamson Act contracts. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The Initial Study and special reports prepared for the application indicate that the project will not have any significant impacts to the environment. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the recommendations of the cultural resource, fault hazard, and geotechnical reports have been incorporated as conditions of approval. 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, because development will be inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building and fire codes prior to occupancy. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. During review of the design of the homes, staff will ensure that all setbacks have been met and that light and air access is available to the extent possible. The construction will be required to conform to all state energy efficiency codes as well. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc the proposed subdivision, because the City staff have reviewed the latest title report and all required easements and dedications will be required as conditions of approval. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby), because the Temecula Community Services District has conditioned the project to have appropriate Quimby fees paid prior to issuance of building permits ATTACHMENTS Plan Reduction (TTM 30169) — Blue Page 7 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-_ PA02-0372 (Zone Change) - Blue Page 8 Exhibit A — Draft City Council Ordinance 3. PC Resolution No. 2004-_ PA02-0371 (Tentative Tract Map 30169) — Blue Page 9 Exhibit A — Draft Conditions of Approval 4. Vicinity Map — Blue Page 10 5. Initial Study — Blue Page 11 6. Excerpt Minutes from June 22, 2004 City Council Meeting — Blue Page 12 Excerpt Minutes from April 21, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting— Blue Page 13 8. Excerpt Minutes from March 23, 2004 City Council Meeting— Blue Page 14 9. Excerpt Minutes from August 12, 2003 City Council Meeting — Blue Page 15 10. Excerpt Minutes from May 7, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting — Blue Page 16 11. Petition and Letters of Support for the Proposal — Blue Page 17 12. Oral Argument Against the Proposal as recorded in the May 7, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting (Excerpt) — Blue Page 18 RAT M\2002%02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-_ PA02-0372 (ZONE CHANGE) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA02-0372, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. WHEREAS, Marchand -Way Development Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA02-0372 (Change of Zone), 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 August 18, 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 City Council approval of Planning Application PA02-0372 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 RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings, Zone Change. The Planning Commission, in recommending City Council approval of Planning Application No. PA02-0372, hereby finds that the amendment to the Official Zoning Map is consistent with the adopted General Plan goals for the City of Temecula, because the zone change from L-1 to L-2 is consistent with the City's General Plan land use policy for the Chaparral area because it "provides an opportunity to transition down from the larger lots found in the Los Ranchitos and Santiago Estates areas to the south and west" (General Plan, pg. 10-29). RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res 1 w Draft Ord).doc 1 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of August, 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 18th day of August, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res I w Draft Ord).doc 2 EXHIBIT A DRAFT CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w Draft Ord).doc 3 ORDINANCE NO.04-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. WHEREAS, Marchand -Way Development Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA02-0372 (Change of Zone); in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 18, 2004, and recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application PA02-0372 as an amendment to the City Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances; and WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library, local newspaper, and the project site; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on , 2004 to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendments To The City Zoning Map The City Council hereby amends the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula for Parcel 945-060-006 by changing the zoning designation from Low Density Residential (L-1) to Low Density residential (L-2: Section 2. Environmental Review. The City Council, based upon the information contained in the Initial Environmental Study and Negative Declaration prepared for this project, finds the impacts of the proposed amendment is accurately described and discussed and hereby adopts a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 4. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w Draft Ord).doc 4 after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places. Section 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage; and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City Councilmembers voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in said City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this_ day of , 2004. Mike Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CIVIC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-_ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the _ day of 2004 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 2004, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CIVIC City Clerk RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res I w Draft Ord).doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PLAN REDUCTION (TTM 30169) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc ioi TRACT 2Q643 M.B. 159 50-53 SP RESIDENTIAL R ROAD - yNEZ t I itI- 52 e N z y:4 i iESIDE Of �7k J L Y t1 1 g$� b ATTACHMENT NO.3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004- PA02-0371, (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30169) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\StaH Report MDP (8-9-04).doc PC RESOLUTION NO.2004-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT INTO SEVEN SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS ON 4.57 GROSS ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006. WHEREAS, Marchand -Way Development Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA02- 0371 (Tentative Tract Map No. 30169), 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 August 18, 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 Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of Planning Application PA02-0371 subject to the attached conditions 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 RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The seven -lot subdivision of a 4.57 gross acre site will result in a density of 1.53 units per acre and is within the allowable density range of .5 to 2 units per RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc acre specified in the General Plan land use element for the Low Density Residential designation. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965; The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land and has never entered into any Williamson Act contracts. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The Initial Study and special reports prepared for the application indicate that the project will not have any significant impacts to the environment. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the recommendations of the cultural resource, fault hazard, and geotechnical reports have been incorporated as conditions of approval. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, because development will be inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building and fire codes prior to occupancy. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. During review of the design of the homes, staff will ensure that all setbacks have been met and that light and air access is available to the extent possible. The construction will be required to conform to all state energy efficiency codes as well. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, because the City staff have reviewed the latest title report and all required easements and dedications will be required as conditions of approval. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc 2 H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby), because the Temecula Community Services District has conditioned the project to have appropriate Quimby fees paid prior to issuance of building permits. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based on a finding of no significant environmental impact, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve a Negative Declaration for the application. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of Planning Application PA02-0371 according to the specific conditions set forth in 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 181h day of August, 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 certify that 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 18th day of August, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 3 EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAT M12002%02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA02-0371 (Tentative Tract Map 30169) Project Description: A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 4.57 gross acres of land into seven single-family lots, located on the east side of Ynez Road, opposite Quiet Meadow Road and approximately 473 linear feet north of the centerline of Santiago Road. DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Residential Detached Residential Detached 945-060-006 August 18, 2004 August 18, 2007 Within Forty -Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicanUdeveloper 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 Fourteen Dollars ($1,314.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements 2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. 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 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA)Aoc 5 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. 4. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 5. This project shall be contingent upon the approval of Planning Application PA02-0372 (Zone Change). 6. If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work shall be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. In addition, the developer will coordinate with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians to allow a representative of the Pechanga Band to monitor and participate in archaeological investigations if and when resources are encountered, including participation in discussions regarding the disposition of cultural items and artifacts. This should be added as a note on the Grading Plans. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 7. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 8. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 9. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: I. This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. ii. This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone. iii. This project is within a Subsidence Zone. C. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc 6 i. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. ii. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. iii. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 10. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: a. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: i. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). ii. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. iii. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). iv. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). V. The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. vi. Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA)Aoc 7 b) Private common areas prior to issuance of the first building permit. c) All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to private slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. vii. Hardscaping for the following: a) Pedestrian trails within private common areas Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: i. Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a public right- of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. ii. Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. iii. Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by i. and ii. above. C. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. it. Roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Director of Planning approval. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 12. If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 13. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 14. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 15. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. 16. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 8 17. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency shall complete all conditions. General Requirements 18. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 19. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained road right-of-way. 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, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 22. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho California Water District C. Eastern Municipal Water District d. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau e. Planning Department f. Department of Public Works g. Riverside County Health Department h. Cable TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 9 k. Southern California Edison Company I. Southern California Gas Company 23. The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Ynez Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 24. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. C. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. h. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. i. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground 25. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. Minimum road widths of 32-ft. paved with 50-ft. right-of-ways or easements (shown on typical section). b. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards (200- ft. minimum). RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 10 C. Cul-de-sac geometries shall meet current City Standards. d. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required (all centerline radii should be identified on the site plan). e. Identify whether gates will be proposed at entrances to project. If so, configuration, stacking distance, and turn -around ability will need to be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. f. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). 26. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 27. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. 28. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 29. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 30. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: 31. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 32. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The City prior to commencement of the appraisal shall have approved the appraiser. 33. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 34. A 32-foot easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. 35. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc 11 36. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On -site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating, "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. " Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 37. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department C. Department of Public Works d. Community Services District 38. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. 39. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 40. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 41. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off -site or on -site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 42. 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 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\S1aff Report MDP (Res2 w COA).doc 12 project is shown to be exempt. The final NPDES requirement shall be address at the right-of-way prior to the water exiting into the street. 43. 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. 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 47. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 48. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutter's rights of access along Ynez Road as shown on the approved Tentative Map. 49. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. A registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation shall certify the building pad, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 50. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 51. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 52. 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 Certificates of Occupancy 53. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 13 a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District C. Department of Public Works 54. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 55. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 56. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 57. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at the time of building, plan submittal. 58. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix III.A) 59. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix II1.13, Table A-III-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 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) 60. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be thirty-seven (37) feet for residential and forty-five (45) feet for commercial. (CFC 902.2.2.3, CFC 902.2.2.4) 61. 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) This will include all internal roads, connecting roads between phases, and construction gates. All required access must be in and available prior to and during ALL construction. 62. 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 R:\T M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 14 roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 Ibs GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 63. 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 and Ord 99-14) 64. 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 and Ord 99-14) Roads on this map being less than 32' will require both sides to be painted Red, and marked "Fire Lane -No Parking CVC. 22500A". 65. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 66. 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 local water company signs the plans, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) 67. 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) 68. Firefighting personnel shall provide all manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access. (CFC 902.4) Special Conditions 69. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland-vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II -A) 70. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II -A) 71. Prior to recording a final map a binding agreement for the maintenance and repair of any and all existing underground Fire Department Water Systems, including all fire sprinkler supplies and all fire hydrants and supplies will be in place as a condition of this division to maintain available water in perpetuity. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow R&StaN Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 15 72. Prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 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. All perimeter parkways (including within the ROW along Ynez Road), the portion of Lot 1 on the north side of the private road, slopes, retaining walls, drainage facilities, street medians and residential street lighting on the private street shall be maintained by the established homeowners association. 75. Any damage done to existing Class II bike lanes along Ynez Road during construction shall be repaired to the satisfaction of Public Works. Prior to Final Map 76. TCSD shall review and approve the CC&R's. 77. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in -lieu fees equivalent to .10 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit 78. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. 79. If additional arterial street lighting is to be installed along Ynez Road then prior to the first building permit or installation of the street lighting, the developer shall 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. OTHER AGENCIES 80. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated October 21, 2002, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 16 81. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated July 24, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 82. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated July 18, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 83. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in The Gas Company transmittal dated August 8, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 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 Planning Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (Rest w COA).doc 17 DAVID P. ZAPPE ppNAir rro 1995 MARKET STREET General Manager -Chief Engineer �°°° °O� RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 r e 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 2 4 2on2 N`B VAr pN 51180.1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: lAlic41A1✓l.. M(.C.o`f Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: TA.oZ _ 03114: 7Z io3-73 s for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or nments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood ed a logical component or extension of a master plan system, itigation 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 healt nd safety or any other such issue: This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District 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 m nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted, Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership o suc aci i ies on wri en reques 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 f es will be required. This project is located within the limits of the District's Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adop a app ica a ee sou a psi y c hier's check or money order only tote Flood Control District prior to issuance o building or grading permits whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit. GENERAL INFORMATION 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 project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies calculations, plans and o er information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR� prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the Califomia Department R Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality CertTcation permit. may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps tio Very truly yours, �"A STUART E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civiill Engineer ^q c: Date: SAT J 1(JZ 3H COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • HEALTFr jcRVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July 24,2002JUl 2 5 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 ATTN: Michael McCoy: RE: TRACT MAP NO. 30169 (7 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tract Map 30169 and recommends: a A water system shall be installed in accordance with plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Environmental Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the 1 original drawing to the County Surveyor's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 30169 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such "Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. A responsible official of the water company shall sign this certification. The plans 2. This Department has no written statement from Rancho California Municipal Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 4065 County Circle Drive • Riverside, CA 92503 • Phone (909) 358-5316 • FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 • Riverside, CA 92513-7600) .w. Page Two Attn: Michael McCoy July 24, 2002 This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed in accordance with plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor's Office and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be singed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 30169 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. 4. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. 5. It will be necessary for the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. Sin M ly, am m artinez, upervising nvironmental Health Specialist (909)955-8980 Board of Directots IJaa D. Herman President Jeffrey L. Minkler Sr. Vice Praddent Stephea J. C.. Ralph H. Day Ben B. Drake John F. Hoagland Caha F. Ho o6rers John F. Henniaw Gaer,al Message, Phillip 4 Forbes DhectorofFioance- BP. "Bob- Lemons Director of Engineering Kenneth C. Deady Direetor of Operatiem k Maintevaoce Perry R. I.opck Controller Linda M. Fragoee District Secretary/Admiaietrati e Barrios, Manager, C. Michael Carvett Best Beet! Krieger I" General Counsel July 18, 2002 Michael McCoy, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 `'U1 23200, SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY TRACT NO.30169 APN 945-060-006 PLANNING APPLICATIONS NO. PA02-0371, NO. PA02-0372, AND NO. PA02-0373 Dear Mr. McCoy: Please be advised that the above -referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 02%B:atl70T012-T6T-CF 42135 Wmcheater Road • Poet Office Box 9017 • Temecula, California 92589-9017 • (909) 296-6900 • FAX (909) 296-6860 f The Gas Company August 8, 2002 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Michael McCoy SouMom Cardamis Gas Company 1981 Lagoon Avenue Redknds, CA 92374-9710 Mad,ngAddmu: B" 3003, SC8031 Re: Proposal to Subdivide 4.57 Acres Into 7 Residential Lots with 1 Open Space Lot — PA02- Redlandr, CA 0371, 0372 and 0373, Quiet Meadows Tentative Tract Map Change of Zone and Variance 92373-0306 to Tract Map 30169 Dear Mr. McCoy: Southern California Gas Company owns and operates a gas pipeline beneath the portion of street that is proposed to be vacated. In accordance with Section No. 8330 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Gas Company hereby requests that an easement be reserved to ensure the continued operation of this pipeline. The Gas Company is requesting a copy of the recorded vacation document upon its completion. If you have any questions, please call Gellman Thomas at (909) 335-7733. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, L Steve Dunivin Technical Services Supervisor SD/vjr ATTACHMENT NO. 4 VICINITY MAP RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 10 ATTACHMENT NO.5 INITIAL STUDY RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Smff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 11 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Marchand Way Development Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner 909 694-6400 Project Location East side of Ynez Road, between Pauba Road and Santiago Road Project Sponsor's Name and Marchand -Way Development Address 31530 Railroad Canyon Road Ste. 9 Canyon Lake, CA 92587 General Plan Designation Low density residential L Zoning Low density residential L-1 Description of Project PA02-0371: A Tentative Tract Map application to subdivide 4.57 gross acres into 7 single-family residential lots averaging 0.5 net acres; and PA02-0372: A Change of Zone application to change the zoning designation and map from L-1 to L-2. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Ynez Road serves as the west boundary of the project site, with single-family residential uses located to the north, south and east. An area to the south of the subject property consists of a culdezac, with full street improvements, approved by the City for single-family residential uses. Low -density single-family residential homes and vacant residential lots will be served by existing infrastructure. Other public agencies whose Eastern Municipal Water District for sewer service. approval is required Rancho California Water District for water service RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.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 Agriculture Resources Noise Air Quality Po ulation and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geology and Soils Trans ortationlfraffic Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service Systems Hydrology and Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance Land Use and Planning None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find'that the proposed project COULD NOT have a_significanteffect on the environment, _and _a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the Droiect or000nent. 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. 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. 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. Signatur Rolfe Preisendanz Printed name ��( % 2av3 ate Assistant Planner Title RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 2 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: i.a. The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The project site is vacant and is surrounded by SP-2 (Rancho Highlands Specific Plan) zoned properties to the north that include single family residential housing, Low Density Residential (L-1 and L-2) zoned property to the east, north, and south. The development of this site will be consistent with the surrounding properties. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1.b. The project will not conflict with applicable General Plan designations and environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (L). The approval of a change of zone from L-1 to L-2 would increase the desired target dwelling units per acre from 1.3 to 1.5, but stay within the low -density residential range of 0.5 to 2 dwelling units per acre as established by the General Plan Land Use Element. Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project where necessary. 1.c. The proposed project will have a less than significant impact with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The site is located within the County of Riverside Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, which will require site disturbance mitigation fees to be paid prior to grading activity. The site has been continuously grubbed for weed abatement and fire protection. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOCAd 3 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either 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 �J construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: 2.a. The proposed tentative tract map is for seven (7) total single-family residential lots and is within the allowed General Plan Land Use Element density range of 0.5 to 2 dwelling units per acre. Even with the approval of a zone change from L-1 to L-2 the property would still be within the allowed density range for low density residential land uses and therefore would have no impact on the surrounding area. 2.1b. The proposed project involving a single-family residential subdivision would have no impact on the displacement of existing housing. 2.c. The proposed project involving a single-family residential subdivision will have no impact on displacing any residents within the surrounding area. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially X to an existing or projected air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any X criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X of eo le? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 4 Comments: 3.a-c. The project will not conflict with applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The project proposes to subdivide for residential lots a 4.5-acre vacant site, zoned for low -density residential development. The proposed tentative map and zone change is anticipated to be within the threshold for potentially significant air quality impact 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. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.d. There are no known sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, no impacts to sensitive receptors will occur as a result of this project. 3.e. The proposed tentative map and zone change approvals will not create any significantly objectionable odors and will not create an impact to the surrounding community. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 5 Comments: 4.a-d. The project site for the proposed tentative map and zone change applications is not located within an environmentally sensitive habitat or wetlands area as indicated on the City of Temecula General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element Figure 5-3 and the Potentially Sensitive Environmental Habitat Areas map. 4.e-f. 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 prior to the issuance of a grading permit. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 5.a, b The project site is not located in an area of sensitivity for archaeological resources pursuant to the General Plan (Source 1, Figure, 5-6). The Eastern Information Center of the University of California at Riverside (UCR) recommended in its response dated July 22, 2002, that a Phase I Cultural Resource Management Report be prepared to identify the potential for historical or cultural resources at the project site. The applicant submitted a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by a Cultural Resources Consultant in October 2002. The results of this assessment determined that no archaeological sites of either prehistoric or historical origin had been recorded within the property boundaries. A field survey conducted by the consultant on October 1, 2002 confirmed that no significant prehistoric or historical cultural resources were observed within the property boundaries. 5.c., d. The project site is located in an area that has high paleontological sensitivity pursuant to the General Plan (Source 1, Figure, 5-7). Therefore, at least one Paleontological Monitor will be present on the site at the commencement of and during all grading operations as a condition of approval to evaluate any significant cultural or historical resources encountered. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 6 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on X the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv. Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 6.a. (i-ii) The City of Temecula General Plan Fault Hazard Zone map Figure 7-1 and Environmental Hazards map show that there is an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone through the eastern section of the project site; therefore, ground shaking impacts are possible as a result of this project. The Fault Hazard Investigation prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co., Inc. reported that no evidence of faulting was identified within the exploratory Fault Trench-1 (FT-1), which was excavated across the existing State of California Fault -Rupture Hazard Zone. Additionally, based on the findings of the Fault Trench-2 (FT-2), no restricted use zones for habitable structures are considered necessary for the northeast corner of the subject property. 6.a. (iii-iv) The project site is not located within an area delineated as a liquefaction hazard zone and is not within an area of potential subsidence as indicated on the General Plan Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards map Figure 7-2. 6.b. The minimal amount of grading required for the proposed seven lot residential tentative tract map will be surficially and grossly stable if constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and will therefore not result in any significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil, and therefore will not have a significant impact. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 7 6.c. The project site is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. 6d. An expansion index test was performed on representative on -site soil samples collected for the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. The results of that test indicated that the expansion index for on -site soils were equivalent to a very low expansion potential and would therefore have no impact on creating substantial risks to life or property. 6.e. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be served with connection to the existing Eastern Municipal Water District public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incoroorated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 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 or loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 8 Comments: 7.a. The proposed project will have no impact in creating a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 7.b, c. The proposed project will have no impact involving the release of hazardous materials, substances, or emissions within the environment or one -quarter mile from an existing or proposed school site. 7.d. This project site is not nor is it located near a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7.e, f. 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 proposal. 7.g. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7.h. This project site is not adjacent to wild lands and therefore would be susceptible to high fire danger. However, during development review the proposed project will be required to comply with Fire and Building Codes to assure that all development is safe from fire danger. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the 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 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 9 g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 8.a. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The subdivision, and subsequent development, will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Regional Water Quality 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 less than significant. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b.,f. 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. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c, d. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on -site 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 hard scape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff, which is created. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.e. Due to the small scale of the proposed residential subdivision, the project will not 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 will be conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the subject site. In addition, the project will be conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.g-i. 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 and the dam inundation area as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.j. The project site will not be 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. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 10 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a.residents in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the of the state? EResult b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local eneral Ian, s ecific Ian or other land use Ian? Comments: 10.a. There are neither mineral resource designations nor any known mineral resources on this project site. 10.b. Development of the site has no potential to lose access to known and available mineral resources since none occur on the project site, nor is access required across the site to such resources. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X 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 ro ect? 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: 11.a. This project site is designated for the development of single-family residential housing units. The site is currently vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run. However, the proposal to divide the land will not create noise. No impacts will result from this project. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 11 11.b. This project site is designated for the development of single-family residential housing units. There will be no activities related to this subdividing of the property that would lead to exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Future residents of the homes will not be exposed to high levels of noise according to the noise contours shown in the General Plan. No impacts are anticipated. 11.c. Since the project site is designated for low -density residential development per the City's General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps, the proposed residential tract map is consistent with this land use designation. No unanticipated noise impacts will result from this project. 11.d. The future grading and home construction activity 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 very 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 in residential areas. No significant noise impacts are anticipated. 11.e, f. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public or private use airport, therefore, people working in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: 13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in an area where there is a scenic vista. The City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.b. No scenic resources will be damaged or altered as a result of this project. 13.c. The City's residential performance standards and General Plan Community Design Element and Subdivision Ordinance will ensure that the proposed land division residential properties is consistent with the goals and policies established by these documents. 13.d. The proposed project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare to adversely affect the day or nighttime views within the project area. RAT Mt2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 12 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associated 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 - f. The proposed residential tract map will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The later development of the parcels created by this project will incrementally increase the need for these services. However, those projects will contribute their fair share through the City's Development Impact Fees, park and recreation fees, and school district fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated from the proposed division of land. 14. RECREATION. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing 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. The project will have a less than significant impact on the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. The proposed residential tract map would eventually add a small number of single-family homes to the vacant property, which would likely increase the use of existing local parks and recreational facilities, but not to a significant level. The proposed subdivision will have a less than significant impact. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 13 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in X relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration 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.., farm equipment ? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inade uate arkin ca aci ? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bic cle racks)? Comments: 15.a-b. The proposed residential tract map with up to seven (7) single-family homes and slightly higher residential density above the target density will have no impact on increased vehicle traffic and levels of service on the local street system. 15.c. The proposed project will have no impact on a change in air traffic patterns to pose any risk to the public. 15.d. The proposed project will have no impact to substantially increase traffic hazards or risk to the public due to a design feature or incompatible uses. 15.d. The proposed project will have no impact on emergency vehicle access. The project will be reviewed and conditioned by City staff to provide proper emergency vehicle access. 15.e. The proposed project will have no impact on parking capacity. The project will be reviewed and conditioned by City staff to provide adequate parking capacity. 15.f. The proposed project will not conflict with nor impact adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation plans or programs. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 14 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X a licable Regional Water Qualit Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X Ec.a. wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate theproject's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 16.a., b. and e. The development of the property 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, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Moreover, the project will be conditioned to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards that will be monitored by the Department of Public Works. No significant impacts are anticipated. 16.c. The proposed residential tract map would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. No impact to existing water facilities is expected. 16.d. The proposed residential tract map and single-family homes will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. No impact to existing water supplies is expected. 16.f,g. The proposed residential tract map and single-family homes will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs and will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TA 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 15 17. AGRICULTURE 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: 17a,c. The project site is not currently in agricultural production. In addition, this property is not considered prime or unique of Farmland of statewide importance pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue. 17b. The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. As a consequence, there are no impacts related to this issue. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 16 C. Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: 17.a. This site is surrounded by low -density residential development and does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is a residential land division project and change of zone application and it does not have the potential to: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore the proposed project would not have an impact on fish and wildlife species. 17.b. The cumulative effects from the project are not considered significant because the subject site is being subdivided in conformance with the City of Temecula's General Plan, Development Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. 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. Given the project's consistency with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impact related to the development of a seven (7) lot subdivision and a minor density increase with approval of a zone change from L-1 to L-2 will not have a significant impact. 17.c. The proposed residential tract map and zone change entitlements would not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The project is designed and will be developed consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. 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. a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. C. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 18.a. Earlier analyses specifically related to this project site were not used because they were outdated. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study 18.b. All impacts related to this proposed project were adequately addressed and analyzed within this environmental initial study document. 18.c. No mitigation measures were required with this proposed project since there are no issues identified in the checklist that would be considered potentially significant unless mitigation was incorporated. RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 17 SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan, dated November 9, 1993. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, dated July 2, 1993. 3. City of Temecula Development Code. 4. City of Temecula Subdivision Ordinance adopted August 24, 1999. 5. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 6. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Jean Keller, Ph.D, October, 2002. 7. Fault Hazard Investigation, prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc., January 29, 2003. 8. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by T.H.E. Soils Co. Inc., February 10, 2003 RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\CEQA INITIAL STUDY EA DRAFT DOC.doc 18 ATTACHMENT NO.6 EXCERPT MINUTES FROM JUNE 22, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 12 35 ' RECOMMENDATION: 35.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Winchester Road Widening at Jefferson Intersection (Jefferson Medians) — Project No. PWOO-27. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified the staff report (of record). MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Washington who was absent. 36 Chaoarral Area Interim Pollcv RECOMMENDATION: 36.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO.04-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN INTERIM POLICY GUIDING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CHAPARRAL AREA ' By way of overheads, Planning Director Ubnoske highlighted the staff report (as per agenda material). Mr. Larry Markham, Temecula, advised the Council that he was in attendance to answer questions. Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero commended Planning Director Ubnoske and Community Services Director Parker and their staff for exploring ways to ensure trail connectivity to ensure relevant trails. Mayor Nagger commended Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and Mr. Markham on their efforts associated with the trail connection. MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to adopt Resolution No. 04-78. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Washington who was absent. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. RAMinutesN062204 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 EXCERPT MINUTES FROM APRIL 21, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 13 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 21, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, April 21, 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 Chiniaeff led the audience in the Flag salute. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, and Chairman Telesio. Absent: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Agenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of April 21, 2004. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of March 3, 2004. 3 Director's Hearing Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for March 2004. RAMinutesPC\042104 1 MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the Consent Calendar and requested to move Item No. 7 after No. 5. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. COMMISSION BUSINESS I, the General Plan after it is updated RECOMMENDATION 4.1 Recommend City Council Approval of the Chaparral Interim Policy Principal Planner Hogan presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: • That in developing the proposed policy, staff had discussions with an ad hoc City Council Subcommittee as well as the General Plan Community Advisory Committee (CAC); That both groups were of the opinion that development proposals that protect sensitive open space areas and provide local trail connections are desirable and have the highest potential for community wide benefits; • That the proposed interim policy is as follows: o Limit the gross density in the Chaparral area to one dwelling unit per acre, except for the tier of lots adjacent to Ynez Road where a density of two dwelling units per acre would be more appropriate; That a one unit per acre density allow half -acre sized lots to help preserve sensitive open space and habitat areas; o That all future developments provide trail dedications for the Citywide trail network when possible; • That the City Councilreviewed the policy direction received from the Subcommittee and the Commission Advisory Commission (CAC) and refer the matter to the Planning Commission for a formal recommendation. For the Commission, Mr. Hogan relayed that the land uses that are currently in the General Plan uses are currently in the General Plan interim policy; and that what is being proposed is to allow'/2 acre lots in what is currently a one -acre zoning district; that there are two different situations being proposed, one would be for the acre lots and the other project area is for the one -acre density with the ability to go down to an lots if the remaining is set is some form of open space. RAMinutesPC\042104 2 Mr. Hogan also relayed that for City -owned trails, proper maintenance would include: regular inspections, repairs and resurfacing as needed, weed control, safety signage, and stripping (if hard surfaced); that when the City trail facilities are constructed in easement areas, City liability for the trail is still covered through the General Plan Liability Policy; however, non -trail related liability will still remain the responsibility of the underlying property owners. Mr. Hogan further clarified that the proposed project is designed for large parcels; that it is a voluntary policy; that it would not apply to a person who would desire to build a home on their own lot; and that it would only apply if one were to have subdivisions of land. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Larry Markham, 41045 Enterprise Circle relayed that he is in favor of the project and noted that the proposed project would cut the density in half for the vast majority of the area with the exception of the parcels that are immediately adjacent to Ynez; and that it would allow flexibility on how to site the parcels with regard to clustering. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff's recommendation. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. It was the consensus of the Commission to combine Item No. 5 and 7. 5 RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Approve Findings of Public Convenience Per the request of Commissioner Guerriero, Item No. 7 will be reviewed after Item No. 5 California Road Associate Planner Long presented a staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: • That the proposed project is for a minor CUP that includes the Public Necessity and Findings for Target to sell beer and wine on site; That the separation of criteria in the Development Code requires 500 feet separation from any schools, parks, hospitals, or religious institution; • That staff was able to make the findings and recommends the approval for a minor Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as well as the findings for convenience; RAMinutesPC\042104 3 ATTACHMENT NO.8 EXCERPT MINUTES FROM MARCH 23, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 14 RESOLUTION NO.04-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ' TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO BEGIN A STREET CLOSURE OF MUIRFIELD DRIVE BETWEEN PECHANGA PARKWAY AND TROTSDALE DRIVE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PECHANGA PARKWAY — PHASE IIA — STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS (WOLF VALLEY CREEK CHANNEL — STAGE 1) FOR 30 CONSECUTIVE WORKING DAYS BETWEEN APRIL 2004 AND DECEMBER 2004 11 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Award a construction contract for Project No. PW04-04 Asphalt Crackfill Project — FY2003-2004 — various streets to Bond Blacktop, Inc. in the amount of $89,722.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 11.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $ 8,972.20, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-11. Councilman Stone seconded the motion and the electronic vote reflected unanimous. ' At 7:37 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:41 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. COUNCIL BUSINESS 12 Chaparral Special Study Area — Interim Policy RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Provide direction on how to address General Plan Land Use and Zone Change requests in the Chaparral Special Study Area. Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (of record) and responded to inquiries as follows, noting that the City Council's action would be the final action; that it would not be necessary for the Planning Commission to revisit this matter; that the proposed action would be policy direction, not a zone change; that any future zone changes will require City Council approval; that the General Plan Community Advisory Committee concurred with the proposed policy as it pertains to land use within the City; that the proposed policy will be solely interim for the purpose of codifying the interim policy in the General Plan, at which point, it will be permanent policy; and that the intent of this policy and its codification will be to maintain the rural environment and to maintain the trail system and to create new trail connections and new equestrian trails. RAMinutes\031604 Advising that the owners of properties within the discussed area would still have to be consistent with the hillside policies, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that owners could have the option to build one unit on the entire one acre or'% acre and set aside %z acre for open ' space. Councilman Roberts relayed his preference that the matter be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Larry Markham, 41635 Enterprise Circle North, noted that the transition policy for the 1.75 acre parcel adjacent to Santiago Road will remain the same as will the properties ranging from 21/2 acres to 1 acre and that this interim policy will reduce the L-2 zoning potential, reducing it to one unit per acre. Mr. Markham expressed support for the proposed action; concurred with Councilman Roberts that certain parcels, because of steep slopes, will not be designated as equestrian parcels and would be desirous of preserving the equestrian connection. Viewing this policy as a means to develop the area as was originally intended, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero expressed his support of the recommendation but concurred with Councilman Roberts that the Planning Commission be given the opportunity to review this interim policy prior to final approval. As a member of the General Plan Community Advisory Committee, Councilman Washington noted that the proposed policy will provide additional flexibility along with providing open space; noted that the Committee was in support of the policy; and concurred that the Planning Commission should be given the opportunity to review the policy. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero moved to forward this item to the Planning Commission ' for review and that the matter be readdressed by the City Council, within 30 days, for final approval. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and the electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. 13 Status Update — Senate Bill 87 (Hollingsworth) (At the request of the entire City Council.) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve amended language to Senate Bill 87 and urge Senator Hollingsworth and other members of the California legislature to approve SB 87 as amended. As was noted at the last City Council meeting, Mayor Naggar advised that the language submitted by the City with regard to this Senate Bill was accepted by Senator Hollingsworth's office and noted that the proposed action would ratify the amended language. City Attorney Thorson provided clarification of the amended language, advising that with this relinquishment, the City will not have to petition Caltrans for improvements the City may deem as necessary and in the best interest of the citizens' safety with the exception of signals that are in Caltrans jurisdiction. Mr. Sam Pratt, 40470 Brixton Cove, stated that the City of Temecula is not a traffic safe City for its citizens or visitors and that the City has failed to implement an affective Traffic Congestion Plan. RAMinuteM031604 ATTACHMENT NO.9 EXCERPT MINUTES FROM AUGUST 12, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 15 14 ' RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 03 _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02- 0371 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 TO SUBDIVIDE A 4.57 ACRE PARCEL INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS RANGING BETWEEN .5 AND .82 ACRES IN LOT AREA, LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 473 FEET NORTH OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 945-060-006 Principal Planner Hazen presented the staff report (as per agenda material); referenced correspondence received from residents as well as a petition of support; and commented on staffs recommendation to approve the request. in response to the City Council, Principal Planner Hazen and Public Works Director Hughes advised that with regard to street improvements, the City would condition a four -lot project the same way it would condition a seven -lot project; that because of the intensification, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees and Development Impact Fees will be imposed; that the intersection will be aligned; that because of traffic volume, the intersection will not be signalized; that the City is not the agency that governs the use of septic tanks/sewers; that the neighboring citizens had expressed a desire to conserve the rural lifestyle; and that staffs recommendation for approval of the request was based on best land use, not economics. Councilman Roberts expressed concern with a L-2 zone being surrounded by a L-1 zone. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, 41635 Enterprise Circle, provided background information with regard to the Meyler properly; noted that the Chaparral area has a series of policies to permit subdividing one acre lots to '% acre lots; that the area of discussion is the flattest parcel in Chaparral area; that if the seven -lot parcels were approved, the developer would implement sewer; that if only four parcels were approved, for cost reasons, septic tanks would be proposed; that an outreach program to educate the neighboring residents of the project was provided; that the residents to the east of the proposed project are in opposition to it; and that if four parcels were approved, the cul-de-sac would shorten by 60'. In closing, Mr. Markham relayed his concurrence with the staff report as well as the proposed conditions. By way of overheads, Mr. Craig Way, 28545 Old Town Front Street, described the type of development being proposed; relayed the continued demand for a market of $600,000 - $850,000 homes; and advised that all lots are rectangular; that four single -story residences and three two-story residences are being proposed; that although all residences will have similarities, each will be different; that three- to four -car garages are being proposed; that proposed development would be a gated community of high quality homes; and that it would not be financially feasible to construct four high -quality custom homes on one acre lots and to absorb the required cost of infrastructure. In closing, Mr. Way reviewed the proposed quality differences between the four -lot homes and the seven -lot homes. RAMinute W81203 Mr. Rick Hauser, 303000 Point Marina, Canyon Lake, further commented on the demand for $600.000 to $850,000 single -story homes, noting that the proposed two-story will only be two ' story in the front element and that the gated community will provide a sense of security. The following individuals spoke in support of the proposed project: • Mr. Charles Delgado 30270 Santiago Road • Ms. Chris Herman 29920 Via Serreto • Mr. Steve Lewis 30080 Santiago Road • Mr. George Zorb 40445 Calle Katerine The above -mentioned individuals spoke in support of the project for the following reasons: • That the size of the lot would not matter (1 acre or''% acre) as long as the homes are quality homes • That the proposed project will enhance neighboring property values and, thereby, enhancing the entire community • That the developer is a good developer • That if this quality project were not approved, what type of project could potentially be constructed. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the proposed project: • Ms. Dianne Tanna 30052 Santiage Road • Mr. Bob Burns 30112 Santiago Road ' • Dr. Steve Lis 30000 Santiago Road • Mr. Ralph Neimeyer 29962 Santiago Road The above -mentioned individuals spoke in opposition to the project for the following reasons: • Will not retain the rural atmosphere • Will not retain open space • Developer could sell the lots of discussion and a different project would be constructed • Will not improve property values Referencing previously made comments with regard to the Meyler property, Mr. Jim Meyler, 31813 Via Campanado, advised that he does not own the property and that he objects the use of his family when referencing that particular piece of property. At 10:03 P.M., a short recess was taken and the City Council resumed with the public hearing at 10:18 P.M. Apologizing to Mr. Meyler for the reference of his name in conjunction with that particular piece of property, Mr. Markham provided background information with regard to zoning designations for the area of discussion; advised of the requirements necessary to meet the approval of L-1 or L-2 zoning; noted that the developer has met those 11 requirements; reiterated that quality homes will be constructed; and requested the City Council's approval. ' As was mentioned by Deputy City Manager Thornhill, Councilman Comerchero reiterated that the General Plan Advisory Committee has been discussing this matter; noted that, in his opinion, either L-1 or L-2 should be approved, not a mixture of both; commented on the City's efforts to prohibit the County from zone changes during its General Plan process; stated that the RAMinutes\081203 10 City should adhere to those same expectations; and suggested that the General Plan Advisory Committee should further investigate this matter and make a recommendation. Concurring with Councilman Comerchero, Mayor Pro Tern Nagger relayed his support of the General Plan Advisory Committee addressing the matter and then make a recommendation to the Planning Commission for review. Concurring with his fellow Councilmembers, Councilman Roberts expressed his dismay with the applicant's presentation and his reference of certain homes and his negative description of them. Councilman Pratt relayed his concurrence with his fellow Councilmembers. As a previous property owner in the area of discussion, Mayor Stone stated that, to his understanding, the City Council's past direction with regard to this area was to retain it as a rural area such as Los Ranchitos; echoed Councilman Comerchero's comment with regard to the City imposing the same expectations on itself as what the City expects of the County; relayed his dismay with the applicant's presentation in reference to particular homes; stated that this City should provide a wide spectrum of housing opportunities; advised that unless the City were beneficiary of certain community improvements, this project does not provide any increased public amenities to justify approval of this project. Commenting on the statutory deadlines with regard to the Tentative Tract Map, City Attorney Thorson suggested that this item be denied without prejudice, allowing the applicant to readdress the matter at a later time. ' MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to deny this project without prejudice; to refer the matter to the General Plan Advisory Committee for further review; to follow the normal review process; and to waive associated fees with resubmitting the project if the General Plan Advisory Committee were to forward a recommendation of support. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Stone who voted no. 15.1 Approve the Negativ claration for the John Warner Road Assessment District and direct the City Clerk to a Notice of Determination with County Recorder, 15.2 Hold the public meeting and public he regarding the proposed Assessment District No. 03-04 (John Warner Road) an egrated Financing District No. 03-05 (John Warner Road) called pursuant to a resolu ' regarding the proposed districts adopted on June 24, 2003; 15.3 Allow the City Clerk to tabulate ballots from property owners ived prior to the close of the public meeting and public hearing regarding the prop-owd districts and allow the City Clerk to announce the results of the tabulation; ' 15.4 If the ballots received with regard to Assessment District No. 03-04 (John W er Road) are a majority (weighted by assessment obligation) in favor of the Assessment District, adopt a resolution entitled: RAMinutesk081203 11 ATTACHMENT NO.10 EXCERPT MINUTES FROM MAY 7, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 16 1 A me the Public Hearing was closed. RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Recommend to City Council, Adoption of a Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. 7.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO.2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA02-0372 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-1) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L-2), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006. 7.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO.2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0371 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30169 SUBDIVIDING ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT INTO SEVEN SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS ON 4.57 GROSS ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, OPPOSITE QUIET MEADOWS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 473 LINEAR FEET NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF SANTIAGO ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.945-060-006 Principal Planner Hazen provided an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: Change of Zone • That the applicant is proposing a Change of Zone from Low Density Residential (L-1) to Low Density Residential (L-2); CADocuments and Settings\Mcintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 11 • That the proposed Change of Zone will allow the applicant to subdivide the 4.57 gross acre into half -acre lots; that currently, the property is zoned (l-1) and would only allow one -acre minimum lot sizes; • That standard conditions of approval have been recommended; • That staff would recommend that a Home Owners Association (HOA) be created to provide maintenance responsibility for the common facilities such as the streets, rear - yard slopes, and a comer of open space at the northwest corner; • That the Department of Public Works would recommend the following modifications to the conditions of approval: o #11-F --all streets and driveway centerline intersections shall beat a 90 degrees; o #12-F --all intersections shall be perpendicular (90); o #33 -- all lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Principal Planner Hazen advised that he had received a phone call from the applicant regarding Condition NoA, noting the following: o B-2 - this project is within a liquidation hazard zone; i o B-3- this project is within Subsidence Zoning. • That both sections are required prior to recordation of the final map; • That staff would recommend that an Environmental Restraint sheet be filed and incorrectly noted that this site was within a liquefaction and subsidence zone; that staff would consent to the elimination of B-2 and B-3; • That after initial study of the project, staff has determined that there were no potentially significant environmental impacts; • That staff would recommend adoption of a Negative Declaration; • That City Council approval will be required; In response to Chairman Chiniaeff's query regarding the Murrieta Fault, Principal Planner Hazen relayed the following: • That a preliminary fault hazard study was submitted with this application; • That the area in reference is roughly 150 feet on the northeast corner; • That boring samples were taken and no evidence of fault ruptures were found; • That the Public Works Department would require detailed analysis prior to recordation of a map; C:\Documents and Set ingsV,4cintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 12 • That if evidence of a fault hazard were noted, the Public Works Department would not allow this map to record; • That the requested change of zone would require the affected lot to merge with the lot that is out of that zone, which could result into a six -lot map; but at this time, there is not such evidence. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that the final map cannot be recorded until it is determined whether or not a fault line is present. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened Mr. Larry Markham, 41635 Enterprise Circle North, representing the applicant, noted that the applicant would concur with the conditions of approval along with the modifications that Principal Planner Hazen has recommended. • That offsite trenching was completed to establish whether or not a fault line was present; • That trenching but not boring was performed; • That there was no evidence of any faulting that would require any setback on the property; J That a fault hazard investigation was performed; • That the open space lot will not be an open space lot and that it will be a portion of one of the lots; • That because it is a gated privacy subdivision, there will be a Homeowners Association (HOA); • That the project is not a part of the Los Ranchitos project; Ms. Lowrey, 29925 Via Serrito, spoke in favor of the project, noting that the new homes would be a great addition to the community. The following individuals spoke against the proposal: • Mrs. Cecelia Lewis • Mr. Steve Lewis • Mr. Robert Burns • Mr. Steve Lis • Ms. Dianne Tanna • Mr. Ralph Neimeyer 30080 Santiago Road 30080 Santiago Road 30112 Santiago Road 30000 Santiago Road 30052 Santiago Road 29962 Santiago Road The above -mentioned individuals spoke against the proposal for the following reasons: • That the Fire Department requires an ingress and egress; CADocuments and SettingsVAcintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 13 } • That the area is zoned for one house per acre; • That the residents enjoy living in a rural area; • That the residents enjoy having farm animals; • That the residents would like to see the property developed as one -acre lots. Mr. Dennis Marchand, 30176 Long Horn Drive, Marchand -Way Development, representing the applicant, noted the following: • That Marchand -Way Development specializes in building high -end residences; • That the homes that are being proposed are not simplistic, tract -style homes; • That the intention would be to build high -quality homes with architectural features and amenities, ornately themed, and European style designs of various sorts; • That the CC&Rs will entail architectural guidelines that must be met; • That there has been no decision as to whether these homes will be one- or two-story homes. 1 At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. ft"QN: Commissioner Guerriero moved to deny staff's recommendation. Commissioner Olhasso conded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval and to recommend to the City Camicil for a one acre minimum. At this time the 1.1 RECOMMENDATION: was closed. 8.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.'s PA02-KII and PA02-0607 (Development Plan) based on the Determination of Cc i project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was pre\ pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's Declarations; 5, PA02-0606, tency with a �u certified and gative CADocuments and Settings\Mcintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 14 ATTACHMENT NO.11 PETITION AND LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSAL RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).due 17 �l1LM1e 1 1,LO. To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS Z,V0� o v 9A _ - 4 C� �15 i /CoHC fi v h`:rZ N Y3'�yC -1 K/? SIGNATURES PETITION OF SUPPORT To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 74ot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS ��� � T� , i"qNi rh I1127i1Je z 37/�i �it�� ✓�� V�,)i_I«,o Rz SIGNATURES J7 7 To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 74ot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS e SIGNATURES V,NI� 'f fOW H /6 # tA1U1WY�y lli� ki-6 ( '!EA ��5 l��►1����,�� T), L� Lr�I/�/4G S i Z ��ryG�oNsv�L<� C E� tZ iz£r2f � T oT F - fl�) To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from LI (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS 2-6 ?,,)j2 14 e Lj 2 i2 <�',,17 7VLE EIV T Cl D Gl< SIGNATURES FI W- , OWN - F1 Imp— 11, vow-1to ow M y Y 1 Z WWWWWAV To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 74ot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS C(a 1 t L �.4A(h 11-f[ /Fro e/D T 7a A1,5,-7FR0UT-P)e 92S9Y 14" 04 Oic i2ryZ V14 i c%� cG ! 01 cvtq SIGNATURES To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Li (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high qu--lity custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAMR I ADDRESS �� v �'31 �- 0 13ulfwa4 ni- To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to LZ (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS -.I— Sv A'w A77 0l ✓ ti It ,�.Si.iC f�l�t�n�0 `i f GG/Io-�"�✓�?a�S �4 a 'aA►�. 3oq SIG1�FRES '� G PETITION OF SUPPORT SIGNATURES�n To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS C +� 9�D Pi k^ 441/067 AL& e `-) fr-e, +� y -V3rN.&t,�,- PETITION OF SUPPORT To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from Ll (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS L7 �SICn f6 ,em,n�1tan, S a Pwa� a �—T z�4 W3 i e �. y3�YG bUT���PiUUT�r I )eILI IV SIGNATURES AJ— 5; C-7- PETITION OF SUPPORT To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned neighbors support the 7-lot subdivision on Ynez Road north of Santiago and the zone change from LI (1.0 acre lots) to L2 (0.5 acre lots) for a custom home gated subdivision with high quality custom homes 3,000 square feet and above. NAME / ADDRESS ale, _ _ __ _ / 7 SIGNATURES AUG-11-200E 04:47 PM GUAMPACIFICPOMERCORP 6716466ZOT P.01 August 9, 2003 Mayor Jeff Stone City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P. 0. Boat 9033 Temecula, CA 92589.9033 Deer Mayor Jeff Stone: RE: PA 02-0371/03729 IM 30169 I qyendy own the house kmW at 30555 Belem St., Temecula in die Chaptard Bet m mighborhood. My house b one year old, 39700 sq. t on a half acre lot. I would like to go on mord, money m➢Pordng elm above Project for a zone dmP iiom 1.0 sae lots to % acre lots for a 7 kg mgaviAon. This Project offers a private pted street wlth Will quOy homes 39300 square feet or large. These homes will enbanoe des saes and help iname our property vsbm& I monaly Mae Your vote for M"vd of this project cc: J. Cometabero, City Council M. NOW, City COMCH S. Pam City Council R. Roberts, City Connorl MINEEMEMEN rah Sub): Marchand way Development on east side of Ynez Rd. just north of Santiago Date: 7/12/2003 8:54:10 PM Pacific Standard Time From: lowrgyhome@yahoo.com To: jstone@q councilor , rroberts@ci council.org, mnaggar@ci council.org, jcomerchero@citycouncii.org, sprattc!tvcoundl.org CC: seawayproperties aolcom Sent from the Internet (Detail) Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: am writing this letter, on my own initiative, and ccing Mr. Way, I'm sure to his surprise. We reside on 2.5+ acres beside the property that Mr. Way has planned for a development. I am referring to the Marchand Way development on the east side of Ynez Road, north of Santiago and South of Pauba. Currently, his land is nothing but an open field and we are very pleased that he has plans.to develop it into a private street with estate homes. From the start, we have supported his project I attended a Planning Commission meeting in support of his project His plans are not the typical 10,000 or less track home lots; these will be upscale homes on over 1/2 acre each with a private gated street We will be thrilled to see a neighborhood of nice homes and families instead of an open field. We are directly affected by his project, and we want you to know we are in support of his development I have not spoken to Mr. Way in over a month (maybe 2 months) so we have no idea where his plans stand with the City of Temecula. I was just looking out my kitchen window this afternoon at his open field and thought I would write a letter to the City in support of his project Sincerely, Elizabeth Lowrey 29925 Via Senito Temecula, CA 92592 cc: Craig Way Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! Tuesday, July 29, 2003 America Online: SEAWAYPROPERTIES August 1, 2003 Mayor Jeff Stone City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92599-9033 RE: PA 02-0371/0372,TM 30169 Proposed 7-lot''/2 Acre Subdivision Dear Mayor Stone: I live at 29920 Via Setrito (fronft on Ynez Road) a couple hundred feet from the proposed 7-lot'J Acre Subdivision on Ynez Road I have sees the map and plans for these custom production homes and I support this project. I think this use would be much better for our neighborhood than a climb, school, or modular/mamifachned homes. Sincerely, � Ciuistuie Herman 29920 Via Serrito Temecula, CA 92592 Cc: I Comerchero, City Council M. Naggar, City Council S. Pratt, City Council R Roberts, City Council August 4, 2003 Mayor Jeff Stone Cityof Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: PA 02-0371/0372,TM 30169 Proposed 74ot'% Ache Subdivision Dear Mayor Stone: We live at 29960 Via Serrito (fronting on Ynez Road) a couple hundred feet from the proposed 7-lot '% Acre Subdivision on Ynez Road. We have seen the map and plans for these custom production homes and we support this project We think this use would be much better for our neighborhood than a church, school, or modular/manufactured homes. Sincerely, Tack and Leslie Roripaugh 29960 Via Serrito Temecula, CA 92592 Cc: L Comerchero, City Council M. Naggar, City Council S. Pratt, City Council R. Roberts, City Council 08/08/2003 12:26 7146442367 J MICHAEL LANNI PAGE 01 AUIi-11-2003 NUN I1:14 eN FAX NO. P. 02 August 11, 2003 Mayor Jeff Stone City of Temecula 432M Business Park Dr. Temecula, CA W899033 RE; PA 02-0371 / 0372, TM30169 Dear Mr. Mayor. I own the 4.7 Acre vacant lot property located on Ynez Rd. in Temecula, a couple bundled feet to the North of the above project. My property was recently approved for 6 - 1/2 Acre Lots and 1 would like to go an record supporting the above project for a zone change from 1,0 acre tote to 112 acre lots for a 7 lot subdivision. This project offers a private gated street with high quality homes 3,300 or larger. These homes will enhance the area and help increase property values. 1 urge you to approve this project Sincerely, 7 1etwatrt.«wN, ATTACHMENT NO.12 ORAL ARGUMENT AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AS RECORDED IN THE MAY 7, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING (EXCERPT) RAT M\2002\02-0371 TR 30169 Quiet Meadow Rd\Staff Report MDP (8-9-04).doc 18 That if evidence of a fault hazard were noted, the Public Works Department would not • allow this map to record; • That the requested change of zone would require the affected lot to merge with the lot that is out of that zone, which could result into a six -lot map; but at this time, there is not such evidence. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that the final map cannot be recorded until it is determined whether or not a fault line is present. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened Mr. Larry Markham, 41635 Enterprise Circle North, representing the applicant, noted that the applicant would concur with the conditions of approval along with the modifications that Principal Planner Hazen has recommended. • That offsite trenching was completed to establish whether or not a fault line was present; • That trenching but not boring was performed; • That there was no evidence of any faulting that would require any setback on the property; • That a fault hazard investigation was performed; • That the open space lot will not be an open space lot and that it will be a portion of one of the lots; • That because it is a gated privacy subdivision, there will be a Homeowners Association (HOA); • That the project is not a part of the Los Ranchitos project; Ms. Lowrey, 29925 Via Serrito, spoke in favor of the project, noting that the new homes would be a great addition to the community. The following individuals spoke against the proposal: • Mrs. Cecelia Lewis • Mr. Steve Lewis • Mr. Robert Burns • Mr. Steve Lis • Ms. Dianne Tanna • Mr. Ralph Neimeyer 30080 Santiago Road 30080 Santiago Road 30112 Santiago Road 30000 Santiago Road 30052 Santiago Road 29962 Santiago Road The above -mentioned individuals spoke against the proposal for the following reasons: • That the Fire Department requires an ingress and egress; CADocuments and SettingsVAcintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 13 j • That the area is zoned for one house per acre; • That the residents enjoy living in a rural area; • That the residents enjoy having farm animals; • That the residents would like to see the property developed as one -acre lots. Mr. Dennis Marchand, 30176 Long Horn Drive, Marchand -Way Development, representing the applicant, noted the following: • That Marchand -Way Development specializes in building high -end residences; • That the homes that are being proposed are not simplistic, tract -style homes; • That the intention would be to build high -quality homes with architectural features and amenities, ornately themed, and European style designs of various sorts; • That the CC&Rs will entail architectural guidelines that must be met; • That there has been no decision as to whether these homes will be one- or two-story homes. At this time, the Public Hearing was closed. ON: Commissioner Guerriero moved to deny staff's recommendation. Commissioner Olhasso conded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval and to recommend to the City Caukcil for a one acre minimum. At this time the [: RECOMMENDATION: was closed. 8.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.'s PA02-KII and PA02-0607 (Development Plan) based on the Determination of Co' project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prei pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's Declarations; i, PA02-0606, tency with a )u certified and aative CADocuments and Settings\Mcintyk\Desktop\050703.doc 14 ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: First Extension of Interim Ordinance; Prohibition of "Medical' Marijuana Dispensaries PREPARED BY: William P. Curley, Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council, by a 4/5ths vote, adopt an ordinance entitled: URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING, CONTINUING, AND EXTENDING THE PROHIBITION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY BACKGROUND: The City Council has previously enacted an interim ordinance, effective on an urgency basis, which acted to prohibit the establishment of land uses that served as dispensaries of medical marijuana. The City Council charged staff with the task of evaluating if such land uses should be permitted and, if so, the recommendation for both land uses designations and operating regulations for such use. The staff has not completed the analysis and conclusions necessary to proffer the information sought to the City Council. As such is not completed, it is recommended that the City Council extend this interim ordinance for the initial time period authorized under California Government Code Section 65858. This period is ten months and fifteen days. R'BallmichWadjuana Ezlension.dw The condition precedents to the time extension: notice, publications and release of the status report ten days prior to the public hearing have been accomplished. The City Council may, if it deems it appropriate, adopt this interim ordinance which will cause the prohibition on the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries to be extended. This office will be present at the City Council meeting to address any questions you may have. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Urgency Interim Ordinance RMallreichWanjuana Ex ension.doc URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN URGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING, CONTINUING AND EXTENDING THE PROHIBITION OF 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 the extension of the provisions of the interim ordinance adopted on September 14, 2004 as Ordinance No. 04-09 as an urgency ordinance regulating land use within the City of Temecula. A. The City Council is adopting this extension of Ordinance No. 04-09 interim ordinance as an urgency ordinance, effective immediately and concurrently upon the lapse of Ordinance No. 04-09, 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 for ten (10) months, fifteen (15) days. B. The City Council has previously found the following: 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 R:/Ords 2004/Ords 04- 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. 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 ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from its adoption. The City Council may consider further 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 and are again made, confirmed, and adopted in support of this first extension of Interim Ordinance No. 04-09. B. REPORT SUPPORTING EXTENSION. The report required by California Government Code Section 65858 was prepared and available for review in conformance with legal requirements. A copy of the report is attached hereto as Attachment 1. C. 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. D. 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. E. CEQA COMPLIANCE. It can be seen with certainty that this first extension of Ordinance No. 04-09 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. F. PLANNING STUDIES. The City staff shall continue to take actions to promptly commence and complete 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. RJOrds 2004/Ords 04- 2 G. EXTENSION OF TIME. The Planning Manager and the City Clerk's office have undertaken all actions legally necessary to extend this interim ordinance in light of the fact the studies and reports desired by this City Council will not be concluded on or before the forty- fifth day subsequent to the initial adoption of this interim ordinance. H. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance extending Ordinance No. 04-09 and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of October, 2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) 1, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-_ was duly adopted and passed as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 261h day of October, 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/Ords 04- Attachment 1 Report Regarding Land Use Regulation of Dispensaries for the Sale of Marijuana for Medical Use Purpose The City Council of the City of Temecula, California has previously adopted its Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 04-09. The Interim Ordinance prohibits the location or commencement of a dispensary that sells or makes available marijuana for medical use purposes. A copy of the subject interim ordinance is attached hereto as Attachment 1 and, to the extent required to review this report, is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. All references, terminology and citations utilized in this report have the same meanings as are used in Attachment 1. Since the date of commencement of Interim Ordinance No. 04-09 City staff have reviewed the existing and proposed General Plan for the City of Temecula, including all individual elements. This is for the purpose of preliminary identification of such land uses consistency with existing and proposed goals, objectives and policies with these foundational documents. Analysis is ongoing but has not yet been completed due to the complexity of the involved issues and the need to integrate them into the previously established General Plan update process. Staff has not been able to complete the integration of the medical marijuana dispensary concept into the work program in a form sufficient to achieve a dispositive conclusion to both the land use and operational/regulatory issues that arise from such proposed land use. Further, the City Attorney's office is researching the legal issues arising under both State and Federal laws. The City Attorney's office is also communicating with other legal departments; such as the County of Riverside District Attorney's office. The results of this analysis will be integrated with the results of the General Plan and related land use issues. At the time the results of the combined research and analysis will be presented to the City Council for its review and further action. ITEM 18 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: usan W. Jones ity Clerk/Director of Support Services DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Community Services Commission Appointments PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary Cb RECOMMENDATION: Appoint two applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Community Services Commission through October 10, 2007. BACKGROUND: The terms of Commissioners Jack Henz and Felicia Hogan expired on October 10, 2004. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling Commission vacancies by advertising the openings in the local newspaper. Notices were also posted at various locations within the City and on the City's Web page. When the deadline was reached for accepting applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Naggar and Councilmember Washington for review and recommendation. Both Mayor Naggar and Councilmember Washington have recommended the reappointment of Jack Henz and Felicia Hogan to serve full three-year terms through October 10, 2007. All applicants are registered voters and live within the City of Temecula. Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of October 5, 2004 ATTACHMENTS: Three (3) Applications for Appointment Agenda Reports\Appointment Community Services City of Temecula 432oo Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.citvoftemecula.ora Application (909)694-6444 For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula kP 15 2004 CLERKS DEFT. Please Check One: Planning x Community Services Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident L6 NAME: Jack A. Henz Public Traffic Safety Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes OCCUPATION: Realtor ADDRESS: 43009 Manchester Court, Temecula, CA. 92592 DAYTIME PHONE: 909-676-5736 EMPLOYER NAME: Rancon Real Estate EVENING PHONE: 909-302-2352 EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 27740 Jefferson Suite 100 Temecula, CA. 92590 E-MAIL jhenz@rancon.com Educational Background/Degrees: BSEE, MSEE, Completed all course work for PhD in Electrical Engineering. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Temecula Community Services Commission 1995- Present Torrance Human Resources Commission 1980- 1983 List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors (Past President) California Association of Realtors (Past Director), National Association of Realtors Southwest Riverside County Fire Safe Council (Chair Person) State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I beheve that Community Services are a basic element to be provided in the city structure. Parks, recreation facilities and programs, senior facilities, library services, fine arts, and historic preservation are all factors to be included in the city plan. Temecula is a growing community and Community Services must grow, expand and assume new and increasing roles. I believe my educational background, my professional involveprent in the community, and my past nine years of service on the Commission qualify mcAo-646tinue as a member of tWCommunity Services Commission. release of return to. City C�l�fk's Office, Mai to: P.O. Bo PLEASE BE purposes. Date; 9/14/04 200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) 033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemocula.org Application (909)694-6444 Please Check One: / Planningy Community Services Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident NAME: / e6 f W1 ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRE Public Traffic Safety Are you a City Registered Voter? _ EVENING PHONE: E-MAIL Educational BackgroundA)egrees• " 31': e-Y l's Leo// 'diet r !/%la��� ro�%. tECE1VED EP 2 2 2004 CLERKS DEPT. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on whic you have served and the year(s) of s ry}ce: List any organizatio s whic you belong Sprofession , technical, community service): �inedala F4 Arden G ublal � use Saci e7e- or?eeccFa Vo�l�� / lP.r77e�ulA �rt/�e -i�/sforiCa/ a�/� State why you wish to serve on this corn ission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of ni formation for public information purposes. . r Signature41 Date: 4 Pleas re urn to: Ci y er s Office, 432QO Business Park Drive (9 9) 94-6444 (OR) it to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE Off 11-7 lr)t' 11 jo V:)dI54 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 10-E4-04A10:21 RCVD Commission Appointment Application IRECEIVED CT - 4 2004 CLERICS Lev—, Please Check One: Planning __/ Community Services. _/ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident / 7 Are you a City Registered Voter? 469-5 11 NAME: OCCUPATION: ei exit— r itI t-C'i ADDRESS: �Fz4�� ��2YtS^TP mPtaa_ll� DAYTIMEPHONE: b-7(6-19!{+ EVENING PHONE: 5u.m2 EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: ffc; ,n S t .-f a nt. E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: 6 A) ,M.S. � C'o1.,�-mbZa� t�.�nlversl'4-y�,jmurnalls++�) List any City or County Board, Committee or Co mission on which you have served and the year(s) of service:, Mice 42akt-fAar,t 241 trtueye r ea&. wd Ae.2G6ol%�) List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): �lemloen-o'�-carish Gm-ncil1 �.Dtt'e�holasD�dm-CCkW%kTV iw� r r� State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) lov'� Li�! tivex}naAj r`s �w.� 4V ae_ip c e44te.11ex1cG. dig 4+,Z�P�ere.t vxoxias' v(149S6-.�ia�� Z sewed ass 6n�'armci.l� a 6L 1, l lncor�ecc i�d+t.a.� tr�8�. I understand that an or all information on this form may be verified..I consent to the release of this inf ' ion f He information purposes. j Signature: Date: /B A-15� Please retur o: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE ITEM 19 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIN E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: irp�san W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services DATE: ctober 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointment PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary Cz RECOMMENDATION: Appoint two applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission through October 10, 2007. BACKGROUND: The terms of Commissioners Darrell Connerton and Paul Jacobs expired on October 10, 2004. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling a Commission vacancy by advertising the opening in the local newspaper. Notices were also posted at various locations within the City and on the City's Web page. When the deadline was reached for accepting applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Naggar and Councilmember Stone for review and recommendation. Mayor Naggar has recommended the re -appointment of Paul Jacobs and the appointment of Tomi Arbogast. Councilmember Stone has recommended the re -appointment of Darrell Connerton and Paul Jacobs. They are both full terms through October 10, 2007. Of the seven applications received, five are registered voters and live within the City of Temecula. Also included are two applications from people who are not yet residents. One is from Brian Freeman who is purchasing a home in the Harveston area. Mr. Freeman advised that the escrow is due to close the end of October (possibly beginning of November). The second is from Christopher Curran who lives in the Redhawk area and will not officially become a City resident until July 1, 2005. The City Attorney has advised that these two additional applications be presented for the Council's consideration. Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of October 5, 2004 ATTACHMENTS: Seven (7) Copies of Applications for Appointment. Agenda Reports/Appointment Traffic Commission ., City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application (909)694-6444 For proper consideration, youmust currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula ' vA t � ER1�S bhp . Please Check One: 00 Cr" =Planning =Community Services Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 3 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: Charles Arthur Araujo, Jr. OCCUPATION: Management Consultant ADDRESS: 43967 Northgate Avenue, Temecula 92592 DAYTIME PHONE: 951-587-8216 EVENING PHONE: 951-587-8434 EMPLOYER NAME: CastlePointe Management Consultants (CastlePointe, LLC) EMPLOYER ADDRESS: P.O. Box 522, Temecula 92593 E-MAIL caraujo@castlepointe.com Educational Background/Degrees: Attended University of Southern California, Cal Poly Pomona and Various Community Colleges List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: None List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): I serve on the board of the Arts Council of Temecula Valley, serve as 2nd Vice President of the Temecula Valley Congress of Republicans and on the Advisory Board of VNW Circle of Care, a Temecula -based food ministry. In the past, I have served on a site council of an elementary school, have participated as a member of several Chambers of Commerce and have served as both a coach and referee for AYSO. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) See attached. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public Information purposes. Date: q/Z'?L� Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula Commission Appointment Application 2"d Sheet, Charles Arthur Araujo, Jr. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position: First and foremost, I wish to serve our community in a meaningful way. I believe that traffic concerns and public safety issues are two of the most significant factors that determine our quality of life. I believe that Temecula has done a fabulous job in these areas and our community has reaped the benefits of these efforts. Nonetheless, Temecula continues to grow and progressive ideas and creative solutions are required to maintain the safety and small-town atmosphere that makes Temecula such a wonderful place to live. While I do not have a formal background or training in these areas, I do believe that I offer two traits that will enable me to serve on the commission effectively: • My ability to systematically analyze a situation, identifying all sides of an issue. • My ability to work with people holding differing views and to help them make a fair and sound decision. My career in technology and management consulting has given me a wealth of experience in leading teams to achieve common goals. I believe that if given the opportunity to serve, I will be a rational voice on the commission, dedicated to finding solutions that serve the greater good. I will bring a straight -forward approach, rooted in common sense and committed to serving with a smile. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application For prgper consideration; yot must c;ii"nty be a resident of the : City of TenrecUla and a Registered Voter In the City of Temecula. RECEIVED SEP 17 2004 CITY CLERKS DEPT. Please Check One: ®Planning ®Community Services Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 12 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: Tomi Arbogast ADDRESS: 43221 Corte Cabrera, Temecula 92592 OCCUPATION: Public Relations & Marketing DAYTIME PHONE: (951) 302-6640 EVENING PHONE: same EMPLOYER NAME: n/a EMPLOYER ADDRESS: n/a ,,,II tomi@pe.net Educational Background/Degrees: BA, University of California at San Diego MPH, Boston University List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Temecula Citizen Corps, Program Administrator - 2003/present Traffic Safety Community Campaign-1998/99 List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Temecula Citizen Corps, Program Administator Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, Past Chairman of the Board State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) Please see attached letter. I understand that any or all information on this forth may be verified. I consent to the release of this Information for public Information purposes. l\ 0 - Date: September 16, 2004 Please return to: City Clerk's fQ�f e, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline TOMI ARBOGAST 43221 Corte Cabrera • Temecula, CA 92592 • (951) 302-6640 E-MAIL: totni@pe.net September 16, 2004 City of Temecula City Clerk's Office 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 To Whom It May Concern: Thank you for the opportunity to apply for a position on the Public Traffic Safety Commission for the City of Temecula. I believe that being able to serve in this capacity is a great honor. For the past twelve years, I have been a resident of Temecula. Over the years, I have been involved with many great organizations in our city from the Rotary Club of Temecula to the Boys and Girls Club as well as the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce (TVCC). More recently I have had the great privilege as serving as the Program Administrator for the Temecula Citizen Corps (TCC) for the past 18 months. Through this position I have worked intimately with both the police and fire departments within Temecula to promote disaster preparedness and crime prevention within our neighborhoods. I feel that through this program, I have been able to establish a strong working relationship with our public safety officials as well as gaining a keen understanding of what their roles are and how that interfaces with our citizens. Of course, through my time as a board member and Chairman of the Board with the TVCC, I learned a great deal about our city government, those who represent us and how we all work together to make this a great place to live. What an opportunity forme to be able to take those experiences and knowledge to be able to serve on this commission and help to preserve the quality of life that we all treasure. I look forward to the challenge and appreciate your consideration of me for this position. Sincerely, Tomi Arbogast TOMI ARBOGAST 43221 Corte Cabrera • Temecula, CA 92592 (951) 302-6640 • E-MAIL: tomi@pe.net EXPERIENCE 2003-present Program Administrator Temecula Citizen Corps Temecula, CA Recruit, coordinate, direct & manage 125+ volunteers within the program Provide them with direction, training and resources. Serve as the spokesperson for the program. Promote the Temecula Citizen Corps through public presentations to the community at large. Assist with marketing and promotions of program. Work with the Temecula Police Department's Liaison and Crime Prevention Officer and have experience in the chain of command in a paramilitary setting. interface with all public safety agencies to provide disaster preparedness and crime prevention education. Serve as a liaison to the Temecula Citizen Corps Council. Provide direction and input from the volunteer perspective. Work with Council on developing administrative policies and procedures, establishing a budget & strategic plan, as well as assessing volunteer needs of training and equipment. Assist with procurement of donations of goods and services with direction and guidance from the Temecula Citizen Corps Council. Meet regularly with Quadrant Directors and District Coordinators for coordination and management of resources, progress and goals. Coordinate & chair quarterly all -volunteer meetings. Coordinate & staff community events that promote the TCC program. Create marketing materials, including 4-color brochure, flyers and forms. Assist with administrative duties, including creation of forms, letters, promotional packets, PowerPoint presentations, etc. 2000-2003 Director ofMarketing dr Business Development Stadium Pizza Temecula, CA ■ Developed and executed all advertising, promotions and business marketing development for all locations. ■ Developed company's strategic business and marketing plan for each fiscal and calendar year, analyzing its results on a quarterly basis and recommending necessary adjustments throughout the year. ■ Conducted monthly, quarterly and annual Return on Investment reports on all advertising and promotional events. ■ Produced and coordinated all special events and promotional programs with organizations such as the Padres Single -A Minor League Baseball Team, the Lake Elsinore Storm and special fundraisers for local cancer victims. ■ As management staff analyzed current practices, addressed key issues and developed solutions and best practices regarding operations, staff development, training & education, job safety and customer service. • Company spokesperson and liaison to all local media. 1998-2000 Director of Occupational Healtb Sendces Inland Valley Regional Medical Center Wildomarq CA ■ Developed a new hospital product line requiring development of policies, training, market assessment, goals and strategies and financial monitoring mechanisms. ■ Standardized current work practices and established understanding of current workers' compensation laws, regulations and guidelines. Developed and operated a comprehensive, cohesive occupational health program, including business development, physician relations and consistent communication with all parties. Monitored and tracked all administrative processes, documentation and utilization of services. 1995-1998 Public Relations Coordinator Inland Valley Regional Medical Center Wildomar, CA • Launched Service Excellence, the hospital's customer relations program that involved the education and training of over 450 employees, resulting in an increase in the overall patient satisfaction and community image. ■ Developed relationships with key opinion leaders and organizations, resulting in improved community image, broader community support of the hospital and its programs and Business of the Year Awards for five consecutive years from local Chambers of Commerce. ■ Participated in developing the hospital's strategic business plan and marketing plan. ■ Coordinated special events for the hospital, including volunteer recruitment, physician participation and community outreach. EDUCATION 1992 Boston University, Boston, MA Master of Public Health (HealtbAdministration). 1990 UC San Diego, San Diego, CA B.A., Urban Studies and Planning (Health dr Human Senices) City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application (909)694-6444 IRSEEIVED For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula S P 2 3 2004 CITY CLERICS DEPT. Please Check One: ©Planning =Community Services FV7 Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident _/O _ Are you a City Registered Voter? 4°S NAME: DARRELL L. CONNERTON ADDRESS: 31618 Corte Rosario DAYTIME PHONE: (951) 693-1994 OCCUPATION: Consultant Temecula, CA 92592 EVENING PHONE: (951) 693-9103 EMPLOYER NAME: DLC Consulting and Construction Management EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 31618 Corte Rosario Temecula, CA 92592 E-MAIL dlc37@aol.00m Educational Background/Degrees: High School, Schools associated with the construction industry. I hold a State of California Contractors "B" license. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Presnetly the Chairman of the Public Traffic/Safety Commission (6), Presently the Treasurer of the Republican Central Committee, Riverside County (3), Member of the State Republican Central Committee (3), Chairman of the State Treasurers Association (2) List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) American Society of Professional Estimators (ASPE) Lincoln Club of Southwest Riverside County (LSWRC) Temecula Valley Congress of Republicans (NCR) State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I wish to continue to serve on the Public Traffic Safety Commission to continue to help solve some of the existing traffic problems and through forward planning, possibly make recommendations to minimize future problems. I feel I am qualified because of problem solving methods used during my construction experiences. 1 understand that or all information on this fo may be verified. I consent to the release of this Information for public Informati urpos s. Signature: _ _ Date: September 22, 2004 Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application (909)694-6444 RECEIVED FpYp%pe(eonspl@mtiop yowtnust�cliMntlybe*,oWdentofthg Chy or T@jhac�fla'and p Rg�listlretl Veter in the * of Tian Jla S 2 9 2004 CITY CLERKS DEPT. Please Cheek One: ®Planning LL1 Community Services ®✓ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 5 Are you a City Registered Voters Yes NAME: Steven L Dehlinger OCCUPA71ON: Business Owner ADDRESS: 41234 Sea Island Court, Temecula CA 92591 DAYTIME PHONE: 951-522-9478 EVENING PHONE: 951-522-9478 EMPLOYER NAME: American Real Estate Inspection (Owner) EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 41234 Sea Island Court, Temecula CA 92591 E-MAIL proinspect7@msn.com Educational Background/Degrees: My background is in electronic manufacturing, I owned and operated my own Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing company in Anaheim for 25 years. I am curently a General Contractor and own a local Property Inspection Company here in Temecula. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: None List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): I belong to several Home Inspection associations and served as past President of the local CREIA chapter. I am a member of the local SRCAR Board of Realtors and have served as past President of the affiliates group. 1 am a Licensed General Contractor, International Code Council Professional Member, and I recently passed the State of California exam to secure my Real Estate License. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) 1 want to serve on the commission to give back to this community that has done so much for me and I care so much about . I crisscross through town three or four times a day on my property inspection runs. My hands on experience in the local commercial and residential real estate market and long hours on these roads every day qualify me to sit on the coryrhission and serve the commuters and citizens. I understand that any o 0 o f Is form maybe verified. I consent to th:mle/ase thisinformation for public information Signature• Date:� ? ase return to: C' Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694 6444 (OR) A, to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.dtyoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 0 05-,04PO4+05 ": Commission Appointment Application iVED 5 2004 LERV,S DEPT. P/esse Check One: ®Planning ©Community Services F— Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 6 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: James D. Dent ADDRESS: 41791 Cascades Court Temecula 92591 OCCUPATION: Retired Police Sergeant DAYTIME PHONE: (909) 506-6639 EVENING PHONE: Same EMPLOYER NAME: City of San Diego Police Department (Retired) EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 1401 Broadway San Diego, Ca 92101 E-MAIL jluvbbluvj@aol.com Educational Background/Degrees: Life Time Teaching credential - Criminal Justice - San Diego State University List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: State of California Police Officers Standards and Training Committee San Diego County Chapter, January 1989 to September 1994. List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Vice President Temeku Hills HOA - 2002 President Temeku Hills HOA 2003 /z o-&4 State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) Please See Attached. 1 understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public Information purposes. _ K Date: /y 3 —o y Please etum : City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula Commission Appointment Application Public Traffic Safety James D. Dent 41791 Cascades Court Temecula, California 92591 I spent the majority of my Law Enforcement career in the area of Traffic Safety, Accident Investigation, Traffic Law Enforcement and Education. Since moving to Temecula from San Diego I have found a community that takes great pride in its Roadways and Traffic Safety issues. I feel that I could contribute to these ideals and give further to the community that I now call home. Please accept the following information as my resume for consideration for this position on the Public Traffic Safety Commission. 1969-1994 San Diego Police Department Assignments: 1969-1971 Patrol Duties 1971-1972 Accident Investigation 1972-1975 Motorcycle Officer 1975-1982 Detective Hit & Run Detail 1982 Promoted to Sergeant 1982-1984 Supervisor Patrol 1984 1985 Supervisor Communications Division 1985-1986 Supervisor Traffic Division 1986-1989 Supervisor Motorcycle Unit 1989-1994 Supervisor Training and Development Division Specific Related Duties: Investigate Traffic Collisions Enforce DUI and Traffic Related Violations Make Traffic Safety Recommendations Follow-up Investigations of Fatal and Felony Collisions Supervise Accident Investigations Supervise Speed Enforcement Units Supervise Special Details such as Presidential Visits, Olympic Events, Runs and Stadium Events (Chargers, Padres, SDSU etc.). Supervise In -Service Training Unit Courses Taught at The San Diego Police Academy, Southwestern College and Miramar College: Basic Accident Investigation Hit & Run Investigation Crime Scene Investigation Interview and Interrogation Verbal Judo Community Orientated Policing Cultural Awareness Thank you for considering my application for the Public Traffic Safety Commission. James D. Dent 09-13-.04PO3295 RCVD City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application (909)694-6444 For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter In the City of Temecula Please Check One. = Planning F7 Community Services Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 9 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes Paul Jacobs OCCUPATION: Licenesed Psychiatric Technician ADDRESS: 32370 Corte Zamora, Temecula, CA 92592-6368 DAYTIME PHONE: 951.676.1950 EVENING PHONE: 951.676.1950 EMPLOYER NAME: Fairview Developmental Center (State of CA) 2501 Harbor Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92626 TemeculaPaul@aol.com Educational Background/Degrees: I graduated from high school via an equivalency exam and completed a 2-year nursing program at Cypress college, CA. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: I have served on the Public Traffic/Safety Commission since Feb. 2004 and continue as a member of the General Plan Community Advisory Committee. In the year 2000, 1 served on the Temecula/Murrieta Traffic Awareness Now committee. List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Currently, I serve as a member of the Vintage Hills Planned Community Association Board of Directors (Vice- president) and I am also a member of the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians state employee bargaining unit. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I have really enjoyed my short tenure on the TrafficfSafety Commission and feel that I complement my collegaues on the commission with my perspective and experience. As a columnist for 'The Californian' I have been able to publicize community safety programs such as the Citizen Corps, CAP and otherwise promote public safety. I have a long history of interest in public safety, such as promoting lighted address signs within our homeowner's association and successfully requesting signalization on Meadows Parkway to safeguard pedestrians and drivers. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this Informatixnr for public Information purposes. Date: Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline iDdIa�5 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Please Check One: 10-84�04A70;21 RC,VD Commission Appointment Application CEIVED Planning / Community Services. r' Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident % Are you a City Registered Voter? NAME: P0, -k7y [ee T - 5 OCCUPATION: IS a rrttre`}i rE ADDRESS: 4z4/,W i4pytll_ SF DAYTIME PHONE: b-7(6-19 j+ EVENING PHONE: 5a.Yne- 4LWKayl; I.i.7TT=i EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 4-2-96 S- HrP-r?c,-51-.`rent. E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: 6 A) L bd U. o �- Avi-ior M- 15. ) Co t u_-mb 10 LLV'k vets i +/(Aowr'na j I.Svn) CT - 4 1004 CLERKs 6fiv ', Pn.rtj 'T� List any City or County Board, Committee or Cofnmission on w ich you have served and the year(s) of service:_Vi ce 422kt-�aOt C-(1-7 Crteoe-re nna,S ►fee, Ct� Sit) List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service):l me..m6er-0`�-6-oi64 Cain-"CIL/ 5v+,0t'-ho(a5Dft6dm�6chinch`I e,4/ State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) -I C-�-�y T- 1I ve_I t a,1d-t�=24- �� * r w P YriP,`tw�A1n i� y e�eel(ea,CG. gig dl, ehere1 ptpnq J2rCl�fFS6-4a%I Z serve.C✓�-O�s I.r..�ormc3J� i.�t�a�-'1c�a.1 � nc�;.�mr n.w'4-) l iv�c.� np oc���.�- a,v ��-%��. I understand that apy or all information on this form may be verified.1 consent to the release of this In moon f9rV- lic information purposes. Date: JB A- x Please returVbo: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE ,to `85.04A'39+59 R�VD City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 Application www.cityoftemecula.org PP (909) 694-6444 aECEIVED - 5 2004 CITY CLERKS DENT. Please Check One. =Planning = Community Services ✓� Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 0 Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: Brian Freeman ADDRESS: 40333 Logan Court, Temecula, CA 92591 DAYTIME PHONE: 951-587-3310 EMPLOYER NAME: KB Home OCCUPATION: Project Manager EVENING PHONE: 951-757-9529 EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 26201 Ynez Rd, Suite 104, Temecula, CA 92591 bfreemanl5@yahoo.com Educational Background/Degrees: Bachelor of Science in Economics from the United States Military Academy at West Point List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Lake Placid Olympic Training Center Athlete's Board, 2 years List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): US Army Individual Ready Reserves Association of Graduates, West Point State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) Please see attached paper. I understand that any or all Information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this Information for public information purposes. _ Date: 4 October 2004 Please retum to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline My interest in joining the Public Safety and Traffic Commission stems from a desire to serve my community. After leaving the Army this past May my wife, Charlotte, and I chose to settle our family in Temecula. We purchased a new home in Harveston, and have enjoyed several community activities over the past few months. Traveling around Temecula has revealed a few growing pains of which I would like to be a part of solving. We need to relieve congestion on our main thoroughfares, curtail aggressive driving, and maintain a proactive stance on the City's emergency services. My current job as a project manager, my background in team sports, and my experiences in the Army make me a good fit for this commission. As a project manager for KB Home I understand the importance of controlled, sustained growth. While on the US National Bobsled Team I competed on many teams, each with a unique dynamic I helped to develop and maintain. In the Army I relied on team input and consensus building; because relying on authority alone, in the long run, gets nothing done. Additionally, I am used to making decisions in stressful situations, and implementing creative, "outside the box," ideas. The City of Temecula needs to relieve traffic on its main thoroughfares. We need to create new roads to increase connectivity in the East, and to relieve flow onto, and off of the freeways. Front loading the funds for the Winchester project will speed up relief. With regards to the Murrieta Hot Springs expansion, the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta need to take the lead on construction. The cities should create a joint fee agreement to repay construction costs, rather than waiting on frontage development. Better signal coordination specific to the time of day and traffic demands will also bring relief. Additionally, we need an interim solution to curtail aggressive driving on our roads, especially from left -turn lanes. Temecula should install and advertise traffic enforcement cameras at key intersections. Through deterrence, cameras will decrease accidents, and increase the flow of traffic while our long-term solutions take shape. The Commission must also proactively maintain the level of emergency services needed to keep pace with the City's growth. We cannot allow our emergency medical centers to deteriorate as is happening in some areas of Southern California. For example, the Faster Ambulance Service in Temecula (FAST) program needs periodic evaluation to make sure ambulances are able to respond in five minutes. We should ensure organizations like the Temecula Citizen Corps (TCC) and other volunteer organizations receive adequate support. By taking a proactive stance we send the right message to our residents and those considering this area for living, business, and pleasure. Lastly, I want to reiterate my desire to serve in a public capacity. Since leaving the Army I have been looking for a way to become involved. While I work in Temecula and I am a registered voter, I am not yet a resident, as we do not close on our home until late October. Yet, in anticipation of our Temecula residency and our current level of involvement, I want to begin my civil service now. City of Temecu 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 �r�TMn� 1I0-85-04P'2:32 RCYI) OCT 0 52004 Appointment Application *oY' )rgoer consIdOration,ryou-muo currgntly be.a, resident of the City of Tetmecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecula. Please Check One: ®Planning ®Community Services ®✓ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 1 _ Are you a City Registered Voter? Yes NAME: Christopher B. Curran ADDRESS: 33048 Romance Pi. DAYTIME PHONE: 951-308-1307 OCCUPATION: 9-1-1 Police Dispatcher EVENING PHONE: 714-270-3718 EMPLOYER NAME: City of Huntington Beach Police Department EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 2000 Main St. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 E-MAIL cbcurran@cox.net Educational Background/Degrees: B.A.- UC Irvine - Social Ecology w/an emphasis in Criminology, Law, and Society List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: N/A List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): HBPOA-Police Officer's Association -Member, PORAC-Member, Chancellor's Club-UC Irvine -Member State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) With more than 8 years in the law enforcement profession, I have had an opportunity to witness and be involved in activities that are important to the community. As a member of the Commission, I would look to use my experience to help better serve the residents and businesses of Temecula in meeting Public Safety needs and concerns. In my career, I have dealt with budgets, city ordinances, nuisances, trafffic, and many other concerns of the community and I look forward to helping Temecula solve similar problems and concerns. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this Information for public informatiop pprpospsi e Date: 10-4-2004 Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline ITEM 20 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FI CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: usan W. Jones ity Clerk/Director of Support Services DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Schedule— December 2004 RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to the City Clerk to re -schedule or cancel a meeting in December 2004, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. BACKGROUND: During the month of December, the second regularly scheduled meeting falls on December 28th. Since this date falls only three days after Christmas, it may not be the best date to hold a meeting. As options the City Council could choose to either hold the regularly scheduled meeting on December 14, 2004, and cancel the December 28, 2004 meeting, or schedule two meetings in December as follows: December 7, 2004, and December 14, 2004. As previously discussed, there are no known conflicts the month of November, and public hearing notices have been published. FISCAL IMPACT: Changes of dates for City Council, TCSD and RDA meetings will result in no additional cost to the City. ITEM 21 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council 4illiam FROM: G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Freeway Bridge Fencing PREPARED BY: Beryl Yasinosky, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide direction to staff regarding the installation of additional barrier fencing on freeway bridges within the City of Temecula. BACKGROUND: At the request of Councilmember Ron Roberts, this report has been prepared to initiate discussion concerning fencing on freeway bridges located within the City. There are four bridge crossings over 1-15 within the City of Temecula; Winchester Road, Overland Bridge, Rancho California Road and Santiago Road. These facilities are under the jurisdiction and operation of Caltrans District 8. On Winchester Road, Rancho California Road and Overland, sidewalks, and fencing were installed along the north side of the bridges. The Santiago Road bridge was constructed prior to the City's incorporation and includes a sidewalk along the north side, and fencing on both sides of the bridge. Typically Caltrans does not install fencing along bridges where sidewalks are not provided. All existing roadway and pedestrian improvements meet or exceed the current Caltrans' Highway Design Manual standards for Bridge Barriers and Railings (Section 208.10). Caltrans has indicated that new supplemental fencing can be considered on existing freeway bridges in some cases. They have recently drafted a standard plan specification for "retrofit" fencing that is expected to be approved by the Caltrans' Office of Special Funded Projects/Structures and included in the upcoming edition of the revised Caltrans' Highway Design Manual. If the new standard plan will work on our bridges Caltrans indicated that the review and approval may take approximately 6-10 weeks. However, in the event the bridge railing d oes n of meet the s pecification requirements, the fencing would need to b e specially designed and engineered, resulting in a more lengthy and detailed review by the Caltrans. Caltrans has indicated that they do not have discretionary funding available for the installation of supplemental fencing on bridges that exceeds their design and construction standards. Individual jurisdictions may fund these additional improvements if they desire. Based on staffs preliminary estimates, the installation costs for pedestrian fencing that is consistent with the Caltrans standard would be approximately $50,000.00 per side of each bridge. R:Agenda Reports\2004\102604\FreewayBridgeGencing FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Caltrans' fencing examples R:Agenda Reports\2004\102604\FreewayBridgeGencing 20042 HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL November 1, 2001 Figure 208.10C Pedestrian Railings for Bridge Structures CHAIN LINK RAILING TYPE CHAIN LINK RAILING TYPE 7 (MODIFIED) CHAIN LINK "RAILING (1,0 ri1) DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAL` CITY MANAGER S CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council ��j�//� FROM: Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police/ >V' DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enforcement and miscellaneous activity occurring during September 2004. The Police Department responded to 41 "priority one" calls for service during the month of September, with an average response time of approximately 5.4 minutes. A total of 4,558 calls for police service were generated in the City of Temecula during the month. During September, the Temecula Police Department's Old Town Storefront served a total of 221 customers. Fifty-eight sets of fingerprints were taken, 38 people filed police reports and 17 people had citations signed off. Crime Prevention Officer Lynn Fanene participated in a number of special events, neighborhood watch and community -oriented programs during the month. He also coordinated requests for patrol ride-alongs and conducted police station tours. Additionally, he continued to provide residential and business security surveys/visits and past crime follow-up. Officer Fanene also continued to process City Planning Department submissions of site plans/conditions. During September, the POP Teams continued their problem oriented policing approach of areas within the community and made 14 felony and 12 misdemeanor arrests for various crimes. The function of the POP Teams is to address situations that typically require extended enforcement action or certain expertise in order to solve an on -going problem within a neighborhood. The POP Teams also continued working with the homeless by assisting them in relocation efforts whenever possible and appropriate. The POP Teams stepped up enforcement again in the area of Sam Hicks Park, which has been the site for a number of homeless related complaints by the public. Additionally, the POP was responsible for conducting nightly surveillance in the Rancho Highlands area in response to a number of residential burglaries that were occurring there. Members of the POP Team coordinated the enforcement and arrest efforts of three adults for the numerous burglaries. Property from the burglaries was recovered and the cases were prepared for the Riverside County District Attorney's Office. The traffic team reported that during the month of September there were 1088 citations issued for hazardous violations, 80 citations were issued for non -hazardous violations and 101 parking citations were issued. During the month there was one fatal collision, six injury traffic collisions, 38 Monthly Departmental Report— Police Department non -injury collisions were reported and 22 drivers were arrested for DUI. In other citation summary information, the Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in 33 citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. The SLAP (Stop Light Abuse Program) resulted in at least 410 citations being issued. During the month of September, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Mall handled a total of 35 calls for service. The majority of these calls were for shoplifting investigations. During the month, calls and on -sight activity resulted in the criminal arrest and filings on two felony and 11 misdemeanor cases. Officers Joyner and Rahn continued to provide training to security staff during the month. The mall officers continued to work to prevent vehicle theft and vehicle burglaries. There were no vehicle thefts or vehicle burglaries reported during the month of September at the mall. Our five school resource officers have remained active during September, with the beginning of the school year. The school resource officers conducted many counseling sessions with students. A total of 81 investigations/reports were conducted/written by the school resource officers during September. The school resource officers made felony arrests for possession of methamphetamine and battery, and misdemeanor arrests for petty theft, possession of marijuana, battery and drunk in public. The YAT program (Youth Accountability Team) continues to be a success in part through its Youth Court program. The YAT officer assisted at other schools when needed and conducted follow-ups with parents of juveniles in the program. Officer Medeiros also worked with "at risk" juveniles throughout the month and also conducted counseling sessions with their parents. She assisted the Riverside County District Attorney's Office and Probation Department by providing training during home visits with incorrigible/at risk juveniles during the month of September. Officer Medeiros is currently carrying a caseload of about 30 at -risk juveniles. During the month of September, the Special Enforcement Team (SET Team), consisting of Officers Jeff Fisher and James Kaffka, continued their narcotic enforcement efforts. Officers Fisher and Kaffka made one felony and one misdemeanor arrest for various crimes, including narcotic violations. Officers also recovered quantities of methamphetamine and marijuana during the month. The SET officers also spent a good portion of the month assisting the POP officers with surveillance activities related to the Rancho Highlands burglaries. Volunteers from the community continue to be an integral part of the Temecula Police Department's staff. Under the guidance of volunteer coordinator Officer Lori Callahan and assistant coordinator Gayle Gerrish, the Police Department's volunteer staff contributed 488 hours of service in September. Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance and telephone answering duties. Community Action Patrol (CAP) Program volunteers have continued their activities, patrolling the city for graffiti, conducting vacation residential checks and assisting patrol with special logistical needs and special events. Other duties these volunteers attend to are business checks and abandoned vehicles and traffic control. The goal of the program is high visibility, which prevents crime from occurring. CAP Team members contributed 187 hours of service to the community during the month of September. The reserve officer program and mounted posse are additional valuable volunteer resources available to the police department. The police department utilizes reserve officers to assist with patrol, traffic enforcement, crime prevention and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 97 hours specifically on patrol in Temecula during September. Monthly Departmental Report — Police Department 2 The Temecula Citizen Corps Program continues to make good. The executive body, or the TCC Council, continued to hold their bi-weekly meetings at Station 84. The council is comprised of representatives from the police and fire departments, the City, local business, the Temecula Valley Unified School District, the American Red Cross, and a local citizen. Almost all of the volunteer leadership positions have now been filled, and the program is progressing well toward meeting the goals provided by members of the city council. Monthly Departmental Report — Police Department APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIND CITY MANAGER G CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Anthony J. Elmo, Director of Building and Safe y4l� DATE: October 28, 2004 SUBJECT: Monthly Departmental Report September 2004 Single Family Development Tracts The City continues to see tract development to be very active with 536 single family homes under construction. However, staff issued only 28 new tract houses in the month of September which reflects the concentration of our residential developers in delivering their current inventory successfully by year end. Staff performed approximately 5331 inspections on tract housing this past month. Custom Single Family Homes Only one (1) new custom single family home received its permit this past month. This continues to support the prediction of a slowing of custom home market, at least in the very short term. Multi -Family Development Eight (8) new apartments buildings were permitted in September representing approximately 160 new multi -family dwelling units. The Fountain Senior Apartment continues to progress well, and the Old Town Senior Apartments are now completed. A very good looking project is the Temecula Creek Apartments and commercial center now under construction along Highway 79 South. Temecula Ridge Apartments off Moraga Rd and Rancho California Rd are beginning to see more activity as well as the Harveston Apartment project. There are currently 341 units under construction in Temecula. Commercial Development Six (6) new tenant improvement permits were issued representing 22,036 square feet of new business space along with a new commercial building in the area of 12,500 square feet. The new section of el Villagio is filling up along with the opening of a Starbucks in that center. Winco Foods is in the process of stocking shelves for their opening later in October. TOTAL PERMIT AND INSPECTION ACTIVITY Staff issued 293 building related permits in September representing a construction valuation of $12,677,682 and fees collected of $460,500. The inspection staff performed over 5524 building inspections in September with only slight difficulty in maintaining our 24 hour response time. R:IBROCRMEZIAGENDAIDEPAE=TAL REPORT SEPT 2004.DOC 1 10111104 APPROVAL" CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECUTA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the months of September 2004. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of September, the City received 5 leads including: small manufacturing business, restaurant franchise, Mexican restaurant, a home furnishings retailer and a university interested in the Temecula Higher Education Center. Staff provided demographic and population forecast information on Temecula to a local golf store owner. The information will be used to assist in their marketing efforts and lining up product suppliers. The store has very sophisticated swing analysis and club fitting capabilities and should be a very good addition to our community. Staff provided information and potential sites to Grubb & Ellis in Newport Beach who is representing a large home furnishings retailer interested in the Temecula/Murrieta area. Staff provided some background information to a university very interested in the Temecula Higher Education Center. Staff also put them in touch with AG Kading. Media/Outreach Materials Staff wrote the City article for the November Chamber of Commerce Newsletter announcing the upcoming Sheriff's K9 Trials and Public Safety Expo scheduled for November a at Chaparral High School. Staff responded to The Business Press questionnaire for Fastest -Growing Cities of the Inland Empire. The results will be published in The Business Press 2005 Book of Lists. Staff provided new demographic information and updated economic development information to the City's webmaster which will soon be added to the Economic Development section of the City's website. \\San3\clly m Wr\Wolnickg\DEFT REPORWSep wdw'04 DepL RpUbc SDecial Events Staff attended the Temecula Chamber Legislative Summit at Pechanga Resort & Casino on September 10d'. Nearly 280 business people from around the region attended to learn more about "Doing Business in California", the theme selected for this years special event. A panel was assembled and led by renowned and syndicated columnist from the Sacramento Bee, Dan Walters. Also in attendance were Senator Bill Morrow, Pechanga Tribal Leader Anthony Miranda and California State Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi. Relevant topics facing today's business climate were debated and discussed including: Indian Gaming, State Budget, Energy and Workers Compensation Costs. Those in attendance heard first hand from todays leaders in Sacramento and in the gaming community what the future may hold for California businesses. Staff is working on the staffing and handouts for the Temecula Chamber Business Showcase which will be held on October 20d' at The Promenade Mall. Temecula Planning, GIS, Fire, and City Manager's offices will represent the City. The Temecula Citizen Core will also have space located next to the City's exhibit space. Meetinas Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Business Relations Committee Meeting on September 2nd. Company contact reports included the following: Jim O'Grady provided a report on RAW Motorsports and Harry Shank of Southwest Community Bank reported on D.L. Phares & Associates and CDM Group, Inc. Staff attended the Temecula Auto Mall Foreclosure Hearing in San Diego on September 91h. Staff attended the Partners in Education Committee Meeting on September 13th. Officers for 2004 — 2005 were approved: Chairman Jimmy Moore, Vice Chairman Diane Sessions and Secretary Mark Margolin. A review of the committee's presentation at the Governing School Board meeting which was held in August was given. The Board was pleased with the actions of the committee and is anxious to see how the internship component comes out. Projects for 2004205 were identified for the different subcommittees: Youth in Government, Career Day, Internship, Career Videos, Partners in Education Page on District Website and Perkins Application Committee. On September 151h, staff met with Milgard Windows to discuss expansion plans for their Temecula facility. The Temecula Higher Education Campus Project Meeting was held on September 15h. This standing meeting occurs bi-weekly and is attended by staff and developer AG Kading. Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting on September 16'h. Two presentations were made including the Temecula Valley Chamber Convention & Visitors Bureau and EDC Business Relations Committee (BRC) annual report. Staff met with Barbara Howard, Director of the Temecula Regional Center, on September 20'h and was given a tour of their new office/classrooms which are under construction. They are located at 28780 Single Oak Drive. Staff discussed several items that Concordia needed to follow-up with including Temporary Use Permit and concerns with the building that they are occupying. On September 23'd, staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Luncheon at Pechanga Resort & Casino. Colonel Peter Bentley, (USAF, Ret.), presented an update on the retention of March Air Reserve Base as it relates to the Department of Defense's transformation process in 2005. He also spoke about the lobbying effort to keep this base in operation. The M=3\6ty m ger\Wolnickj; DEPT REPORTSVSeptembcr'04 DcpL RpL.doc 2 base provides an estimated $347 million economic impact to the region annually. The March Joint Powers Commission has been working toward the joint use of the base. This project will fuel the local economy with approximately 300 direct jobs and 2000 to 3000 indirect jobs. The EDC is committed to retaining March Air Reserve Base and they presented Colonel Bentley, with a check for $10,000 to assist in his efforts. The UCR Extension facility in Temecula is now known as the UCR Temecula Center. UCR is beginning to offer programs for college credit, as well as their Extension (non-credit) programs. This is a very significant step for UCR. Staff, UCR Temecula Center, the EDC, and Economic Alliance met with Chris Buydos of UCR regarding coordination of UCR programs with our economic development efforts. We will be providing employer information to Ms. Buydos. She will provide further information about UCR program areas and particular strengths so that we can better utilize UCR as an economic development asset to our area. UCR will work more closely with our employers in areas of technology transfer, research, and workforce education. On September 2nd, staff met with Paul Hiller, the new director of the IEEP. Mr. Hiller previously headed up economic development efforts in the Irvine area and has an extensive and successful ED background. Staff provided him with our background information and on our EDC and Alliance efforts. Staff shared with him our reasons for working more closely with those groups and reasons for leaving the IEEP. The IEEP plans to move away from the "one size fits all" marketing and is looking for their marketing efforts to be tailored to the different sub -regions within the Inland Empire. Staff attended the 1-15 Interregional Partnership Meeting on September 28`h at Temecula City Hall. A draft of the Employment Cluster Study was distributed and discussed. The work program identifies clusters for Riverside County and develops information critical for identifying implementation strategies beneficial to southwestern Riverside and San Diego regions. Transportation and housing strategies were also discussed. Temecula Mayor Nagger, Councilmember Washington, Temecula staff, Mumeta Mayor VanHaaster, Councilmember Enochs and Murieta staff met on September 271h to discuss the following items: French Valley Parkway Interchange update, presentation by Murrieta regarding the Orchard's Project and the extension of Ynez Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. On September 2rh, the Hospital Ad Hoc Subcommittee, Mayor Naggar and Councilmember Comerchero, and staff met with Scott Crane of Universal Health Systems and architects to discuss the proposed Temecula hospital. Staff met with Bill Green on September 2e to discuss the Temecula Auto Mall TOURISM Soecial Events On September 2e, the Economic Development Subcommittee, Mayor Nagger and Councilmember Comerchero, and staff met with Jon & Jane Laskin and Martha Minkler to discuss plans for the 2005 Temecula International Jazz Festival. Event venues will be held at The Promenade Mall, Temeku Hills Golf Club and the Temecula Duck Pond. Medial Outreach Materials On September 2nd, staff met with Mauricio Pinto, Associate Publisher of Travel Host of the Inland Empire Magazine and provided him with information on Temecula. Staff is creating a map listing tourism attractions in the area and will be providing photo images. The publication's \\SW0\ci1Y ma 9"%W01nift\DEPT REPORTS\Se% mbe '04 Dep[ RpL.do I in -room distribution includes 80,000 readers per month and is placed in over 40 hotels in the Inland Empire. Staff responded to a lead from Tammie Thompson of Kidz n'Fun. Her assignment is 'Not Just Another California Weekend' to run in the family travel publication. Staff worked with Glenda from The Press -Enterprise on the design of the City ad for the Fall Car Show Official Program. The City continues to advertise in Westways Magazine (Automobile of Southern California). The City received over 500 leads in the month of September. Temecula participated with Inland Empire Tourism Council members on a co-op ad that will appear in the 2005 Official California Visitors Guide (see attached). On September 281h, staff met with Randy Kay, CEO of UpWord Communications. He represents the American Flyer, American Home and North Magazine publications. He will be producing an article on Temecula for The American Flyer. Staff provided him with business, tourism and demographic information. On September 291h, staff met with Ruth Harring of the Temecula Valley News. Staff provided updated demographic and tourism information. Meetinas Staff attended the Temecula Chamber Tourism & Visitors Council Meeting on September 91h at the Chamber office. Updates were provided on the CVB website, Visitor Center and Halloween Mixer at The Castle Bed & Breakfast scheduled for October 141h. The Speaker Bureau started making presentations to groups educating them of the importance of tourism. Marketing & Research Subcommittee is in the process of compiling results of their visitor survey. Tourism destination reports were given (see attached). Staff provided City reported on the following: City ad & article in Flying Adventures Magazine, City ad in Anaheim/Orange County CVB Visitor's Guide, Westways and The San Diegan. City provided editorial for the Hidden Wineries Book. City sponsorship: upcoming Temecula Valley International Film & Music Festival, Tractor Race and Women Achieving in Business Conference. On September 20'h, staff attended the Temecula Chamber Tourism Council Fain Tour Subcommittee Meeting at the Chamber. The subcommittee discussed plans to put on a small FAM tour in November with tour operators. Staff provided names of prospects. On September 71h, staff spoke with Jessie Dinkel from Theatrical Arts International and spoke to him about additional entertainment venues in Temecula. TAI currently puts on playstshows at Pechanga Resort & Casino. They are going with all "rock and roll" and would like to produce this type of entertainment venue in Temecula. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Southwest California Economic Alliance Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Media \\San3\aty maoagaMolniacg\DEPT REPORMSeptembm'04 Dept RPL.doc TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE October 8, 2004 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn, Attached please find the September Monthly Activity Report as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of September at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights: In the month of September, 6 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business to Temecula. They received a business packet, which included a copy of the City of Temecula demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Board of Directors Highlights: Legislative Summit — The event was a great success and we are looking at having Dan Walters return next year. The TVCC Board of Directors took a position on the Propositions — Yes on Prop. 64-Stop Shakedown Lawsuits;No on Prop. 72 - $7 Billion Health Care Tax; Yes on Prop. 1A — Local Government Funds; No on Prop. 59 — Access to Government Information No on Prop. 60— Primary Elections; Yes on Prop. 62— Primary Elections No on Prop. 65— Local Government Funds; No on Prop. 68- Tribal Gaming Compact Leadership Academy 2004 Update — 21 individuals are participating in the Leadership Academy 2004. The response has been extremely positive to the first four sessions. The program will conclude on Thursday, October 28, 2004. Paradise Chevrolet Cadillac is the title sponsor this year. With Paradise's sponsorship Donna Wilder of Mt. San Jacinto College and Michelle Arellano of the SW Boys & Girls Club were given a scholarship to the program. Committee Highlights: "New Benefits are underway for the "Shop Temecula First Campaign". For the first time, the STF program will be showcasing its purpose via television commercials through Adelphia Media. July and November will be Rewards Months in which consumers and participating businesses have the chance to win $1,000. Sponsors of the event are Callaway Coastal and The Press -Enterprise. Tourism & Visitors Council (TVCVB): September 2, 2004, spoke with meeting planner Jade Friedensohn from Management Network. She presented an invitation to participate in the Second Annual National Native American Finance Conference held at Pechanga, January 19-21, 2005. We also established contact with the Winegrowers Association -Linda Kissam to also participate in a Wine Tasting Event. The TVCVB has confirmed attendance and will provide information on the day trip opportunities of the Temecula Valley. The event will attract 200 diverse Native American tribes with a total of about 800 delegates. September 9'h-September 23b TVCVB Speakers Bureau went out within the community to educate and promote awareness of Tourism in the Temecula Valley. We presented to eleven high -profile groups within the community: Education Committee -Community 26790 Ynez Court • Temecula, CA 92591 Phone: (951) 676-5090 • Fax: (951) 694-0201 www.temeculo.org • �-mail: info@temeculo.org Leaders, TV Car Club, American Association of University Woman, Membership Committee, Soroptimist International of the Tri-Valley, Local Business and Promotions Committee, EDC/Southwest Riverside County, Rotary Sunrise, Temecula Valley Woman's Club, Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors. The TVCVB has ten presentations scheduled for the month of October. September 10`h, Participated in workshop/presentation for the "The New PECHANGA Culture Museum" with the Pechanga Cultural Resources Team. Attended by the City of Temecula, the School Board, Temecula Chamber, TVCVB and Destination Temecula. Interviewed with Kathleen Brown from ATELIER . Review current Tourism treads and future growth within the Temecula Valley. Provided July TVCVB survey results. Friday September 17th, Attended a lunch meeting with Denis Ferguson, Steve Mallory and Al Douber from Pechanga Resort & Casino. We reviewed strengths, weakness and opportunities within the Temecula Valley and agreed to meet bi- weekly to develop a plan on developing and building a strong partnership with the Winegrowers Associations, the business within Old Town and the Temecula Valley community. Tuesday September 23'd, the TVCVB received approval for $34,000 from the City of Temecula to fund the TVCVB web site. The funding was approved at the City Council meeting on September 28, 2004. The Request For Proposal will be posted in October to meet our launch in the first quarter of 2005. September 2e, the production schedule has been finalized for the filming of the Taste of California television series that will begin in October. Pechanga Resort & Casino will be featured in this series for 5 of the 23 minutes and filming is scheduled for Friday, October 22nd. Diamond Productions has also agreed to return for a follow-up shoot of the new renovations and additions to Pechanga Resort & Casino and South Coast Winery in January of 2005. The completed series will begin airing on United Airlines and 11 other domestic and international TV stations starting the first quarter of 2005. This series will have a 3 year shelf in over 300 million households. Participants in the series: Pechanga Resort & Casino, Wine Growers Association, A Grape Escape Hot Air Ballooning, Grapeline Wine Country Shuttle, Magical Adventures, South Coast Winery Resort & Spa and A Balloon/Biplane Adventure by California Dreamin'. Education Committee: The Committee will be meeting to discuss fundraising options for the 2004/2005 scholarships. The 2005 Youth Job Fair is now in the planning stages. Student of the Month program has begun its 121h year. Special Events Committee: The Legislative Summit took place on September 10, 2004 and approximately 250 business members attended. Speakers discussed pertinent issues that face Southern California businesses. The 13d' Annual Monte Carlo Extravaganza held on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 at Wilson Creek Winery had 450 participants. Temecula Valley Smart Card won the $1,000 cash giveaway given by Toyota of Temecula Valley. The 13th Annual Business Expo will be held on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 at The Promenade In Temecula. 54 businesses have signed up to participate to date. Local Business Promotions Committee: The Shop Temecula First Subcommittee has 56 participants in the program. The months of September and October are covered for the minimum cable -TV participants per month. The Mystery Shopper winner for October is P'ZAZ! Gifts Unique. The Businesses of the Month for October, chosen by the Local Business Promotions Committee, are Adelphia Media Services and First Team Real Estate. The Chamber Spotlight winner for October is The Bently Foundation. Government Action Committee: The Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce's have received a proposal from Chamber Advocacy, Inc. They will work together to create an effective advocacy program for membership and empowering the membership to create a healthy business environment. The Chamber has published a list of positions on upcoming propositions. The positions were included in the Chamber's E-Commerce Newsletter. Membership Committee: 29 businesses joined the Chamber in September. Staff and ambassadors attended 7 ribbon cuttings. Over 20 members and ambassadors attended the membership workshop. The Ambassador Networking Breakfast had a special topic "Facts About Your Business and Residential Utilities." Speakers from Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company and Rancho California Water District gave presentations to the group. Business Spotlights were: Pac West Telecomm and Black Tie Productions. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distributors) Activity Report: • 628 Visitor Guide requests were processed from the City of Temecula's Westway's advertising marketing piece. • 50 Visitor Guides and 50 Tourism Maps were distributed to Kimberly Vineyards/RT Properties, Inc. for tourism needs. 16 Visitor Guides, 16 Tourism Maps and 16 Winery Brochures were distributed to JoAnn Lyman for guests attending her wedding. • 45 Visitor Guides were distributed to Robin Lane with Taco Bell Corporation for business needs. • 25 Visitor Guides, 25 Tourism Maps and 25 Winery Brochures were distributed to Jean Barnett with SDSI Business Systems, Incorporated for a vintage car club. 40 Visitor Guides, 40 Winery Brochures and 40 Tourism Maps were distributed to Pat Gellings for guests attending her wedding. • 30 Visitor Guides, 30 Winery Brochures and 30 Tourism Maps were distributed to Elin Lamp with Destination Concepts, Incorporated for tourism needs. • 12 Visitor Guides and 12 Tourism Maps were distributed to Jerry Hangen for a social group coming to Temecula. Activity Report: • Tourism calls for the month of July — 1,471 • Phone calls for the month of July — 2,752 • Walk-ins for the month of July— 2,199 • Web Page User Sessions for the month of July — 3,675 • Website Tourism Survey - " How did you hear about Temecula" - 87 responses were received: • Article — 3% • Friend - 38% • Link —6% • Magazine - 4% Other - 29% • Radio — 3% • Search — 9% • TV-8% Also, attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Government Action, Local Business Promotions, Membership and Marketing and Special Events committee. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (951) 676-5090 or e-mail asullivan@temecula.org. Thank you. Sincerely, Alice Sulfivan President/CEO cc: Mayor Mike Nagger Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Comerchero Councilman Jeff Stone Councilman Ron Roberts Councilman Chuck Washington Shawn Nelson, City Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Monthly Activity Report September 2004 Chamber Vis. Center Year -To -Date PHONE CALLS This Month This Month Total TOURISM Tourism Referrals 273 2,948 Calendar of Events 116 1,468 Special Events 177 1,725 General Information 905 10,145 TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 1,471 16,286 Relocation 135 1,850 Demographics 105 1,212 Chamber 767 7,953 Miscellaneous 274 2,449 TOTAL PHONE CALLS 2,752 29,750 t 1011:EI01ty Tourism 155 47 1,688 Calendar of Events 110 2 1,282 Special Events 114 9 741 General Information 768 49 6,936 Relocation 135 2 1,484 Demographics 106 1,077 Chamber 560 4,359 Miscellaneous 251 2,172 TOTAL WALK-INS 2,199 109 19,739 MAILINGS Tourism 846 5,552 Relocation 51 599 Demographics 47 572 TOTAL MAILINGS 944 6,723 E-MAIL Tourism 89 963 Relocation 76 833 Miscellaneous 207 3,225 TOTAL E-MAIL 372 5,021 WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 3,675 43,941 GRAND TOTALS This Month Year -To -Date PHONE CALLS 2,752 29,750 WALK-INS 2,199 19,739 MAILINGS 944 6,723 E-MAIL 372 5,021 WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 3,675 43,941 Annual Volume Comparisons Chamber Chamber Percentage September 2003 September 2004 PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 278 273 -2% Calendar of Events 150 116 -23% Special Events 228 177 -22% General Information 1,374 905 -34% TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 2,030 1,471 -28% Relocation 195 135 -31 % Demographics 155 105 -32% Chamber 915 767 -16% Miscellaneous 136 274 101 % TOTAL PHONE CALLS 3,431 2,752 -20% WALK-INS Tourism 194 155 -20% Calendar of Events 166 110 -34% Special Events 125 114 -9% General Information 834 768 -8% Relocation 196 135 -31 % Demographics 150 106 -29% Chamber 491 560 14% Miscellaneous 110 251 128% Visitor Center Walk -Ins 150 109 -27% TOTAL WALK-INS 2,416 2,308 4% MAILINGS Tourism 312 846 171 % Relocation 87 51 -41 % Demographics 87 47 -46% TOTAL MAILINGS 486 944 94% E-MAIL Tourism 111 89 -20% Relocation 104 76 -27% Miscellaneous 434 207 -52% TOTAL E-MAIL 649 372 -43% WEBSITE USER SESSIONS 6,208 3,675 -41% * Chamber referrals reflect faxes, walk-ins and phone calls TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Tourism & Visitors Council Meeting Minutes Thursday, September 9`h, 2004 @ 11:30 a.m. TVCC (Lunch provided by Temecula Creek Inn & Rusty Acres Herb Farm) Chairperson: Cherise Manning (present) Co -Chair: Kelly Daniels (present) Board Liaison: Rusty Manning (not present) Bette Endersen (not present) Michael Doblado (not present) Committee Present: Jennifer Eastman, Darlene Henderson, Vangie Esteban, Robin Varnet, Bill Seltzer, Jim Brady, Judi Brady, Kay McCain, Billie Blair, Tanya Mattern, Jeri Smith, Ken Westmyer, Steve Mallory, Valerie Skovron, Nine Stanely, Kim Kelliher, Maggie Allen, Peggy Evans, Donna Craig, Ron Owens, Jeff Brown, Gloria Wolnick, Sharon Goode, Kimjera Whittington, Trudy Calhoun, Gail Bradley, Clifford Nunn, Eva Kenny, Mindy Pelle, Kim Baily, Rick Sneider, Katherine Artiglio Staff Present: Kimberly Adams, Alice Sullivan & Carrie Kumano Call to Order/Introductions Manning called the meeting to order at 11:40 a.m. Self Introductions were made around the group. Meeting Minutes Westmyer made a motion to approve the August 5`h, 2004 Tourism & Visitors Council meeting minutes as written. Jim Brady seconded the motion, which carried. Temecula Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau • Adams mentioned that there have been some resources allocated for the website and we are looking at the beginning of 2005 for the unveiling. The Request For Proposal for the new visitor's guide will be going out soon. The Visitor Center here at the chamber is open on the weekends (Saturdays, 10am-2pm and Sundays, 11 am-3pm). Adams also mentioned that the Halloween Mixer and Fundraiser will be held at The Castle Bed & Breakfast on Thursday, October 14th from 6:30pm — 9:30pm. A sponsorship opportunity flyer was distributed to the council to encourage volunteers for the event, sponsoring the event and donating prizes. Tourism Subcommittee Groups • Marketing & Research Subcommittee — The surveys have been input into the database system and the subcommittee is in the process of compiling the results to share with the group at the next meeting. Next subcommittee meeting Tue. 9/28 at 10:00am at the TVCC. • Speaker Bureau Subcommittee — The presentation was given to the Board of Directors and they were very impressed with the information and offered some very valuable suggestions to make it even better. The Speaker Bureau has already started with their presentations and will continue through November. If anyone would like the Speaker Bureau to come and make a presentation to their group, please contact the TVCVB. Next subcommittee meeting Thu. 9/16 at 10:45am at the TVCC. • FAM/Tradeshow Subcommittee — The group has determined three month for FAM Tours - November, 2004, February, 2005 and May, 2005. The subcommittee will continue to work closely with the city of Temecula on the scheduled tradeshows. Next subcommittee meeting Mon. 9/20 at 10:00am at the TVCC. City Marketing Report • Wolnick reported the advertisement in the Flying Adventures Magazine. Local Temecula businesses had the opportunity to advertise. There are approximately 1 million readers with higher than average yearly incomes of $400K plus. Ads have been placed in the Orange County CVB Visitor's Guide and the San Diegan. The city continues to advertise it Westways with great response. An editorial was written for the Hidden Wineries Book thal featured over 65 wineries from various regions. The city is sponsoring the Film & Music Festival over the weekend, the Tractor Race on October 1-3, 2004 and Women Achieving in Business being held at Pechanga Resort & Casino. Tourism Destination Reports • Arts Council of Temecula — Allen mentioned that the Arts Festival was very successful and local artists were able to showcase their work. • Old Town Temecula — Allen mentioned the new growth and development with Baily's new restaurant and the new Theater. Hot Summer Nights has finished and she's heard good response on the turnout. • Pechanga Resort & Casino —10/1 & 10/2 — Earth Wind & Fire, 10/9 — Pat Benatar, 10/23 — Los Lobos, 10/28 — David Copperfield. • Temecula Valley Winegrowers Association — No Report. • Temecula Valley International Film Festival — Allen stated that the festival started on Wednesday, 9/8 and goes through the weekend. There will be free performances and the .Market Place at the Tower Plaza will be a highlighted feature this year. The Awards Dinner will have some very famous and prestigious recipients and presenters. • Temecula Valley Museum & Children Museum — Allen said that the Temecula Valley Museum is celebrating and observing the Vail Ranch Heritage. There will be a cattle drive later this year. The Imagination Workshop had a tremendous opening and had over 10,000 people visit this summer. They are starting to schedule field trips since school is back in session. Member Updates • Alice Sullivan mentioned that the TVCC is looking for Board of Directors Nominations. • Reliance Concierge will be hosting the Market Place at Tower Plaza for the Film & Music Festival. For more information contact Sharon Goode at (951) 696-2522 or visit www.relianceconcierge.com. • Rusty Acres Herb Farm will have their Tomato Tasting Festival on September 11`h & 121h, 2004. For more information contact Jim or Judi Brady at (760) 731-7349 or visit www.rustvacres.com . • Pala Casino will have the following entertainment schedule: Hall & Oates — 10/17, Brian Wilson — 10/29, Donna Summer — 11/15. They are having a $300,000 promotion from 9/20—11/22. For more information please contact Ron Owens at (760) 510-2860 or visit www.palacasino.com • Temecula Valley Golf School will offer a free golf instruction lesson for any individual who signs up for the Canine Support Teams, Inc. Golf Classic. Please contact Bill Seltzer at (951) 699-2283. Or contact the Canine Support Teams Group at (951) 301- 3625 or visit www.caninesupportteams.orq. • Warner Springs Ranch was opened in 1844. Jeff Brown is offering an introductory rate for any tourism members who would like to experience the resort. They have golf packages, horseback riding packages and tennis packages. Please contact Jeff at (760) 782-4200 or visit www.warnersprings.com. • Baily's Cafe in the Target Center will be closed as of 9/26/04 and the new Old Town Dining restaurant in Old Town will be opened the 2ntl week in October. Their seating capacity for the downstairs is 170 people and the upstairs can hold 130 people. They will also have private rooms that will hold 20 — 35 people. For more information please contact Kim Baily at (951) 676-9567 or e-mail her at www.kim(a)baily.com. 2 Rancho Damacitas was able to raise $86,000 at the Rubber Ducky Derby. It was a huge success and they are starting to plan for their 2005 event. They will have some very high -end sponsors. For more information please contact Clifford Nunn at (951) 302- 2317 or visit www.thessaIonika.org. Wilson Creek Winery will be having their final Jazz Concert on Saturday, September 181h 2004. They are also looking for donations for the Our Kids Rock Fundraiser for the Boys & Girls Club. For more information please call Wilson Creek Winery at (951) 699- 9463 or visit www.wilsoncreekwinery.com. Valarie Skovron mentioned that the Special Events Committee is looking for donations for the Awards Gala in February 2005. To donate, please contact the Special Events Department at the Chamber at (951) 676-5090 or visit www.temecula.org. TVCC Board Update Cherise Manning reported • Ambassador Networking Breakfast will be at 7:30am on Wednesday, August 251h, 2004 at Embassy Suites Hotel — Temecula Valley Wine Country. • Monte Carlo Extravaganza on Wednesday, September 151h, 2004 from 5:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m. at Wilson Creek Winery. • Legislative Summit on Friday, September 101h, 2004 from 7:30 a.m. —10:30 a.m. at Pechanga Resort & Casino. • Temecula Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau Haunted Castle Mixer on Thursday, October 14'", 2004 from 6:30pm — 9:30pm at The Castle Bed & Breakfast. • Business Showcase on Wednesday, October 20'h, 2004 from 5:00 p.m. — 8:00 p.m. at the Promenade Mall. Next Meeting Date: Thursday, October 71h @ 11:30 a.m. Location: Callaway Vineyard & Winery EDUCATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Conference Room Sponsored by Community Little Book Thursday, September 9, 2004 9:30 a.m. Chairperson: Donna Wilder (Present) Members Present: Danielle Clark, Donna Ramirez, Carmen Camacho, Cheryle Steddom, Mark Margolin, Jacob Tomseth, Billie Blair, Greg Brown and Mary Perez Board Liaison: Greg Morrison (absent) Staff Present: Laura Turnbow Guests: Ken Westmyer, Carrie Kumano and Kimberly Adams Approval of Minutes Clark made a motion to approve the August 12, 2004 meeting minutes as written. Blair seconded the motion, which carried. TVCVB Sneakers Bureau Presentation Westmyer, Kumano and Adams gave a presentation in regards to the Tourism Council and Convention & Visitors Bureau objectives. The main objective is to educate on the benefit and impact of tourism on our valley. The goal from forming the Convention & Visitors Bureau is to promote tourism and market our destination. In doing this the increase in visitors to the area will increase the tax income and create more jobs. The Transient Occupancy Tax (T.O.T) if increased will boost revenue dollars for our county. The T.O.T is currently at 8% which each visitor pays, not residents. Career Education Video No report. School Employee Recognition Committee is looking at giving award in May for the full school year. Student of the Month The Student of the Month Luncheon will be held on Monday, September 27, 2004 at Sizzler Restaurant. Turnbow will discuss option of changing the sponsorship plaques to lessen the expense. The funds could then be allocated to scholarships. Scholarships The committee raised $46 at the last mixer. The box to donate will be placed at each event. Job Fair Committee reviewed last year's participation, which was 350 students despite the rain. There was great attendance at the workshops. The goal for this year is to increase employer participation. Committee will promote at the new members reception. Tomseth volunteered to assist. School and Colleges Update TVUSD — The School District currently has 25,000 students enrolled. 3 schools will be opening this year and 3 next year. • Partners in Education — Committee is working on career pathways. And having a college representative participate in the committee for input as to what type of students, colleges are looking for. Youth in Government — Civic lesson Talk to Jim Morgan tie into YMCA Program (This Part needs help) MSJC —Classes began on August 16, 2004 with 15,000 students enrolled. Citv No Report. Board Update • Leadership Academy —A group of very distinguished speakers have been gathered to facilitate and instruct. The cost to participate is $1,250 and attendance is limited. • 13`h Annual Autumn Fest Business Expo will be held on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 at The Promenade In Temecula from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Booth Spaces are available. • Roundtable will be held on Friday, September 10, 2004 at Pat & Oscars Restaurant. • Pablitos is promoting bilingualism — ESL classes — Mommy & Me French ages 5-7. Meeting adjourned. Thank You! Next Education Committee Meeting is Thursday, October 14, 2004, 9:30 a.m. in the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Conference Room Sponsored by Community Little Book Government Action Committee A Joint Committee of Murrieta and Temecula Chambers of Commerce Meeting Minutes Monday, September 20, 2004 Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Present: Ralph Ferro, Dennis Frank, Karen Wikert, Aaron Adams, Kevin Jeffries, Kelly Battin, Paul O'Neal, Jeff Greene, Kim Cousins, Billie Blair, Verne Lauritzen, Glen Daigle, Norma Arias - Lee Staff: Rex Oliver, Valerie Preston — Murrieta; Alice Sullivan, Laura Turnbow —Temecula I. Meeting was called to order by Oliver at 12:05 pm. II. Self hitroductions III. Approval of August Meeting Minutes IV. State reports A. CA State Senator Hollingsworth - Lauritzen reported SB87 Authorized the CA Transportation Commission to relinquish to the City of Temecula a specified portion of Hwy. 79. SB409 allows the maintenance reserve to be calculated on the unrestricted portion of Lake Elsinore School District budget. SB1138 authorizes 4 day school week option for 5 school districts. SB1147 provided income tax relief for those who suffered loses as a result of 2203 fires. SB1225 failed to allow property owners to construct a firebreak up to 300 feet from the home or structure. SB 1486 failed to exempt overpasses already built from filing a CEQA environmental impact report.6 of Project Kidsafe bills died in the Senate. B. CA State Senator Battin - K. Battin reported Minimum Wage bill was vetoed by the Governor. Repeal of Smog Check requirements for automobiles over 30 years of age is pending decision from Governor. C. CA State Assemblyman Haynes - Greene reported Walmart Bill was vetoed by Governor. Canyon Lake was exempted from bill disallowing recreational use if water source. D. CA State Assemblyman Benoit- No report. V. Legislative Reports A. U.S. Congressional District 43, Calvert - No report. B. U.S. Congressional District 45, Mary Bono - No report. C. U.S. Congressional District 48, Issa - No report. VI. City Reports A. City of Murrieta — City Council to discuss approval of Orchard's Mall, 215 and Los Alamos. B. City of Temecula —Adams reported Prop IA will go to City Council for support on 9-28. VIL Chamber Reports A. Temecula - Sullivan reported bus on 9-22 to Riverside for support of March Global Port at March Air Force base. B. Cousins reported Education Seminar to take place 10-14. C. Murrieta - Oliver reported Proposition recommendations from Cal Chamber will continue to be sent to Chamber membership. VIII. Ferro expressed support of I and 65. Jeffries stated annexation studies in process. IX. Meeting adjourned 12:45 pm TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Local Business Promotions Committee MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, September 15th, 2004, @ 8:00am TVCC Conference Room Sponsored by Community Little Book Committee Chair: Bert Baluyut (present) Co -Chair: Kurt Peck (present) Board Liaison: Greg Brown (not present) Members Present: Bob Hagel, Lisa Fuess, Phyllis Risner, Mike Mamian, Michelle Evans Staff: Carrie Kumano Welcome & Introductions Baluyut called the meeting to order at 8:07am. Self introductions were made around the room. Approval of Minutes Fuess made a motion to approve the August 18, 2004 meeting minutes as written and Hagel seconded the motion, which carried. Shop Temecula First Kumano mentioned that we currently have 55 participants but our budget is 100. We really need to push for more participants before November since it will be the second rewards month. Baluyut suggested another fax blast. Risner asked if the commercial sponsors are happy with their spots and if they have seen any additional business from it. It was mentioned that some participants have expressed that they saw the commercial but no feedback has been given regarding the increase of business. Fuess suggested to reserve a booth at the October Business Showcase to advertise the program. It was also suggested to have larger signage for more recognition. Member Recognition Program Hagel reviewed the monthly winners. • Mystery Shopper Program (Courtesy of DHL Business Solutions & The Californian): — September — Provident Bank — October — Unique Experience Hair & Nail Salon • Businesses of the Month (Courtesy of KMYT 94.5 FM): — September (Special Events) — Aloris Design Group — September (Special Events) — Trinity Tents & Events — October (Local Business Promotions) — Adelphia Media Services — October (Local Business Promotions) — First Team Real Estate • Chamber Spotlight (Courtesy of FROGGY 92.9): — September — thinkavocado.com -- October — Ziegler & Son Publishing Business Resource Program Baluyut mentioned that Kathy Forbes has resigned from her position as subcommittee chair for the program. Baluyut expressed the need for a new subcommittee chair and to please contact him with any volunteers or suggestions. Board Update Baluyut gave an update on the following: • Ambassador Networking Breakfast, Wednesday, September 22, 2004 at 7:30am at the Embassy Suites Hotel — Temecula Valley Wine Country. • Monte Carlo Extravaganza, September 15, 2004 from 5:30pm to 8:30pm at Wilson Creek Winery. • Leadership Academy, September 18, 2004 at 8:OOam at Pala Mesa Resort. • TVCVB Haunted Castle Mixer, Thursday, October 14th, 2004 from 6:30pm — 9:30pm at The Castle Bed & Breakfast. • Business Showcase, Wednesday, October 20th, 2004 from 5:OOpm to 8:OOpm at The Promenade. Member Updates • Crystal Avalon — They will be having a Halloween event called the Tour of Terror starting on Thursday, October 28th to Sunday, October 31 st, 2004. This will be an interactive tour and will cost $5 per person on 10/28 — 10/30 and $10 per person on Halloween Night, 10/31. She is looking for sponsors. For more information please contact Shelly Evans at (951) 587-9994. • Smart Card — They now have 80 more businesses included. For more information please contact Mike Mamian at (951) 693-1232. • Peck Creative — Kurt is now working under his new business name. He is providing web design and is working with a website called unitedstatestouristattractions.com. It is a national organization and they will be offering advertising on their website for only $179 per year. For more information please contact Kurt Peck at (951) 303- 0935. Adjournment Thank you for attending! NEXT MEETING: October 20th, 2004 at 8:OOam Location: TVCC Conference Room Sponsored by Community Little Book Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Membership and Marketing Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 8, 2004 8:00 a.m. — 9:00 a.m. Chamber Conference Room Sponsored by Community Little Book Mission Statement: Develop programs to maintain and build a membership commensurate with the growth of the Temecula business community and simultaneous growth of the Chamber. Serve as goodwill representatives and strive to enhance the value of membership encouraging ongoing dialogue between members. Committee Chair: Timmy Daniels Board Liaison: Stan Harter Co -Chair: Judy Zulfiqar Committee Present: Carol Thompson, Fil Knoff, Bob Bryant, Kirby Bown, LaVonna Lacy, Annette Nielsen, David Bush, Terry Kosycarz, Jacob Tomseth, Don Myers, Bill Seltzer, Ann Burgner, Judy Remsen, Judy Zulfigar, Timmy Daniels, Paul Cauchi, Jann Gentry and Dan Brunell Board Liaisons Present: Stan Harter Staff Present: Alice Sullivan, Cora Saxarra & Shirley Eilek Minutes Committee chair Timmy Daniels called the meeting to order at 8:10 a.m. The minutes of the previous meeting were reviewed and motioned for approval by Kirby Bown and seconded by Dan Brunell; which carried. Membership Report The committee reviewed the Membership packet. Currently there are 1,355 members (reflects 29new members, 91 renewals, 32 drops). Office Depot representatives Carol Thompson and Fil Knoff did a presentation offering a great discount (up to 60%) to the membership and a chance for the Chamber to generate income (1 % of total sales). Daniel would like to send out letter to the membership to inquire if they are also interested in offering a similar program. Interested members will also have a chance to do a presentation as well. Staff will work on the letter and present it at the Board of Directors meeting for approval. Follow Up Calls: Seltzer stated that follow-up calls have been well received by new members but need a feedback from the sub- committee. Ribbon Cutting: Ambassadors attending ribbon cuttings were encourage to check the calendar available at the Chamber website (www.temecula.org) under the Membership section and subsection, for any changes. There were 7 ribbon cuttings attended by the staff and ambassadors for the month of September. Roundtable Discussion: Roundtable Discussion Friday, September 10th. Topic: Customer and Employee Appreciation. Membership Workshop: Over 20 members and Ambassadors attended the workshop for the month of September. Committee members who have not attended the workshop are encouraged to attend. Mixer: Next mixer will be on Wednesday, November 171h hosted by Sterling Senior Communities, 41780 Butterfield Stage Road. Ambassador Networkine Breakfast A special topic breakfast was held on Wednesday, Sept. 22°a: Facts About Your Business & Residential Utilities: Embassy Suites Hotel Temecula Valley Wine Country. Presenters included Robert Lopez & Tinamarie Squieri/Southern California Edison, Kimberly Williams/Southern California Gas Company and Brian Brady/Rancho California Water District. Important information and handouts were given to members who attended the breakfast. Bob Moore of Pac West Telecomm and Michael Scalise of Black Tie Production are the two spotlight businesses for the month of September. Next Breakfast will be October 27, 2004. Meeting adjourned: Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 at 8:OOam Chamber Boardroom Sponsored By: Community Little Book Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Special Events Committee Meeting Minutes September 21, 2004 Chairperson: Jennifer Jones Co -Chair: Melodee Leavitt Board Liaisons: Bette Endresen, Joan Tussing Members Present: Cheryl Cave, Melodee Leavitt, and Karen Ratkowski. Board Present: Staff Present: Jennifer Malek, Michelle Eilek, and Melissa Hayer Approval of Minutes Leavitt made a motion to approve the August 17th meeting minutes as written. Cave second the motion, which carried. Legislative Summit The event took place Friday, September 10`h at Pechanga Resort & Casino. The event was well attended. Ratkowski commented that she preferred last year's format better; the breakout sessions allowed the attendees to listen to just topics they would like addressed. The speakers were very informative. Dan Walters did a great job filling in for David Crane. Leavitt suggested polling those that attended last year's and this year's event to find out which format they prefer. Pechanga did a wonderful job with the food! Monte Carlo Extravaganza The event was wonderful! Everyone seemed to have a great time. Leavitt suggested coming up with new signage to recognize the Craps Table Sponsors. The views of the craps table signs were obstructed during the gaming. Annette Nielsen did a great job with the decorations. Leavitt also suggested enforcing a "no smoking" rule for inside the tent. Some attendees were smoking cigars inside the casino tent. Ratkowski mentioned for next year to make sure there is a meeting with all the dealers prior to the start of the event stressing the point that it is a fundraiser and to have fun! Business Showcase The 13` Annual Autumn Fest Business Showcase is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20`h at the Promenade In Temecula, behind the Edwards Cinema. The event Title Sponsor is Community Little Book. One Affiliate Sponsorship is still needed. Cripe is working on Sam's Club to participate as the Affiliate Sponsor. 34 exhibitors have been confirmed to date. Staff will contact TCI to donate the use of 318 linens to cover the tables. The next committee meeting will be October 5`h at 9:00 a.m. Installation The 2005 TVCC Awards Gala is scheduled for February 191h, 2005 at Pechanga Resort & Casino. The committee has agreed on a theme and is working on the event logistics. The next full committee meeting will be Thursday, October 21, 2004 at 12:00 p.m. at the Chamber. Board Update The Chamber is accepting board nominations. Nominations are also being accepted for Business and Citizen of the year. Committee Update The TVCVB Mixer will take place Thursday, October 14`h at The Castle Bed and Breakfast from 6:30p.m. — 9:30p.m. Board Nominations & Business of the Year nominations are now being accepted. Next Meeting Date Tuesday, October 19th at 11:30 a.m. at the TVCC Boardroom sponsored by Community Little Book. SOUTHWEST Clyo adatadaaam 130 South Main street LW esmme, CA 92530 06674.3124 fax W091674-2392 Qyde- - 26442 Seaman Q. Mumaa CA92562 00 30e,2489 Fat =698-M otyontmm90 432008usiness Puk a. Te uxxix CA 92590 M 69464" Fax. (909169440 Foam I WVd*W2 Arq 27447 Emer m Cmde Weal Suite 101 Tomxxx ,CA92590 W091600-M Fat W69150080a0 „,mw,,,. I Cmmty of Riamidde TO: Bradley J. Hudson Assistant County Executive Officer Riverside County EDA Lori Moss Assistant City Manager City of Mumeta FROM: Stevie Field Manager, Business Development DATE: October 8, 2004 Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula Marlene Best Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore SUBJECT: SOUTHWEST CALIFORNIA MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Dear Partners Please consider this an update on the marketing activities for the Alliance as required in the Southwest California (formerly Southwest Riverside County) Marketing for Business Attraction Agreement. Leads During the month of September, seven leads were generated. Of these leads, one was a referral from the EDC, one was from IEEP, and five were direct contacts to the Alliance. During the last two conferences, I was able to meet several site selectors from around the Country. I will send out a mailer to these individuals in the next week educating them on our region and add them to our list of event invitees. GISANebsite As a result of Alliance efforts, our GIS and website continue to generate interest. During the month of September, the Alliance had 2,841 visitors to the website. Our new year to date (2004) web -site total is 19,244. Our GIS application had over 1,361 visitors during the month of September, totaling 29,258 visitors since its launch in January 2003. Job Database The job database is complete and ready for launch to Human Resource professionals. Earlier this month, I forwarded over the press release, user guide, and log in information sheet for your review. The consensus is that we include professional occupations such as attorneys, accountants, financial executive etc. to the list of posted job opportunities. I am currently working on an ad in the local newspapers to advertise this to employers. I am also working with Cutting Edge Marketing on public service announcements. To advertise this benefit to our residents, we can take out ads in the local papers, release a press release in our region as well as surrounding regions, PSA's, city newsletters and websites, EDC mailing lists, Business Retention Committee (BRC) company visits, and possible a mailer insert in a utility bill. If you have any additional thoughts on how to promote this site, please contact me at your convenience. Southwest California Trademark I will be meeting with Stan Harter during October to better understand the trademark process and requirements. I have scheduled this item on our October agenda so that we can decide how we want the Southwest California name to be used. If an outside agency or company would like to use the name, they may be required to obtain written approval from this organization. It is also important to determine the interest in pursuing those who misuse the Southwest California name or brand via cease and desist letter, etc. I will provide a more detailed update for you at our next meeting. Trade shows On behalf of the Alliance, I will attend the following conference and trade shows: National Association of Office and Industrial Properties (NAIOP) Oct. 19-22 San Diego, CA Corporate Office & Real Estate Network (CoreNET) Nov. 6-10 San Antonio, TX Speaking engagements On behalf of the Alliance, I have been asked to speak at the 2005 CALED conference in Monterey. The subject is yet to be determined, however, those mentioned include regional partnerships, website and GIS and regional branding. This will again be great exposure for the Alliance and I will keep you informed as this develops. Industrial Development Bond (IDB) I am pleased to announce that CompuTrus' bond issue closed a few weeks ago. This was the first bond issue the Alliance was involved with from the beginning. CompuTrus Inc. is building a 38,000 s.f. facility in Lake Elsinore for their engineering and manufacturing of the metal plates that hold trusses together. We continue to promote IDB's and the assistance the Alliance can provide in the process through the Alliance web -site and our collateral materials. Southwest Airlines I continue to work with Southwest Airlines on various ways we can work together in marketing our region to business travelers. After meeting with Kelly Yang, Marketing Director for Southwest, the Alliance has been asked to come up with a proposal for what it is we are looking for; i.e. tickets, advertising in the in-flight magazine, etc., and what we will give in return; i.e. advertising on web -site, web link, and other ideas yet to be determined. This item will be on the agenda for October so that we can brainstorm and submit a clear, concise proposal. On behalf of the Alliance, I attend the following meetings on an on -going basis: Murrieta-Temecula Group SWRC EDC Board Meetings Business Retention Committee Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Government Action Committee Business Attraction Advisory Committee LE EDC 1-15-1 Partnership Meetings Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest California region If you need any additional information or have any questions, please contact me at (951) 696.1578. Sincerely, Stevie Field Manager, Business Development Copy: Belinda Graham Robert Moran EDqq October 15, 2004 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: EDC Activity Summary — September 2004 Business and Workforce Development Staff responded to the following 3 business and workforce development requests in September 2004: Date Lead Source Request Action Taken 9/3/04 In -Person Client requested assistance with Met with client and provided contacts and other contacts to market commercial marketing strategies. offices ace located in Murrieta. 9/13/04 In -Person Client requested assistance with Met with client and provided strategies to market health marketing business. & wellness business in Southwest California. 9/28/04 Phone Client requested a referral to Provided client with 3 business contacts. someone who could write his business plan. Community Outreach Staff and/or directors attended the following meetings/events to promote or support economic development/community outreach: • TVCC Legislative Summit Planning Meeting (9/2) • Komen Race for the Cure Planning Meetings (9/2, 9/14 & 9/21) • Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce Annual Luncheon (9/9) TVCC Partners in Education Meeting (9/13) UCR Connect Meeting (9/14) State of the Inland Empire (9/17) Business Retention • Business Relations Committee Meeting (9/2) —Meeting minutes are attached. Administration/Or2anization • EDC Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Meeting (9/9) • EDC Industrial Committee meeting (9/1) Meeting minutes are attached. • EDC Education Committee Meeting (9/17) • EDC Board of Directors Meeting (9/16) - Meeting minutes are attached. Jim O'Grady City of Temecula EDC Activity Summary — September 2004 Page 2 of 2 Administration - Staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office; managed website updates; processed membership renewals and packets; coordinated the EDC Quarterly Luncheon; wrote letters of support for March JPA and for a grant to benefit MSJC; filed paperwork to change the corporate name to reflect Southwest California; attended 2 of 7 Leadership Academy classes (classes are ongoing); and distributed the following business development/community announcements: ➢ Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce Annual Luncheon & Economic Briefing ➢ 2004 Legislative Summit ➢ First Team #1079 (Chaparral Robotics Team) Annual Picnic ➢ UCR 6`h Annual Industry Day October 27, 2004 ➢ Foreign Trade Zone Workshop ➢ 50 Free UCR Extension Classes This concludes the activity summary for September 2004. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 677-1862. Respectfully, Diane Sessions Executive Director ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, September 2, 2004 - 9:00 a.m. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 Committee Members Present: Lisa Marie Ellis, Cutting Edge Staffing Stan Harter, Mirau, Edwards, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Chris Masino, CDM Group Lane McGhee, ARROW STAFF Resources Jim O'Grady, City of Temecula Greg Prudhomme, Kuebler, Prudhomme & Company Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Harry Shank, Southwest Community Bank Gary Youmans, Community National Bank Guests: Kim Joseph Cousins, Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce Liz Yuzer, Economic Development Corporation Call To Order • Chair Stan Harter called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. He introduced Kim Joseph Cousins, the new president/CEO of the Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce. Introductions of other members present were made. Follow-up Action Reports • There were no follow-up action items to report. Campanv Contact Reports • RAW Motorsports — Jim O'Grady reported on his visit with Dana Cote, owner of RAW Motorsports in Temecula. RAW Motorsports manufactures custom and semi -custom dune buggies. They began the business in Hemet as a speed shop eight years ago and located to Temecula five years ago. Mr. Cote liked doing business in the area because off -road motor sports were very popular. Primary customers were located in Southwest California and San Diego County although he did have customers throughout the western United States. Mr. O'Grady reported that the company leases their 2,200-square-foot facility and planned to expand their facility to the Westside Business Park. They employ nine full-time workers and would increase their employee base with their expansion. The employees were trained on -site. Mr. Cote was happy doing business in Southwest California. • D. L. Phares & Associates — Harry Shank reported on his visit with David Phares, owner of D. L. Phares & Associates. The company was a provider of real estate services in the areas of development, property management, investments and brokerage. They had been in Southwest California for all of their 26 years of operation. The business was growing since the region was one of the strongest growth areas in the state. The only business disadvantage of the area was the transportation infrastructure. Primary customers were builders, start-up and move -up companies. Mr. Shank reported that their present 2,000-square-foot facility was leased but their new office building that was now under construction would be company -owned. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes — September 2, 2004 Page 2 of 3 There were no plans to increase the number of employees with the move into the new building. The company employed six full-time employees who lived one in Temecula, two in Hemet, two in San Diego County and another in Riverside County. They used newspaper classifieds and referrals to recruit new employees and they also trained in-house. Mr. Phares' biggest concerns were the developer fees levied by the cities and interest rates. They were happy doing business in Southwest California. Mr. Phares would be willing to be a contact person for companies relocating to the area. • CDM Group — Chris Masino reported on the visit he and Harry Shank had with Charlie Nichols, president of CDM Group. The company is a real estate brokerage firm. They had been in Southwest California for all of their twenty years in operation. Mr. Masino indicated that business was growing due to affordable housing and good schools. Business disadvantages of the area were traffic and the quality of labor. They presently leased their 2,000-square-foot facility and planned to build a 6,000- square-foot facility on S79 by the end of the year. They would occupy 3,000 square -feet of the new facility and lease the remainder. They anticipated using more technology in the next few years and believed that improvements in telecommunications technology would be beneficial. The company was staffed with seven full-time employees who all lived in the Temecula/Murrieta area. They planned to add four more employees to their staff if they can find qualified persons with Certified Property Management certification for their property management positions. Major obstacles or issues facing their business were finding quality employees, interest rates and the economy. Mr. Nichols was happy doing business in Southwest California and he would be willing to be a contact person for companies relocating to this area. • Channel Commercial Corporation — Lane McGhee reported on the visit he had with Bill Channell, president of Channell Corporation in Temecula. Channell was a global designer and manufacturer of equipment supplied to telephone companies and cable television network operators. They had been irroperation for 22 years and relocated to Southwest California 16 years ago from Glendora. Mr. Channell moved the company to the area due to available land and good quality of life, but disadvantages of the area were primarily an inadequate workforce. Business activity was stable but Mr. Channell expected growth over the next 6-12 months. Their primary market was both national and international with operations in Toronto, London and Sydney as well as their headquarters in Temecula. Mr. Channell believed that improvements in the area's telecommunications technology would be beneficial. They owned two buildings and leased a third to provide 400,000 square -feet of facilities. They planned to add 100,000 square -feet over the next two years and would increase the labor base by 100 employees due to moving their United Kingdom operation to Temecula plus the projected growth in the company. Presently the company employed more than 400 workers, with 85% of those employees living in Temecula/Murrieta, Lake Elsinore/Wildomar, Hemet/San Jacinto, and Sun City/Menifee. The remaining employees came from San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles counties. The company was experiencing recruitment problems due to the lack of skilled white- collar workers and the difficulty in keeping unskilled labor. Workers comp and insurance issues were also major obstacles facing their business. Mr. Channell expressed concern about the lack of low cost housing for his labor force. He did indicate that he was happy doing business in Southwest California. Action: Mr. Channell would like information on the availability of ESL courses and local vendor and supplier lists. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes — September 2, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Goal Progress Resort • Diane Sessions announced that visits and phone interviews in the second month of the fiscal year were as follows: Goal: 60 surveys completed. YTD VISIT PHONE SURVEYS Goal 60 Actual 5 5 Oven Discussion • EDC Board Update — Diane Sessions reported that the next EDC Quarterly Luncheon would be held September 23, 2004 at Pechanga Resort and Casino. Colonel Pete Bentley, consultant to the March Joint Powers Authority, would speak on matters relating to Base Realignment and Closure scheduled for 2005. A donation of $10,000 from the EDC would be presented to Colonel Bentley at the luncheon in support of their lobbying efforts to keep March open as an Air Reserve Base. Ms. Sessions also announced that the Legislative Summit would be held on September 10 at Pechanga Resort and Casino. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:05 a.m. DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MEETING MINUTES Thursday, September 16, 2004 - 9:00 a.m. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce 26790 Ynez Court, Temecula, CA 92592 BOARD MEMBERS Marlene Best, City of Lake Elsinore Scott Crane, Southwest Healthcare System Maryann Edwards, Temecula Valley Unified School Dist. Stevie Field, Southwest California Economic Alliance John Fili, Solid State Stamping Dennis Frank, UC Riverside Extension Stan Harter, Mirau, Edwards, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Melanie Nieman, Eastern Municipal Water District Jim O'Grady, City of Temecula Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Greg Prudhomme, Kuebler Prudhomme and Company Claude Reinke, The Californian Harry Shank, Southwest Community Bank EDC STAFF Diane Sessions Liz Yuzer DRAFT MEMBERS AND GUESTS Kimberly Adams Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Paul Anderson, Strategic Catalysts, hic. Kim Cousins Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce Lisa Mane Ells, Cutting Edge Staffing Carrie Kumano Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Christina Lindley, Keeton Construction Chris Masino, CDM Group Cherise Manning Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Valerie Skovron Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Alice Sullivan Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Chuck of Temecula CALL TQ ORDER • Board President Dennis Frank called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. He welcomed members and guests and presented membership renewal materials to a number of board members. APPROVE AGENDA • Motion was made by Claude Reinke, seconded by Maryann Edwards and carried unanimously to approve the agenda as presented. MINUTES • The Board reviewed the minutes of the August 19, 2004 Board of Directors Meeting. Motion was made by Stan Harter, seconded by Jim O'Grady and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the August 19, 2004 Board of Directors Meeting as presented. FINANCIAL REPORT • August 31, 2004 Financial Reports: The Board reviewed the August 31, 2004 Financial Report that showed total monthly revenues of $44,284, total expenses of $6,537 and total cash -in -bank of $140,324. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting — September 16, 2004 Minutes — Page 2 of 3 Motion was made by Claude Reinke, seconded by Rex Oliver and carried unanimously to approve the August 31, 2004 Financial Report as presented. NEW BUSINESS • Update on EDC Quarterly Luncheon: Diane Sessions reported that the next EDC Quarterly Luncheon would be held September 23, 2004 at Pechanga Resort and Casino. The speaker at the luncheon would be Colonel Pete Bentley, consultant to the March Joint Powers Authority on matters relating to Base Realignment and Closure scheduled for 2005. A check for $10,000 from the EDC would be presented to Colonel Bentley at the luncheon in support of their lobbying efforts. • Update on Lobbying Efforts for DHL at March ARB: Dennis Frank announced that the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce was organizing a bus for those interested in traveling to Riverside Convention Center on September 22, 2004 to attend the meeting regarding air cargo contracts at March Air Reserve Base. • Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Tourism Council Presentation: Cherise Manning, Chair of the Temecula Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, announced that they began in 1989 with ten members and now had 130 members. They were now the largest committee within the Chamber of Commerce. Marketing efforts included filming of "Taste of California" which was being shown on United Airlines flights, FAM or familiarization tours being given in the area, participation in trade shows, an updated website, and continuous research with surveys and public forum workshops. Ms. Manning reported that $1.4 B was being spent every day in the United States on tourism and that 86% of the tourists in California were from California. She also indicated that the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) in Temecula is 8% which is tmmrthan surrounding communities. Raising the TOT would require a vote by residents but additional funds would assist the marketing efforts of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. Mr. Manning was also pleased to report on the close working relationship between the TVCVB and the City of Temecula Economic Development Department. • EDC Business Relations Committee Annual Presentation: Stan Harter, Chair of the Business Relations Committee, presented their report on the visits made by the committee in the past two years and the information collected. Survey information included questions about years in operation, where companies relocated from and reasons for relocation, where their employees lived, and if they were happy doing business in Southwest California. Mr. Harter reported that company issues were addressed by the committee on a case by case basis. • City Updates: City of Lake Elsinore — Marlene Best reported that the Riverside County Transportation Commission was hosting a meeting this evening at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center to consider transportation options to Orange County. City of Murrieta — Rex Oliver reported that Verizon was installing fiber optic cable to all businesses and residences and that Murrieta was one of four cities in the country selected for this installation. He also reported that a 460,000-square-foot shopping center would be located at the northwest corner of Clinton Keith and I-215. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting — September 16, 2004 Minutes — Page 3 of 3 City of Temecula — Jim O'Grady reported that staff was working on the development of criteria for office space in light industrial areas in the city; a new business called For Golfers Only had opened on Hwy. 79 So.; and an educational needs survey for students and employers was being conducted. • Additional Announcements: Dennis Frank reported on the success of the Legislative Summit that was held on September 10. He also announced that the roster for the Leadership Academy was filled and that there was a waiting list for next year's classes. Mr. Frank also reported that Menifee Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Julie Johnson had requested support to counter proposed zoning changes from commercial to residential in the Menifee area. Jim O'Grady added that the City of Temecula was also concerned about the proposed changes and that Steve Brown with the City of Temecula had additional information about the issue. ADJOURNMENT • Dennis Frank thanked Alice Sullivan and the staff of the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce for providing the conference room for the meeting. At 10:15 a.m., motion was made by Stevie Field, seconded by Jim O'Grady and carried unanimously to adjourn the board meeting. Respectively submitted by: ElizabellrYtrzer Recording Secretary Maryann Edwards Board Secretary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY INDUSTRIAL COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, September 1, 2004 — 8:30 a.m. EDC Offices, 37552 Winchester Road, Murrieta, CA 92563 Committee Members Present: John Fili, Solid State Stamping, Inc. Charolette Fox, League of Women Voters & L.O.C.A.L. Partners with League of California Cities William Prouty, Global Economic & Workforce Development Coalition Del Ross, Enviro-DAC Diane Sessions, Economic Development Corporation Call To Order • Committee Chair John Fili called the meeting to order at 8:40 a.m. and led self introductions. Review Stakeholders' Matrix • Committee members reviewed the Stakeholders' Matrix from the July 2004 meeting. Diane Sessions reported there were no additional comments from other committee members or interested parties. Mr. Fili recommended that the Committee continue with completing the matrix so it could then focus on identifying regional needs and issues for industrial businesses. The Committee held a brainstorming session to: 1) identify who are the stakeholders of the committee and 2) what their expectations are of the Industrial Committee: Stakeholders 1 heir Kev hxvectattons of the uomtmttee All manufacturing and industrial companies in 1. Keep abreast of legislative issues and Southwest California. advocacy for manufacturing/industrial • Manufacturing businesses 2. Partner with other interested organizations o Owners/Managers 3. Regulatory involvement o Technicians 4. Workshops, newsletters, web -cam o Human Resources o Work force • Agriculture Business • Other Industrial conferencing 5. Networking with peers 6. Human resource sharing 7. Identify areas for HR staff to participate in community 8. Access to available resources and suppliers EDC Industrial Committee Meeting Minutes — September 1, 2004 Page 2 of 3 Stakeholders Their Kev Expectations of the Committee Support industries 1. Business connections • Vendors 2. Marketing surveys/trends • Suppliers 3. Exposure to customers • Transportation Carriers 4. Transportation sharing • Consultants 5. Import/export assistance EDC Members 1. Learn more about industry 2. Information distribution 3. Customer/Supplier opportunities General Public - Workforce 1. Pro -employment environment 2. Technical certification resources 3. Speakers Bureau (through survey) o SCORE o SBDC o Environment Other advocacy groups — • Chambers of Commerce • UCR Connect • Manufacturing Alliance of the Inland Empire • Southwest California Economic Alliance • Other manufacturing organizations and economic development entities Public agencies — • Public utilities (power, water, gas, telecommunications, waste management) • Government (local, state and federal) • Regional school districts — K12 through university level Committee members agreed to complete the matrix at the October 2004 meeting. Committee Goals and Obiectives • Identify Regional Needs and Issues for Industrial Businesses - John Fili recommended the Committee begin identifying needs and issues when the Stakeholders' Matrix is completed. EDC Industrial Committee Meeting Minutes — September 1, 2004 Page 3 of 3 • Special Programs — Mr. Fili reported there were some projects that the Committee may want to consider for its focus: 1) Eastern Municipal Water District brine line, 2) water efficiency programs, 3) First Robotics TEAM 1079, and 4) import/export processes. Other Business • Future of March Air Reserve Base — Diane Sessions reported that March ARB could see a closure in 2005. She explained the efforts being made to keep it open. Ms. Sessions also reported on the application hearing for DHL to locate to March and the efforts by special interest groups to oppose the application. • EDC Board Update — Diane Session reported the Board had approved a $10,000 cash donation toward lobbying efforts by March Joint Powers Authority to help keep March ARB from closing. • Other Announcements — Bill Prouty provided literature on the Global Economic & Workforce Development Coalition and Global Manufacturing Industry Alliance. Next Committee Meeting • The next EDC Industrial Committee Meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, October 6, 2004 at 8:30 a.m. in the EDC offices. Mr. Fili recommended that committee members call on EDC manufacturing members to invite them to the next meeting. He further suggested that the manufacturing members be invited to the October 2004 Board of Directors meeting. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m. L Just east of LA is a sweep of California's heartland —the Inland Empire. Mountains and deserts echo with Old West history and Hollywood's hideaways. Map a modem escape to Idyl6ild's quaint mile -high village, Riverside's historic inns, Temecula's wineries and antique stores. There's great outlet shopping in Ontario and Barstow —along finger -snapping Route 66. SrpYMn{o Take to the air in a balloon, play 18 holes or" your luck at one of our son Ftmck m Vegas -style casinos. Hike, bike or ski alpine terrain, wander Calico ghost town, browse art galleries or take in a festival. Grab your keys and hit the gas— errs there are fresh views around tw every bend in the road! r Spa getaways rejuvenate 16 ^ �. r e o _ z 1 f �'aopn``a On Trai�sp�rt try �, ,. kT T&9CUL ► Enjoy Historic Old Town, Golf, Wine Country, Ballooning, Shopping, Museums and Special Events. Call or Visit Our Website for a Beautiful Temecula Brochure. 866-676-5090 - 9S1-S06.5100 www.cityoftemecula.org �pCot.�sr%ry 4 Set in one of Southern California's m Il' ost beautiful valleys Ttn eendas Wine ' Country has it all - 19 award winning '+ wineries, year-round wine tasting, special' everts, dining, shopping, golf, ballooning t and more! Call or visit our website for a colorfid Wine Country brochure. 1-800-801-NiVE k witim temeculawines.count n Ties ad spamsnrcd 63 the Riverside Cnunry ReOnolpde neveloprvev[ Agevry Ask About Resort Packages Gaming • Wine Tours • Golf 1-888-732-4264 RESORT f4 CASINO PECNANGA 1-15 • Temecula 45000 Pechanga Parkway www.pechadrga.com Enter chance Ufiail Rfilka MO , ReadE NEOSSAAa. dater or a ehanVtI to win a tr la or n tr me Rader S d n Card odineanium ary atlm imprd jo°e fib m rtuirt mANe purr, I name. afAav sior pha a number ao! maa a oreT WAYS IRGONE. IN PIUSeld Id., lenm, NA'011d0. TO THE SAN DIEGO ZOO61 'e tam 4 `ano`Ran Aieg don i Geuwly, pm tame, Wdnu and pbane oumber on.1 a 5 p¢p d pepr and mar m WESIWyS M* trIai a it addnm root R kviman arapvd. I fnnn muse k.rtrened ro lapr rM1an midnioba Mon. ( �'/ II (Adam �d ckage ✓"d es: do A Family 4-pack of tickets to the San Diego Zoo. de San Diego Zoo Gift Bag. ' au, ImA dame0ed, akpYle or inmmplev entire. [Wffy eb aid their anediah famfin of AAA and it . d ft. parfi efilian dpbtag ponmadd dnal eendore an tree" pmddn a art ma diepem in in"'Orlyone r AM k alkwed. Winner man a At Iran V lean of V and a US. reddMa Open to rcAin of WESIWAIS MAGAZINE Winner wa be tendAndf WeirdInadrea�gandahnnlnfa doa5pngm•.i j Iay Ianm, Mk an or A;A Nm. q 3001: hdeN. • Iwo complimentary nights in a one -bedroom suite at the Town & Country Resort Hotel and four (4) Breakfast Buffet lump tp� a d Art do a* no` Added i" bUrt nnml inmpmpcn ha repo and al abee ' �`e gotas q pad r, � ^�duaNd'At efe 1 winner d send `adage pone o doh. pr t Iced � Emmapd reps slue n A75OWid�wberc pinhibjvd k law. AN indent, suit and Intel Ian apply. Jedg6 dewmu anfund No subsnNnon w prise. /me a Coupons each morning. SAN D I EGO yw n award vd wA be rn aakb3q Lone mdwn ram mir ap*..0 mrdfimn a, be Y - `remand At tlme d rt"nor, - �. 1- \ 1 l . I not tanins an ble and not p, ran for ink Odds eof , ninnies an apendenl opm de numEer of ennin , t reared Pnae inner mint Inapt or didim t e,p ire 1 oRpd `nee tat daimed wiring 30 days of n ofiv 1 thin ad be deemed forkad and only be awardod m I u -edam. winner. Winner wa be mdfitd. by pm. fled mad Ad nl be mympd 0 sign andmoem an ; auk of dp66ty pubrwq unpnt and Wharf ��VASIPWAYS ��� ' Neap thin 30 dap of Indpoan m x altemep i nare d bel,panpN #Ip envelope to in",, r wumer ad be Weved in name of pone winner, and PEpp�Rp, 'ary44Vrr+age}— 0OMF0�1� �=' ' — 0 re, fdwr, d Cmoury Retort Hoer! i. proud m be a Cm Caulra ltr%rind Hnrcl NAGILNE Rao Otago Ion Gnaw 3131 joining I. Road, A311, raga Met, U ndM by Ma.: 1, 3004. Atm ""iota an for up no Sour 141 people only and rtaenadma snEjen m in four And are nat add during spedd:ma. Wagea. and among d— print a apod.kr art a a bekre N. I, 1005. 84 Travel Guide CcnnromhcdnnnhP, Anna APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR FINA� CITY MANAGER R CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for the month of September, 2004. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report September / October 2004 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: October 26, 2004 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. John Warner Road Assessment District Under this project an assessment district was formed. This district includes the construction of street and storm drain improvements in the John Warner Road area. Minor punch list items, mainly addressing resident concern/complaints, remain outstanding, and will be addressed the week of 10/18/04. Final job walk is anticipated to be held week of 10/18/04. 2. Rancho California Road Widening & Median Modifications East of Ynez Road The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. In addition, a dedicated right turn lane will be added on the eastbound direction on Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Final punch list items addressed the week of 10/4104. Final landscaping walk-through was performed and 90-day landscape maintenance period began on 10/6/04. Final job walk-through is to be held the week of 10/18/04. 3. Old Town Community Theatre This project will construct a 20,000 square foot community theater complex and refurbishes the existing Mercantile Building. The acquisition of 4th Street right of way is complete. All environmental permits have been obtained. Construction started on 3-3-04 and the allowable working days (14 months + 16 days) extends to 5-05-05. Work is progressing on the erection of structural steel, framing and site utilities. 4. Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements — Phase II This project will construct the storm drain triple box culvert and the channel improvements north of Loma Linda. As part of this stage the entire Pechanga Parkway, Phase II project will be environmentally cleared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Muirfield Drive is temporarily closed to residents. Detour signs have been installed to direct the residents around the construction zone. Loma Linda Road will be temporarily repaved after a 60" storm drain line is completed. Pedestrians and school children have a separate sidewalk through the construction zone. The sidewalk has chain link fencing on each side to guide the pedestrians/school children through the construction zone. 5. Pechanga Parkway Phase 1113 Storm Drain Improvements (Wolf Valley Creek Channel - Stage 2) The project includes construction of a grass lined channel/box culverts from Loma Linda Road to Deer Hollow Road. The contractor has completed the box culvert at Wolf Creek Drive North. 1 R:\MonthlyAcdvityReport\C[P\2004\September- October.doc The box culvert at Wolf Valley Road is currently under construction. A traffic detour south of Wolf Valley Road has been completed and pedestrians/school children have a separate sidewalk through the construction zone. At Wolf Creek Drive South, the sewer line is completed and the box culvert is currently under construction. Completion date for the project is early January. 6. Diaz Road Realignment Phase I, Traffic Signals Under this project, two traffic signals will be installed, one on Diaz Road at Rancho Way and the other one on Rancho California Road at Business Park Drive/Vincent Moraga. Also, a northbound lane will be added on Diaz Road from Rancho Way to Via Montezuma (Low Flow Crossing). Contractor has completed the paving on Diaz Road. Contractor has completed most of the work and is waiting on the delivery of the traffic signal poles. 7. Vail Ranch Park (Near Pauba Valley School) -Add Amenities This project will add amenities, including play equipment, to the recently annexed Vail Ranch Park. A pre -construction meeting was held on June 7th. The contractor submitted the equipment information for review and approval. Equipment and Polygon Shade Structure have been ordered. Curb and sidewalk around the play area has been installed. Play equipment has been installed. Picnic tables, trash receptacles and benches have been delivered to the site. Shade structures are scheduled to be installed the week of October 25, 2004. 8. Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation - Phase II This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue from south of Overland Drive to Rancho California Road. The design includes a complete reconstruction of the road within the project limits. In addition, problematic driveways will be reconstructed. Pavement rehab work on Diaz Rd is part of this project via Construction Change Order (CCO) No. 1 (per City Council meeting dated 6/22/04). Construction started on 07/06/04. The TCP was approved on 9/30/2004; night work began Sunday, 10/10. Ph 1 includes reconstructing the west side of Jefferson. Griffith will perform the Hampton Inn median stretch of the road next weekend (day & night work). Other forthcoming CCOs include additional CAB & 2.5" rock (due to unstable soil). The cameras on Del Rio & Via Montezuma have been installed & re -aligned. Griffith exposed themselves to Liquidated Damages, as they expect to complete the project by late November. 9. Landscaping and Sidewalk On SR 79 South (Old Town Front Street to Pechanga Parkway) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewalk, irrigation, and landscaping along State Route 79 South between Old Town Front Street and Pechanga Parkway. All work, including CCO's, was completed 10/04/04. Acceptance of the work was submitted to Council 10/12/04. Contractor's Affidavit of Completion of Work and Maintenance Bond have been filed. 10. Citywide Concrete Repairs - FY 2003/ 2004 This project continues the annual citywide concrete repairs program for City streets. The Contractor has completed about one-half of the concrete work. The City has given the contractor 17 additional locations to repair. 11. Pechanga Parkway Landscape Improvements This project will complete the landscaping that was required as part of doing the sound walls on 2 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- October.doc Pechanga Parkway. America West Landscape is installing the irrigation lines and preparing the ground to receive the plantings. 12. Traffic Signal Installation — Citywide Under this project, traffic signals will be installed on Meadows Parkway at La Serena and at Rancho Vista. Staff met with representatives of Temecula Valley Unified School District on November 20, 2003, to obtain their input on the installation of the traffic signal at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and La Serena. Bids were opened on July 13th. The lowest bidder was DBX, Inc. with a bid amount of $329,040.00. The City Council awarded the contract at the July 27th meeting. This project will begin construction in mid November 2004. The delay in construction is due to the availability of the traffic signal poles. 13. Veteran's Memorial This project will construct a Veteran's Memorial next to the Duck Pond. The artist and the concept have been chosen. Bid opening was held on 8/19/04; one bidder only, SFM Constructors, for $160.000. Construction begun on 8/30/04. As of 10/11/04, all concrete flatwork is complete, as well as the structural concrete for the planter wall. Contractor began setting the granite tiles and service plaques on the planter wall on 10/11/04; work on setting granite pavers on the memorial steps is to begin 10/18/04. Contractor began working on an accelerated schedule on 9/29/04 (20 hours OT/week), and much ground has been made up since then. Project now approx. one week behind schedule, and is anticipated to meet completion date of 11/4/04. 14. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson This project will widen Winchester road between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson Avenue. It will also add a right turn lane from Eastbound Winchester to Southbound Jefferson, starting at Enterprise Circle. With several properties affected by the widening project still in escrow, temporary rights -of - entry are in the process of being acquired in order to be able to begin construction. Until such time as either rights -of -entry are acquired or escrow closes on all properties, submittal review and utility coordination constitute the bulk of project activity. 15. Temecula Sports Complex A new 40+ Acres sports complex will be built at the corner of Pechanga Parkway and Deer Hollow Way. Bids were opened on September 16, 2004. The contract was awarded to Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. at the September 28, 2004 Council meeting. The contract award amount is $13,365,055.51. RFP's for artificial turf contractor and geotechnical testing are underway. Coordination with utility companies continues. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS NONE 3 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\Sepwmber- Octobendoc PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Pechanga Parkway (Formerly Pala Road) Improvements — Phase II (SR 79 South to Pechanga Road) This project will widen Pechanga Parkway (formerly Pala Road) to its ultimate width from the Pechanga Parkway Bridge to Pechanga road. The City is working with Caltrans' Local Assistance and City's Environmental Consultant to re-classify the Preliminary Environmental Document Classification (NEPA) of the project to a Categorical Exclusion with required technical studies (involving Federal action). The City met with the consultant to review the remaining plan check comments. 100% plans should be submitted to the City within a couple of weeks. The Planning Department completed Addendum No. 3 to the Wolf Creek EIR and the Notice of Determination (NOD) for the project. The Addendum and NOD were needed to satisfy all CEQA requirements for the project. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is requiring that the City process an individual permit in addition to a nationwide permit for the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The individual permit will be provided to the City the week of October 18. This project was divided into two stages. The first stage is to construct the storm drain triple box culvert and the channel improvements north of Loma Linda. The second stage will construct the remaining street improvements and drainage structures. Construction of this stage will start once the first stage is completed. 2. Pechanga Parkway - Muirfield Drive Traffic Signal Under this project, a traffic signal will be installed on Pechanga Parkway at Muirfield Drive. Traffic signal poles have been ordered and final design plans will be submitted to the City the week of October 18. 3. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and services. A separate parcel has been created for the library for bond purposes. The City was approved for funding by the State on October 28, 2003. TCSD will coordinate the submittal of plans between the architect and the State. Land development has commented on the re -submittal of the civil Drawings and they have been returned to the architect. Building & Safety has reviewed both the civil and building drawings with minimal comments. LPA is currently redesigning the exterior to accommodate the replacement of EIFS with plaster, design is 70% complete. This will need to be reviewed by Building & Safety. An RFQ for contractors and an RFP for Geotechnical and special inspection services was published on 10/5/04. A project presentation meeting was held on 10/14/04 and eleven contractors attended. The RFP is due 10/22/04 and the RFQ is due 10/27/04. 4. Pauba Road Improvements — Phase II (Margarita Road to Showalter Road) This project will widen Pauba Road from Showalter to just west of Margarita Road to its ultimate width. The City has reviewed the 100% Design Plans submitted by the consultant. Specifications are under review. Plans were sent to all utilities and utility issues are being addressed. Work is being coordinated with the library project, which resumed since State funds have been secured. A new RCW D waterline is under design to service the library project. It will tie into an existing line that ends just west of Margarita Road. TCSD has requested the waterline be extended past the Library. This extension was added to the second submittal which was received on October 4, 2004. Review is in progress by the City and RCW D. 4 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- October.dm 5. Murrieta Creek Bridge - Overland Drive Extension to Diaz Road This project will entail alignment studies and the design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. The project includes the widening of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Commerce Center Drive, and the extension of Overland Drive across Murrieta Creek to Diaz Road. Coordination with RCFC & WCD and the Corp of Engineers is required. Staff ha reviewed the 30% design plans and plan check comments were returned to the consultant for revisions and re -submittal to the City. 6. Bridge Barrier Rail Upgrade, Rainbow Canyon Road over Pechanga Creek/Del Rio Road over Empire Creek This project will replace the existing barrier rails of the Rainbow Canyon Bridge over Pechanga Creek and the Del Rio Road Bridge over Empire Creek. Project plans and specs are 100% complete and are ready to bid. Caltrans Local Assistance group was provided with copy of submittals for the third time. We finally got confirmation that it was sent to Caltrans HQ for Authorization to Construct. 7. Fire Station -Wolf Creek Site A fire station will be built at the Wolf Creek Site. Standard Pacific Homes has posted a deposit for the redesign of the station to better match their development architecture. STK amendment has been approved by City Council. Redesign, funded by developer, will begin with a kickoff meeting to be held Wed. 10/19/04. Schedule and estimated date will be determined at that time. 8. Murrieta Creek Multi Purpose Trail This project will build portions of the equestrian and bike trails along Murrieta Creek within City limits. The City has received a federal grant of $1,214,000. Caltrans has given the City the "Authorization to Proceed with Preliminary Engineering." We are working with US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and Riverside County Flood Control to coordinate the trail design with the Murrieta Creek Improvement project. The City received comments from Caltrans on the Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) on April 22, 2004 and is working on addressing them. The Natural Environmental Study (Minimal Impacts) (NES (MI)) was submitted to Caltrans on April 7, 2004, no comments have been received to date. The PES response to comments was completed and resubmitted to Caltrans on September 23, 2004. 9. State Route 79 South Medians Under this project medians will be constructed on State Route 79 South within the City of Temecula limits. PDC is making the 1 st plan check (30%) corrections. PDC has submitted an alternate storm drain plan for the City's review. 10. Guardrail Installation and Replacement On Rainbow Canyon Road In this project, old guardrails will be replaced and new guardrails will be installed in needed locations on Rainbow Canyon Road within the City of Temecula. PS&E is 95% complete. NES (MI) was submitted to Caltrans on 10/18/04, including their comments/revisions. Upon approval, Caltrans will approve the PCE/CE in compliance with NEPA. City has filed a NOE with the County to meet CEQA requirements. PS&E certification and Request for Authorization (to construct) have been initiated. 5 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- Octobecdoc 11. Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Under this project, 10,000 square feet remnant parcel west of Front Street, which was created by the realignment of First Street, will be landscaped. Plans are essentially complete. The project will be advertised for bids during the next period. 12. Rancho California Road Widening, Old Town Front Street to 1-15 (Southside) This project will provide a right turn lane for southbound 1-15 motorists and explore the possibility of providing a dual left turn lane from westbound RCR to southbound Front Street. Alternatives study is complete and the City has chosen alternative no.1. (widen the south side of the entire length between Old Town Front and 1-15). An MND (CEQA) was completed and a notice of determined was sent to the County on 10/11 /04. Right of entries to perform a geologic investigation on the roadway embankment (two properties) were sent out at the end of September. 13. Fire Station - Northeast Site (Roripaugh Ranch) This project will construct a new fire station in the north part of the City. The timing of the station will be impacted by the developer's ability to provide finished street grades, final site utilities, and finish all site grading. PS&E approval and authorization to be bid was obtained at the July 13 meeting. Bids were opened on 08-19-04 and there is project funding deficit of $1.92 million. Due to the funding issues the anticipated award date is 11-09-04 along with consideration of CM services from proposals received on 7-08-04. 14. Main Street Bridge Over Murrieta Creek (Replacement) This project will replace the existing Main Street Bridge over Murrieta Creek. The freeboard issue that was a potential stumbling block has been resolved, and the bridge profile will remain unchanged. Design process is ongoing; consultant is working toward 70% design. No significant changes since last month; 100% design plans is anticipated January, 2005. 15. Vail Ranch Middle School Basketball Court Lighting This project will add lights to the basketball courts at Vail Ranch Middle School. No bids were received at the bid opening due to the scheduling constraints contained in the specifications. The project will be re -bid this spring for construction during the summer break. 16. City Maintenance Facility and Corporate Yard Under this project, an expansion of the maintenance facility will be built on the property adjacent to City Hall. Design of Phase 1, the parking lot, is scheduled for completion by mid October with construction scheduled to begin in December. Concurrent with phase 1, schematic design of phases 1 & 2 (the expansion of the maintenance yard and the new building) will be progressing. Consultant is preparing responses to DRC and Business Park Association in hope of getting site plan approved. Once the Site Plan is approved, Phase 1, the parking lot, will be bid and constructed. 17. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moraga Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. Staff is modifying the plans to incorporate the Phase I improvements. Right of Way acquisition process is ongoing. Plans have been sent to the utilities companies for their review. 6 R:\MonddyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- Octobendoc 18. Bus Bench Upgrades Under this project, bus benches and shade structures will be installed and existing ones will be upgraded at various locations. Project research on locations of current bus stops, existing bus bench/shade structures, bus bench/shade structure costs and RTA routes is complete. Bus bench/shade structure design and location options were reviewed and a report with recommendations was prepared. The design and locations were approved. Staff is in the final stages of preparing the construction bid documents including ADA and permitting requirements. 19. Localized Storm Drain Improvements This project will fix the drainage problem at the south end of Front Street (at the MW D easement). Baseline right of way and utilities are established. Staff is preparing a conceptual design for presentation to MWD (since it will be on top of their waterline). 20. Traffic Signal at SR79 South and Country Glen Way Under this project, a traffic signal will be installed on State Route 79 South at Country Glen Way. Plans and specifications have been submitted to Caltrans to obtain the Encroachment Permit. 21. Long Canyon Detention Basin - Access Road This project will construct an access road to the Long Canyon Detention Basin being maintained. Surveys of the site are being prepared and design should begin the week of October 25th. 22. Pavement Rehabilitation Program - FY 2004/ 2005 This project continues the annual pavement rehabilitation program for City streets. Preliminary research is being performed in order to begin preparing plans. PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGE 1. 1-15/ SR 79 South Interchange -Project Report (PR) This project will modify the 1-15/ SR 79 South Interchange to accommodate projected future traffic. This is the next step of project development after the completion of the Project Study Report. RBF Consulting (firm that completed the Project Study Report) submitted the PA & ED Proposal. Comments from City and Caltrans were sent to RBF regarding the PA&ED Proposal. Caltrans Environmental review is pending. Upon receipt, RBF will revise the proposal, and negotiations to finalize the design contract will begin. 2. French Valley Parkway Overcrossing and Interchange, Project Report (PR), Plans Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) Preparation This project will construct an interchange between Winchester Road Interchange and the 1-15/1-215 split. The consultant continues to work on the Project Report. The consultant continues to work on the Project Report (PR). Currently, the consultant is working on some additional traffic studies that both FHWA and Caltrans required. Caltrans has completed their review on the results of the traffic study and now M&N will incorporate this info into the PR. In addition, the consultant is finalizing their 7 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- October.doc comments from the Value Analysis and the Accelerated Construction Technology Transfer (ACTT) workshops. We are also continuing to pursue the acquisition of a number of properties to protect them from development. The work on the environmental document continues. 3. Alignment Study for Murrieta Creek Bridge Between Winchester Road and Temecula City Limits and Diaz Road Extension This study will determine the alignment and location of the Murrieta Creek crossing between Winchester Road and the northern City Limits. In addition, the studywill be combined with the Diaz Road Extension alignment study and design. Coordination with the City of Murrieta, Riverside County Flood Control and Army Corps of Engineers is necessary. The Consultant and Staff met with Riverside County Flood Control to discuss possible alignments. The consultant is currently awaiting data from Riverside County Flood Control in order to complete the work on the first draftof the alignment study. In order to proceed with the design of Diaz Road Extension for the proposed college, the alignment study was restarted with the existing information. The consultant is preparing a base map for the Diaz Road extension alignment. PROJECTS THAT ARE SUSPENDED OR ON -HOLD 1. Santa Gertrudis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase II of the Southbound Auxiliary Lane project at the southbound exit ramp for Winchester Road. This project will widen the 1-15 southbound exit -ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just north of Winchester Road. Staff is revisiting the merits of this project in light of the Project Study Report for French Valley Parkway Interchange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the new Interchange. This project is suspended indefinitely. g R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2004\September- October.doc O LL N O� w c Q IL W W_ N LU m 0 le IL Y gJ H Z 22 H LL N O v }w 1- O U w a U) Z W 2 W O w a 2 A 2' W e° W A N M O c o U N 0 C Q O'N x a N m E2 2 T E m O D ry t U m m N D $ 0 EmE 8 m a O O c c N O N S o m 0 $ 030 N m $ C 0 E c y m w Z t C a 2 = m N m � oa O m Y a « O E N a o c m Q O20 U m U L j N j C m s .O L L 2 L O C m C Y« 0 o g m 2 m c c E N a D 3 0 d N m t a D O m T U N L D m «'C O m O O C m 0 O ~ l a 's E� c 0 a O m N c E'� a a y c m 0 = C G $ w y y'3 L 0 m m C D N 2 Dm m m N O L C O O C d o vmwa8w m n m m 2 m j C« D 8 c E N O 0 s$ D m N O m O C y m y C . o 0 o m-M o C m N, %m m N mC, C D m O CO m C y N y O o c 2 a=m w e N a N E O L Q Kam 0 0 C N O w n E m « w U O O 10 N m 0 3 w o$ c O g 0 y Y O U ry O 0 n N O O 0 L> N x c c n N y 0 m am a ~ u - T O C 0 0 E0750 O o_ 0 Q c 4 j O C C m r m y m N t c m,,2ac8m 8 O N m p 0 % m v o 8 c 22 m `m a c m � o a y c a o m a,E a m m c � E.- d$ O J m N L m O d C W E 8 d Q E 0 a a r a u u T ro Z m m N N f m m C c 9 m m m O N �tll N N m m w y w m E o m c O i w mU 0 c�^a EU 0� EU00= F �d C cDH 'N y.�� 0m�p inm3� m C O c w a U ro U 0 t E m a c m TJY C T d y w 3 d m E co L' of =� m e umi = 8 2 EU a a w _ c m a K o 2 'u N o E Ku E Ew'A cp w mC)c 33x m 3�,ma a .� `m o U c ieNmm m m} ieyo0 N cam. �1VU n. yU .. 0. y9.. v q 0 2 u U h O w c c' D 3 N m a E o C N 1 E c o c 0 J m O Q N a >a CD LL O N W Q IL f U w 2 w LL O H V O O N O I r w w _ U) ww LL O w IL Y J 2 H Z O 2 N H w 3 O w a N H Z w 2 w O w Ca 6 Q H T 2 m_ m Tam E o .. c¢ E a o ,� m i a ~ a> m m m d r> a m E^ �a U J d 3 o L y n �` m n c L 3 a T C d L L d m O C d Q C m 0 c7. o a o c'p d 0 «:.• oiU w c m I 0 d N m J m d w` N d c c J L ; v L` d dm D U m O ` O N (") '41 Y 'r+ O Q -6 a� n N o a C d «y L 'C ,L„ L� d 3_$ oa O L '� N 2 a; w m 2-2 r J u c E- w O U m m w y'^a a o !° o E d~ a N U m w O L C y'C y D d D Q a vi 3 m G1 N E y a d m f d 3 L d> y d c� p C U E p U d C« w3 C J L E p C P m m Vi vl O L j a �l d wv dd0 O a 2 L d J d> O wa"1.�4 vZ 6 0 $.. U O 03 C m X 2 0.- m`ZO y d d w L m«yn = P 3 �+7 c 3 a3i £ � O E m c 0 c K y d m O> O 2 02 y �$ D '�k m w o m m 15 � L d w 4' E c` y 020 c U m 10 O p v ¢ o c m t E L° >.Dcm 3 5 i� u �e 3 v d _ 0acm0 Jommmmdaxi cU 32 yU c«a oQ Uc c ° �vo$ mmm L"yca aca`� 4 d E E a_ d >aa�EUoyTi U pp c w y y d O- C- vi o e$ o mm L« p o m U �y3`o�O' ` V x .- d m wd$Ey, 5 d> dJ T C I y d m o° U t a m F U C p p E o 0 m c E d a p D L° _d O N o w :E n y� 2 2- O 2 w a m« a m C O y y d y m U' .7 w�2c cd« oZ~dnS $«« m00N'° 5 3�`m $�Oo_�0 27 �ECEi H C y N d a N > U f0 E C d� N p = U d d L O j$ "a m 5 C L o c O O «° L a 0 FJ C Q N 6> 9 ¢ U h C_ = f i7 = E v o c L U w m i� N C p nddy N = =a EE yUNl m Um$Ed «c2c0d m 0ym d N O L m w 3o n` EN aO U Oac n R¢« w—U O 6 0- '6 dU Ql d C d T i - C p- d-w d y 6C m y«5d rp y Ea v m o DJ O ro U? U$ ao np yO `d y m 5 E a N ao 'y2u E x 2 U mm ` a E Da «Ja y d C o D yJ m L O C= d NOc « 3E7"i w y DO L 6 O Cy C D 6 LP C$ yCc ON $ 24 -3R_>O w '6 iyi gad aym Ti 0U'?m'c ow mE a @ w o $ E $ m Em0 c o o2,nx d OQ2 m E D adJONOm mL ❑ 3 M L U ¢ w !D m r NDy ynrydCd C O a m > n > m m a a o z v ;o ;� e 00 Q � cz U > O Z S C! t9 m ry C' W f Q N m m 0 o a o > — m m y ¢ L a « N c o 8 �� o,6 m E d E ELF d s O C O o p c W arn d c y.Z yp? Oc E V E E y T m a c N m G'N O L y QI m a ,p d a y a U 'a U y d U U 2 C C E y To c J3 g� K d> Z. Gj d¢cNi ���' aU mw voi y�ro K T '—° %% 9 m O 3 ` U {ra ism <i $« c c w �1 N y 3d -I'E 3 3 0� w 8` O d w u e —S ELL Oai U. V y U C O O V N O go y y 0 y C d dn U 0 d>U 0D >O L 0 �Dmv y c20�cO >m¢Evm UUma Y a b O o z FV+99 t� N A m V ry O e as ' a 4 co LL O Cl) W Q a f D U W 2 w H LL O H U O CD N O F W W S N y N W w CD w a Y J 2 H Z O 2 H U w n O w a cn Z ui 2 W O w IL Q H S �V e�Q S m Oa U � U � ^WS Z N a z 3 yyE..0 U 0u O z 0z �0 O z °a a. a E aai c t00 c c QEvEcTa?c= Q 3« t E d a o .> D roEmn�+co� x Um23 o-c d �0a aL).vm a o H m a Z€ nH m m c c d c a Q m �- U— ErK mco j c E ui x E 7 c t m«° m 8x ma Ti ._U y v u U -ma eLo m d O ELL U O O Q m N U :^S o n�£~ o n 0 c E m v c U= E w,v_E5onE$3 E E S U o v 5 o ut �L:2❑0 ^Q:m€ v = o w� E n� Uo0 E > N 3 O>m t L m 2 N 0 c z = N 3 V :3 E N y 3 M c w N m y w- o d N "u a t m an d W d j Z m y E D >. D c w 3 0.6 m m a c o. Ei. �' 3 � Em 3 n n- 1 W m m E v m m a F *E 0 0 y 15 m 9 c $ t E v 00 Q c c c c u$ m D n o y ¢ m LL v t rn E c OEO p 0 ioi m y C Q LV m a E mi E v mad c 3E w o E y o m d v c— o m> r E� n c m 3 c m° E n c m c w v o m> w o$ g a w v m m L u o. a3i a>>dm cw m(7 m.ry4'a 4 'mU � En da¢ umi of e m e a a Z e m e 32 u u c m w w mCD m g A f O m ° Q m C w o o K � u m W m L N � U F _ N f9 M > ma< E4M ❑ ao L LL a 5 a 3o OE B O O C N O J o m= -6- L' E aai d3 a mD❑ J m o. H K ¢❑ wYi A y U q as i 3 a a U) a 3 00 LL O O w a a f� U w 2 w F- LL O U 0 O N OI O H w w N y w w IL Y J 2 H Z O 2 dN F- U w 3 w IL fA F- Z w 2 w O w Ca L Q H o `v trD c c 5 m m E b w. c n y w D m.£ 0 E_ m = 5 y c 8 am D y D c D ; ° 5.2)w U J c o 2ULN m 4� C OLm yy O C S a= E« ° M°L C WmOam€nm m m E E m n a mU� Q C> 2y « mm oQ a E 2EmEE �O = 0£ E_cEL"D Em cNOD U d 0 0 m O ON cmo2 3 12 2 O E m m « m E Qc c «mo oaoE w mo«�GT0 c 8 2 UZ� N a oL 0= mont9 zv m m ot0� ° ou mc t c 00 mU c- m �oUmmO o E 4 E m Ot y3o '=E0N = L ry E r«2WE v O> EtE E v0 Qa °mUW mYm c m= do Emoy m� 0m E rya £� =UOJ 3 m'ya m>m pm 3 o0 y m Wa o wmo2 c >;c=�_ 1-a j) > ZaammWN. oLy � moomm' tm3m C m=N DUpNm a L aZN�0'y C« �— O N m« «nLL� Q cHm 2 E - N E 0 1cm E KoNm E8E U=>mw W= Hm ME n«= SoE a LL c E E a ca E mm 3d nEEann E m 2 m to m E Q m 0g' no o o o �Zmv 23 jc>n m00�2 ���L E O Lp3CmmmmN`n>-, WNoa E Q En 16 W 3 'Km,aE2. a- mCL �m 2a0 w> ZC p E O WZW mL HKUo p£ a..=a E m m Q U£vO QS U .° T' ° P�9 7- N Y�1 N n tip Oa U CI O N O O G G N O F G 6 M e Q F+ x u m 'qq m lqfz� d v� y md v ,z mm Am ,m m = O m m O.Cj H W H W �Om y c a ° w ma >m9 o >, w a> 3 H c 0 S o 2 O p zy N m o 3 U w U O c F Y = o d o 8 0 M m Z p a U t O N - T U b o = ua WO q U m p a m M a e Fc m0 m m Z m kj. a i 'q d m- =U a= c c T c _ O c o ° e'p .ym. m > ao L F' m Jw ;ate= n o `� m d d � m �o p o t a°i m 0 Dao 0 'M m U: m` U �0aEh c o is Uow m t t0o�' o y m rn ^ w° m m a «L° y F o o m P' O Cj D N m E U 0 0 d U o c m m �° c y m e 0❑ m 3 i� m 3S� T1° °3� a .mS3 3 0 °m m Z+ m°°= =m ° m °�� 3 M m c O J m c c O ~ L J c c dE c m ioa m==�a°m LL �Yw tin UU UUU O av)U F a a C a 0 0 0 co a 3 co O LL N N LLJ O IL i V W 2 W F- LL O U w w y N w I� V w IL Y 3 J 2 H z O 2 N H U W O w a F- z W 2 w O w IL Q '.l O IC _ w m a 0 0 Z a O� L OfA j N d m m a m C 00_ mOr rSi n0 3 A E "c ">_ d d$ 3 d ca' c c cs-D a b m> m u D c w a o c E a d d o d m 3 c$ Q 2$ c .a n m 1 y L T D d y� e m '� m q n m o 2 a N j O 2 LL m'� _ 0 m d ma " J cm aQmo cO:d�= 0cd ' O m0m9D E m m > mm 3 n mmt m> NavO a9n oca o U c c o 2 0 2 mJo2 Jc `v a E o D 3 an d a H o a n £ m a o h 0. uni 13 3o V$v w ddN c c d vi 08 m am "c dm allot na $"Fw c E 3 E a m D d F m 3mm8 n-9D� 2 c 5£ ny o.m d oO2 w `0 P� yd ao'Z J d ami € man of o m c d vl = J y m m m 0 H a m m= $ u 15 n"� m a Z a m a$ E c E o n y `m ` 9 o E a 2= a 5 n o y d m .o = rn d a m a n 0 n '^ o y O m m= E n a c 2 0 " m rn a m c m c m > m a = 0.cc a� ..ate vmc cm39�d�'c-a AND i d v c O _NOC2 �' O= 'Vl m d Y_0 c ama m m m 6'N�>Ud ((pp L D 3 m p m� D d (p m� w C a a N U m •N= =O N .L., _ c 6 d m U o .. U j O C a c ii r N C U O E m L m S o u. m 'c _ v H 3 a n m c o d m H .o n 2 D m c z y « m `Li a m m 9 C N m LO ` S D 6 a« O = O a 2 m m.« d J c _ 0 5 3 m N C d '9 d p d `l C O d 0 N m 00 C C '=� D N O m a D E fn m a 3 N m .L. .L. C H m p L 2 C N 3 D O 2 = a C 'S_J`o .Ze O J d N$0 m m L E .o m 00 C "N mi d L O N N E y> 32 3 c Z'a >m o3 mUm O >.m m E L O m 0 c mmcD. a!_ J d=c a« Vl cc d m 6 =nm ZE T d. mE'S m U U.Sl 2 J 2 cnu w d 0 0, C 2 o m - o F-c mm Em m a m p"m,Z$$ o 0 0 UL$ 5 Un38 m= n o a`6a3mD r m n �z W 2 m c aw J u OO a �v It c S S a a a a a a a < z o o H zz z z z z zz a oa U O Z A t7` H f7`O N O O O Os m > = > w 5 u Do oD m' a U ? m _c A. pp" o J Q d c Q N u0 a L a t O O H9 = r J LL m O ti m Nf C d Q C O U LL z �. O 'o c Y m E Q E ov d m 'mm y> m m j m m i� > 2 d 6 20 Eco N m0 c QO z w d cu > = E SO m a r .c U� r rn d En rnw L a a 0 .m m p tZN 2 K j o m o R' O o .N c m E c O `o Vi D D N a c c 9 0 m cg'« y c m 00 o m c N " y m O m 3 m I ii U O � d E� m O a E m rye. IL ILU m i�U i U N �j `�M ❑ W m J H J n r� 5 _ 0. z 4 Q m 4 4 9 4 w O 8 S i a 00 LL O W Q a fi :.i w 2 W H LL O O O N r N H U W i Ix a `CUO) r Z W 2 w O w a J H W LL n Ql ... m« O m 0 '.C--. J m N° m m Nj ¢1 O' m 6 C c313v«3o8 UU�'o'a:°d vc r o�Eom� m10�EEa-Sco� mom ndm U t«moomo�m L� � .� � 6 �m p ° N E� y 01 2 cO 9 O m a' !� L m 0 2 Cc 'O m mm2 0Vfa�Msl� O Cmca_maL cO r Fm Oc 9«HWmm am0�BFc nm EmUO W J °m m LLmm mUE aUC m m.2 i88 o a2�c °n o ° v oWm o «m C>QE mm c mcCm o ~° -a 95Lmao m 0m E c « o y d E � m nO om c �=m wm o n o o i« c «2c8 m mcmc E E 2-c m'm0 8548 °Ec Eg oc€M 2 2«>` m mm o mcE g'55 o q--Sc q E ¢°28 2Cc a8w8 E c 3 m_ En8$m « Qmmm o m« 0c C Zy L O �iCj 3N C O m mmLCL i(m MN m O«-zm m o om2Z « E O E w `o me=r0 f° " o ' yEc=cc�UHaEo 'o orn D£ c c0 «� o m@a 0 ovCcO v UK3a w Em c$ >`no0 U y 0' O y 6 t ? >' Nc E o yLLLL«o T. 9mmddmj5 Cm c Dn 'amow dm 8m,2,�AA�arEm c 00 6'mom owwB a O$ c o�onS� 08 0a` c) a. 0vi KEUamaE z z UQ v a a z d G M M Z Z Z pa U F, L e � m l c �ry w ti u O 2� � yq m �. in N � a O E N a c a a9 O C O U a. 'H t w a o' 0. 0 ° C 0. « o MM U �. dJ 2 M e m m d v ®1 'C y -c _ago m� m m - v m_ 0 42of T 2 Zp F Us Z E K 3t� -L men c,E om 2 W 3m v �a a g o c � > C U m C N C 4 S N m 0 o' an d 0 9 >� 3 F Wc y c 2 i=i 'E N oci Z c m LL° �'a _ `aci �� �v0 z W � 7 a m ccf� ro ye EaernOtm O G y O 3 0- 16 U m o m o f u fi D U w 2 w H LL O U N H w O w a N N z w 2 w O w IL Q H N y D m d W ° D O m 3 O Q D D D U s d j d m 0 6 L N L O m C U C_ m 3 �" m pp W U V p 2 E O E d m D m °mU o 8 p t m c U a o U m m ° N a o o a y �' d m -L >> c 3m N d n.a �mm DdN V L LdDmN L gem E mwmf O d Zl" C >i o °i F] m M C m N 6 N L d O N m V p�p O N C n d m$ Q m O D N .� E 3 C o OI m w p r = v Q E C 3 6 ° c N L m ry O O u c m m m a N d mD 5 m nma aEi 5 c 3 m2D m U ra $ L `o c Ld, Y o 0 5 E N n -ao m ,7 f d ,moo _ m W r «— T c W W m �o m O .O w a L 0) c L m yW m m m N > m Q m TN $ m m m—a E c o 1O ° N ��+nO py ° O n°E Dn m WE N N N O r O c a NOnN U o oOE �WN a>p C C O m W c a$m$c nd'm £°d_dm c E ad 'aC N O>2 2O tm O C c c. oD c o cm m c c Crn o m c Dw y mH �❑LL dE o' a90 2E O NU O—> O LD M . afL C m fd0 C U O O O NdE O a O > m°6 CO) i z 'z z z 3 z 'z i 'z 'z i 'z C 0. U U� ii N N d d d N N A A R '. .Z. QU h d m TF N d d m N ENE L W. N Q �' N fq .0 T D � O LL' m N O m m C m m a 3 z1n O «y 9 '� c a a Ad a m @ K n m a c �.,, E U. E 2 m 16 E c c N E W m y 2m L LL O LL =WO O cU d= aWL° mE O > aw w O U m w g 2 m mo W awy n s.7°b c c c � D0 > N m c0gN+ N > m fq O C m nrrL^m L F � = m M w —ro y. O aoam a ¢> o ° co d t W 6n EL° 2 �>aL ? q 0 a o00 z aW^O+i�C ° m c U ot $ vKao a0 o> Ec c m o m cU c WW f m O D 9 y 0c 62 m V 9 O d >r u� E2 ti dem C7 a MO m m a O � O Q N N N O a q o s > a a a 0 0 co LL O CD Q IL i U w 2 w F- LL O H V O O N CI O r r w w N U) U) w�/ VN w a Y } J 2 F- Z O 2 M F- U w O w IL F- Z w 2 w O w a J H Q U o Ci co m m N o 'a. co nnE m�d o8 y0 E E mc « m 08 n C Dd an many `Ac dy �v >10 D yN'o mot' aaiU e d o o n m m c 8 E' �,2 82'D� c c °m mD b e 8 boo `= c m a E m aD Z` yc0 «an 3Oo tin m m t 8 m tJ aO O) D{m U •y N 3 U ly m 3 y m m W m t0 m 0) C7 N y C m a° y 6 B W D L O m m C N C O 0.' C Em (`p LL y3_oU «C 'S� D m ym m coy mn maw m N a m mm m m Ema Q L m 5c n 0. E E m m m m c K L> U o c m y° c m C m y L C w c y E— C m a r 3 i o �- m_ '> .0 a�. ,_, y 'j y o �y Vl. m N a d N a n m T !/i m �O�pp w �'00 Ow ? W 7 .0 = L NC mYT pCp _m OE 8dWmy6mm O u �m �N U 3om TQ 3n0 «nc v m8 C E? o 12 Mi5 mv m O W o Qx TO C O O%l oLa"Cmm iypaL3ELmCymryryUN rn 7 E c D c Cmc iU E m UcV0-5 a E M N 2 N —m Vmo3l y 4E py5 « p «C OE 8LW m¢O, O�¢�Da 4 E .(�y1 E¢M OW U ° o'c ¢ i w 8 m ME 3m a 8 o c Nc D EcN y ° y d 0N N M > O—E ca m N o m > L x m m E mD> N O(U�n r ° , 8O C E y C Om �o > O N y m yiD m NN O wO d m V o�> y� 8 am O f Qc- UE d° ?=v EXam2m'om Q n � amm3 miiO8 m oHm$ �W UBa��`m �v 'z 'z 'z z 'z z z 'z z� z z z oa U Wr wee' c c W z z z z z z z o a o o O Z O O O 09 W' A A A w A A p U. m A!u 22 m m 4 W'5 c '5 c i c c EmE Q U' g Q N w 8 m U w Q Odf x C N m O O m C 0 F m d v y C a 0 y C N IEr F u TU — C N— m C J 11' O M l0 C '.°i. _ N Z c LLL m U "a m y E T M U' 0 o v 3w vm Q W 3 d c8 >:� o WO c'°aly w m C U al ¢ w a o mU E a oo c m N n m' W di m m LT ° ° � m n N N Q VJ C O 8 m C 8 c m �+ ° " ° ° y` Q z m E p m L° Q c U o 'y f v m m m ¢ 6' F m y mN m C n o o > d € W o m C W gt� m 0! ¢ N ama m T O w 6 0 O� m m $ V� m W d° a°o x . mm x m 0 m m` o ` a'U �E� W �E o Ni EEao a ay�d M as L W "E U L OI V {p N '�-j W m 6 m N m Ti C 3 C y c O C W O 'x W O O tJ y `R c 2 0 ¢ > ig° m a N fl 6 m O u`ma Sd N (n LE w°.w D d w a r F a a O z 1- 9O N y y N y m 'o_ G d 1 > > 6 > 6 > o: a MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: 6#rad Baron, Maintenance Superintendent DATE: October 4, 2004 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - September, 2004 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of September, 2004: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 90 B. Total signs installed 24 C. Total signs repaired 48 fl. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 55 III. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs 2,964 B. Total Tons 28 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 293 V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 1,410 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations 8 B. Total S.F. 922 VII. STENCILING A. 355 New and repainted legends B. 0 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping R WAINTMmmnAf RP 2MI-MM Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 34 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 36 service order requests for the month of August, 2004. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 204 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of September, 2004 was $29,677 compared to $7,228.00 for the month of August, 2004. Account No. 5402 Account No. 5401 Account No. 999-5402 $ 8,770.00 $ 20,900.00 $ -0- cc: Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (Traffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer - (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) 0 t/7 VW- it 3 O N U0s m i N 00� a pwa FU� Z H LL z w 2 c W 0 O W OO �Op O rn O 00 voO m m Op f9 M� ro MMN r O M M M v N O O N O 00 V t0 O o O r r W N r V M V M M M M N N 0 N V rn D V F � m LU W W O K m LLI z w m 0 0 O O tO O O O o 0 O O O rn N M N V M N m N m LLI ` r cr W N M » v IL W U) 000 00 o�n o corrnm�N m (ON M 7 � M 0 6 c o o cc V ifJ O 0 0 m o M M 0 M N O O M m N N C rn O J rn lz W C O zoo enU W d 0 LL QO ZZ 16 0 N Z ` J N f U) LL � f 4' H '>. F W my E yJFQ U UO (tQnw mU 0 Q CEO � mU z 0 EE0 a0 y0 z 3 Eim�Um0EO 3y � 00 6N7bf MMUF-a 3Q2Cm _ 2 Q m0 K0 O 0 0 ,om `� aamO O myr- 2F QUOF- U rr�- U U)U)U F-D'z Q y(D y Q O OW0 3CUN J > a o m 2 N 7 F f U. O V ¢ } Z Q J W }!WN CZ LL Q0 ag W 0 w FW- cr N yF Lj O y W J OLLON F LL N V N N Yf 00 O O O G O H V H On M G elf O O W mN N NH O O O CI O W N IZ ili W NH O O W V7 w0 O VD rH w N OV vi N A M Oi O Oi r N O Oi O r w O O H N M a0 N 6 G w W OLI V f` w O O O O O O O M N M O N O N t0 M y N O O O O O MR 0 f` O O N O O M V Q W () 2 W W 00 w w 0 H W 1� c W N 1� C m N N N M O O M CII 0 H M Of Y W N M m m W M O w W m m O O M Oi OD C A N N V O N Op H iM I-OU w w ww wines inw w w v Q LL y W H LL eo 00 0 0 00 o ro o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 o W! W!o ' a o r ry 0. M 00 O O 0" O O N f H O N O W W N LL O H H H O O N O N tD N F OD O N Of N N H M Of tG H IG y a N N W �n cH 16 N rH N N w w 0 y ❑ T m O N N a Y N LLI LLr W 1- 32w O y U O O O O O O 16 O fppD O W O �O O o O m W W OH O A N 16 W A W N Ili cc W iOp O M M e^p O M Q MH H W w w w O W V O W w N f~A Q Q H U ❑ O V M N 4D M 00 r W lc Y W o r M N 3�� Oa U IA o 0 0 0 o Ilf O v m I o IA o a o M N O O O O O 0; O N N O M O M O O a 03 0 0 O O O T 66 M O N O O O � H H H M N M M c n H H cf H O y J W K W W w H W W H W N Vw Y W N' N 30 o� U 0 o O O N OV C O a a A d Nry C 0 a 0� aR. O LL IL 0 W LL U �yJ rC qJ L LL m A ❑ L 1 ZQW U WWF ❑ ` f y = W W ❑ y F O 3 UP7 F M O m U 2 W 7 W n w U a O 2 Q LL CD W H W J LU W oa Z O O C H C � F W ZZZ W W U m 0 JJJ Q Q N U U 2 a Q 0 K K O 4. y W F O O W FY O y W LL' Z H C7 y W 2 3 3 a ❑ y y 2 7 U d• y LLQLL, y ❑ f 2 _U' U' C K 2 W u~CS u' 0 Q (n y Z Ui vi U 0 3 y C' H STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of September, 2004 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST SIZE ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK CONTRACTOR: BECKER ENGINEERING Date: 09/.04 VALLEJO CHANNEL REPAIR BASINS, CLEAN AND REINFORCE JEDEDIAH SMITH CULVERT SLURRY AND RIP RAP # 5401 SPICA COURT CATCH BASIN BOX TOTAL COST 1"' @ OLD TOWN FRONT CATCH BASINS TARGET STEEL GRATES $ 17,400.00 Date: 09/21/04 MAIN STREET BRIDGE WEST END BUILD & INSTALL PEDESTRIAN BARRICADES TOTAL COST $ 4,520.00 # 5402 CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT Date: 09/04 CITYWIDE MISC. TRASH & DEBRIS PICK-UP ALONG R.O. W.S # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 4,250.00 Date: 09/04 CITYWIDE CHANNELS CHANNEL SPRAYING FOR "MOSQUITO CONTROL" # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 3,500.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 $ 20,900.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $ 8,770.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 $ - 0 - CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TOTAL TONS 09/01/04 PIASANO AT JEDEDIAH SMITH A.C. OVERLAY 401 2.5 09/08/04 DIAZ ROAD A.C. OVERLAY 221 3 09/13/04 DEL REY AT VIA CORSICA A.C. OVERLAY 610 2.5 09/14/04 DEL REY AT SAN PASQUAL A.C. OVERLAY 376 4 09/15/04 DEL REY AT SAN PASQUAL A.C. OVERLAY 305 2.5 09/16/04 DEL REY AT VIA CORSICA A.C. OVERLAY 77 2 09/20/04 6TH STREET R&R A.C. 220 4.5 09/21/04 LA PAZ A.C. OVERLAY 304 2.5 09/22/04 RANCHO VISTA E/O HIGH SCHOOL A.C. OVERLAY 325 3 09/23/04 RANCHO VISTA E/O HIGH SCHOOL A.C. OVERLAY 125 1.5 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 2,964 TOTAL TONS 28 R: 1AINTAINIWKCMPLTDUSPHALT.RPRN 05�EP EMBER CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/07/04 SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK AT MARGARITA REMOVED 300 S.F. OFGRAFFITI 09/24/04 CALLE REVA AT TIERRA VISTA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/27/04 1 MARGARITA ROAD AT RAMSEY REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/27/04 SOUTH END OF PUJOL REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/27/04 FRONT STREET AT 6T" REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/27/04 BEHIND TARGET REMOVED 305 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/04 1 79 SO. @ I-15 REMOVED 180 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/04 42176 LYNDIE LANE REMOVED 105 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 922 TOTAL LOCATIONS 8 R:UTAINTAIMWKCMPLTD\GRAFRTI\M 05 SEPIEMBER W O O O O O O O O O 0 v v v v v v o 0 00 f- (0 In .em N � U w 0 O Z U O F a w C7 a J 7 w Z M a x a a Ir a m w LL Q 7 y O N N b � U 00 w �nUU op �D Vt vt 7 N M vl N L N L y � L NJ y T d N O 'dam nU 0zCa CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/07/04 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 35 CATCH BASINS 09/08/04 AREA #I CLEANED & CHECKED 22 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/13/04 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 36 CATCH BASINS 09/14/04 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 15 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/16/04 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 28 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/20/04 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 34 CATCH BASINS 09/21/04 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 18 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/22/04 AREAS #1 & #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 34 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/27/04 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 36 CATCH BASINS 09/28/04 JOHN WARNER AT PAULITA CLEANED & CHECKED 8 CATCH BASINS 09/28/04 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 19 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS 09/30/04 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 8 UNDER SIDEWALK DRAINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 293 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE REC'D LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK COMPLETED 09/02/04 30552 IRON BARK COURT CATCH BASIN CLEANING 09/02/04 09/02/04 DIAZ ROAD AT LOW FLOW DEBRIS REMOVAL 09/02/04 09/03/04 40048 VILLA VENECIA REINSTALL S.N.S. 09/03/04 09/07/04 31855 CALLE NOVELDA PAINT SPILL 09/07/04 09/08/04 REDHAWK PARKWAY CELL IN CATCH BASIN 09/08/04 09/09/04 BRASSIE LANE TREE DOWN 09/09/04 09/09/04 DIAZ ROAD POTHOLE 09/09/04 09/11/04 MARGARITA AT SAN FERMIN PLACE S.N.S. BROKEN 09/11/04 09/13/04 43154 VIA DOS PICOS TREE TRIMMING 09/13/04 09/13/04 45038 CORTE BRAVO DEBRIS REMOVAL 09/13/04 09/13/04 31945 AVENIDA MALLORI CELL PHONE IN DRAIN 09/13/04 09/13/04 CORTE BARBASTE S.N.S. SPELLING 09/13/04 09/13/04 44459 CAYENNE TRAIL TREE TRIM 09/27/04 09/14/04 27411 YNEZ ROAD CATCH BASIN CLEANING 09/14/04 09/14/04 MARGARITA AT HARVESTON DAMAGED SIGN 09/14/04 09/15/04 MARGARITA AT MORAGA ROAD BATTERY IN STREET 09/15/04 09/17/04 31452 CORTE ALAMAR TREE TRIMMING 09/17/04 09/17/04 SANTIAGO AT JOHN WARNER DEBRIS PICK-UP 09/17/04 09/20/04 OLD TOWN FRONT AT LIQUOR STORE DEBRIS PICK-UP 09/20/04 09/20/04 45750 JERONIMO STREET OIL SPILL 09/20/04 09/20/04 43500 CORTE BARBASTE SNS SPELLING 09/20/04 09/20/04 45446 MASTERS DRIVE SLURRY SEAL 09/20/04 09/21/04 31268 HIAWATHA COURT TREE DOWN 09/21/04 09/21/04 31268 HIAWATHA COURT TREE STUMP 09/27/04 09/23/04 C STREET DIRT SHOULDER 09/27/04 DATE REC'D LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK COMPLETED 09/23/04 29776 NIGHTVIEW CIRCLE TREE TRIM 09/24/04 09/24/04 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE AT WINCHESTER OIL SPILL 09/24/04 09/27/04 40521 LA CADENA COURT TREE TRIMMING 09/27/04 09/27/04 45501 CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TREE 09/28/04 09/27/04 30442 COLINA VERDE TREE 09/28/04 09/29/04 NELLIE COURT SNS 09/29/04 09/29/04 40860 DE PORTOLA TREE 09/29/04 09/30/04 CORTE FRESCA AT CALLE NACIDO SNS 09/30/04 09/30/04 41055 AVENIDA VERDE STANDING WATER 10/01/04 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 34 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/01/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD E/O MARGARITA REPLACED 4 DELINEATORS 09/01/04 28465 FELIX VALDEZ REPLACED W-3, W-6 09/01/04 CITYWIDE REPLACED 22 S.N.S. 09/02/04 INDUSTRIAL AT RIO NEDO INSTALLED 2 S.N.S. 09/02/04 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 13 SIGNS 09/07/04 PAUBA WEST OF VIA RAMI REPLACED R-26 09/07/04 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 15 SIGNS 09/08/04 DEER HOLLOW INSTALLED 16 R-26 09/10/04 WINCHESTER AT WINCHESTER CREEK REPLACED S.N.S. 09/10/04 FRONT STREET AT HWY. 79 SO. REPLACED R-26-81 COMBO 09/13/04 TIERRA VISTA REPLACED "N" MARKER 09/13/04 1 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 8 SIGNS 09/14/04 28999 FRONT REPLACED R-26 09/14/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT HUMBER REPLACED R-7 09/15/04 MARGARITA AT HARVESTON REPLACED R-7, "K" MARKER 09/15/04 1 PECHANGA PARKWAY REPLACED 2 R-16 09/16/04 NICHOLAS ROAD REPLACED 12 CARSONITES 09/20/04 JEFFERSON AT WINCHESTER REPLACED R-7 09/20/04 41700 WINCHESTER REPLACED R-7 09/20/04 P[O PICO AT MARGARITA REPLACED 2 DELINEATORS 09/20/04 HWY 79 SO. AT BUTTERFIELD STAGE REPLACED 2 DELINEATORS 09/20/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT BUTTERFIELD REPLACED 2 DELINEATORS 09/20/04 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REPLACED 3 DELINEATORS R:WA1NTAIMWKCMPLTD\IGNS�DSSEPEMBER.4 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/20/04 PAUBA AT MEADOWS REPLACED CARSONITE 09/21/04 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REPLACED 6 DELINEATORS 09/22/04 VIA AMERITA AT VIA RAMI REPLACED W-17 09/22/04 MEADOWS AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED W-41 09/23/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. AT OLD TOWN FRONT REOKACED R 73-6 WITH R-73-5 09/23/04 MAIN STREET BRIDGE INSTALLED 4 "N" MARKERS, 2 DELINEATORS 09/24/04 CALLE REVA AT TIERRA VISTA REPLACED W-57 09/27/04 NICHOLAS AT N O. GENERAL KEARNEY REPLACE W-5 09/27/04 SOUTH END OF PUJOL STREET REPLACE W-19 09/27/04 PARAGUAY AT FOX REPAIR 2 SNS 09/27/04 PECHANGA PRKWY BEFORE RAINBOW CANYON REPAIR 1 R20B 09/27/04 PECHANGA PRKWY BEFORE RAINBOW CANYON REPAIR I R2-25 09/27/04 ELINDA AT PAUBA REPALCE I R-1 09/27/04 YNEZ AT QUIET MEADOWS REPLACE 1 R26/81 09/27/04 YNEZ N/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACE I R-26 09/27/04 YNEZ N/O TOWN CENTER REPLACE I R-26 09/27/04 YNEZ AT EMPIRE CREEK REPAIR 1 R-26 09/27/04 YNEZ N/O EMPIRE CREEK REPLACE l R-26 09/27/04 MARGARITA AT LA SERENA REPLACE I W-56, I TYPE N YELLOW 09/27/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD E/O MARGARITA REPLACE 1 R26/81 09/28/04 SAN FERMAN AT MARGARITA REPLACE 2 SNS 09/28/04 E. LOMA LINDA AT MASKAUZ REPAIR I W-53 09/28/04 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD W/O TEE DRIVE REPLACE I R26/81 09/28/04 MARGARITA S/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPAIR 1 W-41 09/28/04 MARGARITA N/O AVENIDA CIMA DEL SOL REPLACE 1 R2-45 09/28/04 MARGARITA AT MORAGA REPAIR I W-56, l TYPE N YELLOW 09/28/04 MARGARITA AT PASEO BRILLANTE REPAIR 1 R26/81 09/28/04 WINCHESTER AT NICHOLAS REPLACE I R-7 09/28/04 1 COUNTY CENTER AT EQUITY REPAIR 2 SNS R.WAINTAIMWKCMPLTD�IGNSS .054EPTEMBER.W DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/30/04 CORTE FRESCA AT CALLE NACIDO REPAIR 2 SNS 09/30/04 EB SOLANA 1000' E/O MARGARITA REPLACE I R26 09/30/04 DEL REY ROAD AT AVENIDA DEL REPOSO REPAIR 1 R-1 09/30/04 SOMERSET AT ROYAL BURKDALE REPLACE I R-7 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 90 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 24 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 48 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/01/04 AREA #2 REPAINTED 40 LEGENDS 09/02/04 AREA #2 REPAINTED 30 LEGENDS 09/07/04 AREA #2 REPAINTED 33 LEGENDS 09/20/04 AREAS #2 AND #3 REPAINTED 61 LEGENDS 09/21/04 AREA #3 REPAINTED 58 LEGENDS 09/22/04 AREA #3 REPAINTED 35 LEGENDS 09/27/04 AREA #3 REPAINTED 51 LEGENDS 09/28/04 AREA #3 REPAINTED 26 LEGENDS 09/30/04 AREAS #3 AND #4 REPAINTED 21 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 355 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 0 R:WAINTAIMWRKCOMPLTD\STRIPING\NGOA EPTEMBERN CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/13/04 AMARITA WAY TRIMMED 6 R.O.W. TREES 09/15/04 PUJOL STREET TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 09/16/04 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT LA SERENA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 09/24/04 CALLE REVA AT TIERRA VISTA TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 09/27/04 PECHANGA PARKWAY BEFORE RAINBOW CANYON TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 09/27/04 ELINDA AT PAUBA TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 09/28/04 6T" AT PUJOL TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 09/29/04 PAUBA ROAD - ELINDA TO LA PRIMAVERA TRIMMED 23 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 VIA LA VIDA TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 RANCHO VISTA AT CALLE RESACA TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 YNEZ AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 EB SOLANA 1000' EAST OF MARGARITA TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 SOLANA AT SKYWOOD TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 DEL REY AT SOLANA TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES 09/30/04 NICHOLAS ROAD AT NO. GENERAL KEARNEY TRIMMED I R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 55 R:WAIWAIMW KCOMPLTD\TREESk0-05\SEPTEMOER0 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2004 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 09/01/04 DIAZ ROAD AT LOW FLOW ABATED 600 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS 09/29/04 CALLE REVA AT TIERRA VISTA ABATED 600 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS 09/29/04 PAUBA - ELINDA TO LA PRIMAVERA ABATED 210 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 1,410 R:�AlN MMWKCOMPLTD\W EDS�-05 SEP EMBER 0 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FII CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council wtll FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning 1 - - DATE: October 25, 2004 SUBJECT: Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 56 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations and 5 applications for public hearings during the month of September. The new public hearing cases are as follows: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 1 MAJOR MODIFICATION 1 Status of Maior Proiects New Proiects • PM 28049 EOT — A fourth Extension of Time for Parcel Map 28049 (A proposed multi -family residential development. The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Pujol Street and Calle Cerrillo. The application was submitted on September 30, 2004. Staff is awaiting comments from affected departments. (PA04-0539 — HARRIS) • Temecula Town Center Modifications — A Major Modification to construct various fagade renovations and parking lot modifications within the Temecula Town Center. Located on the northeast corner of Rancho California Road and Ynez Road. The application was submitted on September 23, 2004. Staff is awaiting comments from affected departments. (PA04-0530 — HARRIS) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc Recentiv ADDroved Proiects • Meadows Village —A Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and two Conditional Use Permits (drive-thru and alcoholic beverage sales) to construct an 80,677 square foot commercial center consisting of seven buildings on 9.77 acres located on the southeast corner of Meadows Parkway and Rancho California Road. (PA04-0200, PA04-0201, PA04-0202, and PA04-0203 — FISK) • Creekside Plaza Del Taco— An Administrative Development Plan to construct, establish and operate a 2,260 square foot drive-thru restaurant on .69 acres. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Highway 79 and Pechanga Parkway. The project was submitted on January 29, 2004. The project was granted administrative approval on September 23, 2004. (PA04 - 0057 — HARRIS) • Light Industrial Development Code Amendment — Staff has developed additional performance standards for "Campus style professional offices I the LI zoned areas of the City. This item was approved by the PC at the August 18, 2004 meeting and was approved at the September 28, 2004 City Council meeting. (WEST) • Cingular Wireless — A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate, establish and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility with 3 antennas housed within the bulb portion of a 45-foot artificial mono -palm tree located at 31575 Enfield Lane, east of Riverton Lane and north of Humboldt Court. The project was deemed incomplete in February 5, 2003. The project was approved at the April 21, 2004 Planning Commission Hearing. An appeal of the approval was filed by Valesta Ayer on May 5, 2004. The appeal was approved at the October 12, 2004 City Council meeting. (PA02-0717 — FISK) • Bev -Ray Camera: Staff worked with this established Old Town business owner to help bring his signs into compliance with the sign program for the Temecula Stage Stop. This project was approved at the October meeting of the Old Town Local Review Board. Fourth Street Antiques: New signs for this Old Town business were approved by the Old Town Local Review Board in October. Projects Under Review Commercial • Butterfield Ranch Shopping Center — A Pre -Application for a 54,500 square foot. shopping center located at the southeast corner of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79 South. This application was submitted on September 13, 2004 and staff is currently reviewing the plans. (PR04-0015 — FISK) Butterfield Square —A Development Plan to redevelop Butterfield Square in Old Town, resulting in four two-story buildings totaling 22,048 square feet on 0.56 acres located on the southeast corner of Old Town Front Street and Third Street. The Applicant submitted plans on March 31, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on June 10, 2004. A DRC letter was sent to the applicant on July 13, 2004. Revised plans were submitted on September 29, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing the plans. (PA04-0231 — FISK) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc • Boys and Girls Club —A Pre -Application for a 5,520 square foot Boys & Girls club facility on 9.12 acres located within Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. This application was submitted on August 31, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on October 7, 2004. A DRC letter was sent to the applicant on October 7, 2004. Staff is currently awaiting the submittal of a Development Plan application. (PR04-0013 — FISK) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints — An appeal of an approved Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan was filed by the "Homeowners of Temecula" on June 2, 2004.The approval will permit the applicant to construct and operate a 24,119 square foot single story church located on the north side of Pauba Road, approximately 170 linear feet west of the centerline of Corte Villoso. The project was approved by the Planning Commission at the May 19`h Planning Commission hearing. The appeal was heard by the City Council on September 14, 2004 and has been continued to the October 26, 2004 City Council meeting. (PA03-027 — HARRIS) Creekside Plaza Circle K/Unocal — An Administrative Development Plan to construct, establish and operate a service station, self service car wash and retail store within the Creekside Plaza Shopping Center. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of State Hwy 79 S. and Pechanga Parkway. The application was submitted on March 31, 2004. The DRC meeting was held on June 3, 2004. The applicant requested another meeting to further discuss plan revisions. The meeting was held on June 16, 2004. The DRC letter was sent on June 17, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on August 6, 2004. Sent 3rd iteration of comments out on September 1, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on October 7, 2004. (PA04 - 0232 — DAMKO) Creekside Plaza Pads 4 & 5 — An Administrative Development Plan to construct, establish and operate two commercial buildings of 5,600 and 9,600 square feet respectively. The subject site is located at the southwest corner of State Hwy 79 S. and Pechanga Parkway. The application was submitted on March 12, 2004. The DRC meeting was held on June 3, 2004. Second iteration letter sent on August 9, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on August 19, 2004. Staff is currently preparing an Administrative Approval letter. (PA04 - 0170 — DAMKO) Roripaugh Town Center — A Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit and a Development Plan to design and construct approximately 171,200 square feet of commercial development, which include four major tenant buildings, six smaller freestanding buildings and inline shops on 20.2 acres. The project is located on the northeast corner of Nicholas Road and Winchester Road. Matthew Fagan Consulting Services submitted the application on July 24, 2003. A DRC meeting was held September 4, 2003. The project was resubmitted on November 12, 2003. Staff has reviewed the revised plans and at this time, the applicant has not complied with most of staff's initial comments, including: site layout, elevations, and pedestrian circulation. A Planning Commission subcommittee and Staff met with the applicant on March 29, 2004 to discuss the project. Staff sent a letter to the applicant on April 6, 2004, summarizing the issue's raised at the March 29, 2004 meeting. The applicant resubmitted plans on June 16, 2004. A DRC was held on July 22, 2004. This project is scheduled for the October 20, 2004 Planning Commission. (PA02-0364 —Long) • St. Thomas Episcopal Church — A Development Plan /Conditional Use Permit for a 16,983 square foot sanctuary and a 12,768 square foot parish hall with day care on 3.74 acres, located at 29132 Avendia de Missiones. This application was submitted on June 4, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on August 12, 2004. The applicant has been discussing revised Concept plarsw th staff snoeAugust 12, 2004. Staff iscurrer*awabigsubnibad of revised pl ars. (PA04-0394 — FISK) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc Penny Dome Office Building — a Development Plan to construct a 5,296 square foot office building on 0.18 acres located at 41888 41" street. This application was submitted on August 11, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on September 9, 2004 and a DRC letter was sent to the applicant on September 13, 2004. The project went before the Old Town Local Review Board on September 13, 2004. Revised plans were submitted on October 7, 2004 and staff is currently reviewing the plans. (PA04-0498 — FISK) • La-Z-Boy — A Development Plan to construct a 15,000 square foot building for La-Z-Boy on .94 acres at the NE corner of North General Kearney and Promenade Loop Road. (APN 910-130- 088). A DRC meeting was held August 5, 2004. Staff is recommending approval with conditions at the October 20, 2004 Planning Commission. (PA04-0456 — PETERS) • Moreno Road Office Building - A Development Plan to construct a two — story 7,000 square foot office building on .76 acres, located at 41919 Moreno Road. The application was submitted on July 12, 2004. Staff provided a DRC comment letter to the applicant on August 23, 2004 and is awaiting plan revisions. (PA04-0470 HARRIS) • Pauba Road Offices — A Development Plan to construct 2 two story office buildings totaling 18,237 square feet located at Pauba Road and Margarita Road. The office buildings will be used for retail and office space. A DRC meeting was held on October 7, 2004. Staff is currently preparing the DRC letter. (PA04-0476 — DAMKO) • Temecula Corporate Center — A Pre -application for a mixed -use business park was submitted on October 5, 2004, consisting of 17 office, "flextech", and industrial buildings on two parcels (6.19 and 6.23 acres) on the east and west sides of Via Industria. (PR04-0017 — PETERS) • Vantage Oncology — A Minor Modification to an existing Development Plan was submitted on September 27, 2004 to add a 1,250 square foot addition to the Rdehawk Medical Center at the southeast corner of George Cushman Court and Highway 79 South. (PA04-0535 — PETERS) Subdivisions • Gallatin Parcel Map —A request to subdivide 2.89 acres into three lots with a minimum lot size of .92 acres located on the northeast corner of Margarita Road and DePortola Road. Gallatin Dental Group submitted the project on February 3, 2004. The project went to DRC on March 11, 2004. The project was resubmitted on August 3, 2004. This project is scheduled for a Public Hearing on October 14, 2004. (PA04-0074 — LONG) • Seraphina Tract Map 32346 — A request to subdivide 28.6 acres into 67 lots with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet located on the north side of Nicolas Road. The project was submitted on March 16, 2004. The DRC letter was sent on April 20, 2004. The applicant submitted a draft development plan via email for staff's review on June 2, 2004. Staff reviewed draft development plan and sent comments via email on June 15, 2004. Staff met with applicant regarding additional issues in August. The applicant resubmitted on September 20, 2004. Staff is currently preparing the comment letter. (PA04-0178- DAMKO) • Wolf Creek PA 16 — A Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 4.22 acres into 6 custom hillside lots averaging 30,000 square feet. The application was submitted on May 19, 2004 and a DRC meeting was held on July 1, 2004. A DRC letter was mailed to the applicant on July 6, 2004 and staff is awaiting resubmittal. (PA04-0358/TTM 32319 — KITZEROW) R:WONTHLY.RPTT2004\.9-2004 Report.doc Industrial Roick/Regency Industrial Building — A Development Plan to construct an industrial building with four suites totaling 12,407 square feet on 1.87 acres on the southwest corner of Roick Drive and Winchester Road. James E. Horeca submitted the application for Regency, Inc, on July 1, 2003. A pre-DRC meeting was held on July 22, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on July 31, 2003 with the applicant. Staff was informed by the applicant on December 29, 2003 that there has been a change in architects. Applicant resubmitted on March 11, 2004, but the submittal package did not include revised landscape plans. Applicant was advised but has not yet submitted landscape plans. Letter was mailed to applicant on June 4, 2004 to extend application processing 6 months. New architect is working on revising plans. (PA03-0359 — KITZEROW) Temecula Industrial Park —A Development Plan to construct thirteen single -story office buildings totaling 56,900 square feet on 4.83 acres located on the west side of Business Park Drive, between Rancho Way and Rancho California Road, approximately 1,000 feet north of Rancho California Road. Scott Barone (Lot 11 BPD LLC) submitted the application on December 23, 2003. A DRC Meeting with the applicant was held on January 29, 2004. A DRC letter was sent to the applicant on February 2, 2004. The applicant submitted revised site plans on March 29, 2004, and again on April 28, 2004. A DRC was held July 15, 2004. Staff is reviewing revised plans submitted on September 9, 2004. A DRC meeting was held September 30, 2004 (PA03- 0728 -PETERS) Kearny Commerce Center — A Development Plan to construct an 86,175 square foot light industrial building on 5.55 acres located on the north side of Remington Avenue. Project was submitted on May 25, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on June 22, 2004. The DRC letter was sent June 23, 2004. The applicant resubmitted in July without fully addressing staffs comments. The second iteration letter was sent out on August 6, 2004. Staff is waiting for a letter from the county geologist before scheduling a hearing date. Staff estimates a December Planning Commission hearing date. (PA04-0361 — DAMKO) • Temecula Corporate Heights — Applicant is requesting a sign program for a multi -tenant industrial building at 42301 Zevo Drive, just west of Diaz Road. The DRC letter was sent on May 6, 2004. Applicant submitted on May 22, 2004. Sent 2Id iteration letter on June 8, 2004. The applicant resubmitted on June 29, 2004. Staff sent 3"d iteration comment letter on August 4, 2004. Applicant submitted on September 7, 2004. Staff sent 4th Iteration comment letter on September 17, 2004. (PA04-0198 - DAMKO) • Beacon Industrial- A Development Plan requesting a 15,308 square foot multi -tenant light - industrial building. The property is located at 42103 Rio Nedo, just west of Diaz Road. A Pre- DRC meeting was scheduled on May 20, 2004. The DRC letter was sent on May 25, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on August 13, 2004. A Planning Commission hearing date is scheduled for October 20, 2004. (PA04-0149 - DAMKO) • Milgard Windows Addition — An Administrative Development Plan to construct an 8,775 square foot office addition to Milgard Windows located at 26879 Diaz Rd. An ad hoc Planning Commission sub -committee met with the applicant on September 15, 2004 to resolve design issues. A letter was sent to the applicant on September 20, 2004. Staff is reviewing revised plans. (PA04-0479 PETERS) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc CBC Business Center— A Development Plan to construct two multi -tenant industrial buildings (Building A — 75,697 SF / Building B-56,193 SF) on 8.59 acres located on the north side of Remington Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet east of Winchester Road. The applicant submitted plans on March 1, 2004. A DRC meeting took place on May 20, 2004. A letter was mailed to the applicant on May 20, 2004. The application was resubmitted on June 28, 2004 and a letter requesting revisions was mailed to applicant on July 27, 2004. The application was resubmitted on August 23, 2004. Comments from other departments were due September 7, 2004. Clearance from the county geologist is required prior to scheduling for hearing. This is anticipated to be received in early October. (PA04-0134 - KITZEROW) Park Place Office: - A Development Plan to construct a 20,416 SF office building located at the southwest corner of Diaz Road. & Winchester Road. The applicant submitted plans on July 14, 2004. A Pre-DRC meeting was held on August 10, 2004.A DRC letter was mailed to the applicant on August 12, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing revised plans submitted on September 21, 2004. This is located in an MSHCP criteria cell and has a HANS 1 designation. (PA04-0134 Kitzerow) • Weste Pointe Business Center —A Development Plan to construct 14 separate office buildings totaling 50,000 square feet set in a campus setting. The proposed buildings are located on the corner of Roick Road and Via Industria. A DRC meeting was held on September 29, 2004. Staff is currently waiting for departmental response. (PA04-0512 DAMKO) Mixed Use Old Town Queen Anne Victorian —A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to construct a 11,000 square feet mixed use building to include retail uses (restaurant) on the ground floor and office uses on the second floor on 1.93 acres, located at the northeast corner of Old Town Front Street and Fourth Street. A DRC meeting was held on September 11, 2003. Revised plans were submitted on March 1, 2004. The project was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Old Town Local Review Board on April 12, 2004. Revised plans that were to address Public Works comments were submitted on July 28, 2004, and on September 9, 2004. A Staff report with resolutions is currently being prepared. Staff anticipates a November Planning Commission hearing. (PA03-0447 — FISK) Old Town Mixed Use Concept — A Pre -Application for a mixed use concept plan in Old Town. There are four concepts from 6,420 square feet to 12,950 square feet of office, retail, and residential uses. The project was submitted on September 7, 2004. A DRC was held on October 7, 2204. (PA04-0014 — Long) Temecula Creek Village — A zone change application to amend the text only of PDO-4 to change the schedule of Permitted Uses to allow alcohol sales in conjunction with restaurants and gift shops, located on the south side of Hwy 79 S. between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida De Missiones. At the Planning Commission on August 4, 2004 the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed change to the Development Code. This item will go to City Council on November 9, 2004. (PA04-0384 — PAPP) Residential • Naron Pacific Tentative Tract Map 30434 — A proposal for a zone change from L-1 to L-2 on 31.93 acres and Tentative Tract Map to create 30 residential lots and 4 open space lots in the Chaparral area. The applicant has provided all materials, but is now proposing a PDO for the project. The CAC has made a recommendation on policy for the Chaparral Area allowing 1/2- RAMONTHLY.RPT2004\9-2004 Report.doc acre lots if it does not increase the "net' density. A PDO was submitted on March 25, 2004. Staff met with applicant in April to discuss grading issues and begin preparation of an Initial Study. As of October 12, 2004 the applicant has not yet submitted a revised constraint map. (PA02-0204 — PAPP) Tierra Vista Condominiums — An Administrative Development Plan to construct 23 residential condominiums on 1.5 acres. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Tierra Vista Road and Ynez Road. The application was submitted on September 30, 2003. A DRC meeting was held on November 6, 2003. Revised plans were submitted on July 7, 2004. A second DRC letter was provided on September 10, 2004. Staff is awaiting plan revisions. (PA03-0552 — HARRIS) Quiet Meadows —A proposal to subdivide 4.57 acres into 7 residential lots with one open space lot; and a proposal to change the zoning designation from L-1 to L-2. An Environmental Assessment (EA) has been completed. Based on the EA, no significant impacts have been identified. On August 12, 2003, the City Council denied the Zone Change application without prejudice and referred the Zone Change policy issue to the General Plan CAC for an advisory recommendation. The CAC has determined that the Zone Change can be supported and the applicant will refile anew application. The project was recommended for approval at the August 18, 2004 Planning Commission, and is scheduled for the October 26, 2004 City Council meeting. (PA03-0669, PA03-0698 PETERS) Horton Continental — A Product Review for 100 single family residences including four floor plans and four architectural styles. The project is in planning area 1 of Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. The applicant submitted plans on Marchi , 2004 and submitted revised plans on May 25, 2004. Staff sent out comments on July 9, 2004. The applicant resubmitted plans on September 13, 2004. Staff is currently working on a staff report. A tentative hearing date is scheduled for November 3, 2004. (PA04-0133 — LONG) Del Val Second Dwelling Unit —An application for a second dwelling was received January 23, 2004 for a 768 square foot mobile unit at 31050 Nicolas Road at Leifer Road. A pre-DRC Meeting was held on March 9, 2004. A DRC meeting was held August 5, 2004. Waiting for applicant response. (PA04-0039 — PETERS) Estero Street— A request for a Zone Change (from L-1 to L-2) and a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 1.39 acre parcel into two parcels for single family homes. The project is located at the end of Estero Street. The applications were filed on April 19, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on July 8, 2004. Staff is awaiting submittal of revised plans. (PA04 -0283 and PA04-0275 -PETERS) Temecula Ridge Apartments — A Development Plan for the addition of 20 units by adding a 3'd story to five buildings in a previously approved 220 unit apartment project. The site is located on the south side of Rancho California Road, southeast of the intersection of Rancho California Road and Moraga Road. The application was submitted on April 13, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on June 10, 2004, and a letter was mailed to the applicant on June 14, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing the resubmittal received on October 12, 2004. (PA04-0260 — KITZEROW) • Tortelli second dwelling unit —Application for a 753 square foot second dwelling unit located at 29243 Providence Road in Harveston. Application was submitted on June 1, 2004. The DRC letter was sent on August 2, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on September 7, 2004. Staff is currently preparing a letter for administrative approval. (PA04-0378 - DAMKO) RAMONTHLY.RPT2004%9-2004 Report.doc • Gallery Traditions —A product review for 8 single family residences including 3 floor plans and 2 architectural styles. The applicant submitted plans on June 2, 2004. DRC was held on August 5, 2004. DRC letter was sent on August 9, 2004. Applicant resubmitted on September 2, 2004. Expected Director's Hearing date is November 4, 2004. (PA04-0383 DAMKO) Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendment - A Specific Plan Amendment (SPA), Tentative Tract Map and Zone Change PA04-0369, 0370, 0371. A request to change OS to LM and a tentative tract map to add 6 residential lots. SPA addresses fuel modification issues, general clean-up items such as fencing and inconsistencies. Staff sent a letter outlining concerns on June 28, 2004. The SPA was resubmitted on September 1, 2004. Staff sent out a correction letter on October 11, 2004. (PA04-0369, 0370, 0371 LONG) Harveston Neighborhood 6-A- Development Plan to construct 69 attached residential condominium units on 4.7 acres, located within Neighborhood G of the Harveston Specific Plan. The application was submitted on April 21, 2004. The applicant provided a second plan submittal on August 12,, 2004. Staff provided a second DRC letter on September 8, 2004. Revised plans have now been submitted and the project has been scheduled for the November 3, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. (PA04-0077 - HARRIS) Harveston Neighborhood 12 - A Development Plan to construct 93 attached residential condominium units located within Neighborhood 12 of the Harveston Specific Plan. The application was submitted on April 26, 2004. A DRC meeting was conducted on June 24, 2004. The applicant provided a second plan submittal on August 12, 2004. A second DRC letter was provided on September 9, 2004. Revised plans have now been submitted and the project has been scheduled for the November 3, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. (PA04-0079 HARRIS) Saratoga Ridge — A Product Review for 10 detached single family residences which offer 2 floor plans, and 3 architectural styles. The project is located off Rancho Vista Road and Greentree. It was submitted on July 28, 2004. Sent comment letter to applicant on August 30, 2004. The applicant resubmitted on October 7, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing plans.(PA04-0488 DAMKO) • Temecula Lane —A Conditional Use Permit, Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map to construct 59 4-plex buildings totaling 236 units, 32 3-plex buildings totaling 96 units and 96 single-family detached units on a 47.5 acre site located at the northeast corner of Loma Linda Road and Temecula Lane. Staff is currently working with the applicant on completing the MSCHP — Hans review. (PA04-0496 HARRIS) Miscellaneous • Sprint 100 Margarita — A Minor Conditional Use Permit for the co -location of six (6) cellular telecommunication antennas on a mono -pine, which includes the replacement of the existing 57 foot high mono -pine with a 68'4 ft mono -pine. Located at 41520 Margarita Road. The application was submitted on September 23, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing the plans. (PA04-0529 — FISK) Faith Bible Church — A Minor Conditional Use Permit to establish a church facility at 42257 Avenida Alvarado. Project was submitted on April 13, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on May 20, 2004. Staff is currently waiting for revised plans. No change as of October 12, 2004. (PA04-0266 — LONG) RAM0NTHLY.RPT12004\9-2004 Report.doc • Southern California Car Company —A Minor Conditional Use Permit for an automobile sales facility with interior sales only (no outdoor display) from an existing building located at 28860 Old Town Front Street. This application was submitted on August 24, 2004. The project is scheduled for the October 21, 2004 Director's Hearing. (PA04-0508 — FISK) • Cingular Mono -Pine Wireless Antenna — A Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50' high monopine on Greentree Road, approximately 500' east of Via Sierra. Project was submitted on April 19, 2004. Staff sent a DRC letter on June 8, 2004. The applicant resubmitted plans on September 23, 2004. Staff is in the process of contracting with a third party for review of the project. (PA04-0285 — LONG) AT&T and Verizon Wireless — A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to construct, operate and establish an unmanned wireless communication facility consisting of up to eight±48' high "Italian Cypress" trees stealth antennas and an 8'x12' equipment area, located at the Rancho California Water District Water Reservoir Complex, east of Meadows Parkway. Staff has received phone calls from the surrounding residents expressing concerns about this proposal. The project was scheduled for the October 15, 2003 Planning Commission Hearing with a denial recommendation, however, the meeting was canceled and the project will be renoticed for a future Planning Commission Hearing. Staff met with the applicant on March 12, 2004, to discuss design alternatives. As of October 12, 2004, the applicant has not resubmitted. (PA02- 0335 — PAPP) Rancho Medical Group Sports Facility — A Conditional Use Permit for a recreation facility (for physical therapy and public use) in an existing 76,886 square foot building in the LI Zone located at 28780 Single Oak Drive. Proposal includes volleyball courts, basketball courts, martial arts studio and exercise equipment. The project was submitted on August 5, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on September 9, 2004. A DRC letter was sent on September 10, 2004. The project was resubmitted on September 14, 2004 and a second DRC letter was sent to the applicant on October 1, 2004. Staff is awaiting resubmittal. (PA04-0493 KITZEROW) Meadowview Golf Course — Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to design and construct a public golf course and driving range within the Meadowview Community. The Focused EIR requires modification. The applicant has retained a new environmental consultant to complete the modifications. The Draft EIR was submitted on April 12, 2004. Staff has transmitted the EIR to affected City Departments for 3 week review. Staff provided an EIR comment letter to applicant the week of June 7, 2004. Staff is currently awaiting comments. (PA01-0375 — PETERS) Verizon Wireless Telecommunication — A Conditional Use Permit fora 60-foot high mono -pine within the Rancho California Water District Headquarters facility. Staff has informed the applicant that the proposed mono -pole is not an acceptable design for the area. The applicant indicated alternative sites would not be feasible; however, on November 10, 2003, they offered to look at alternative sites and designs. The applicant resubmitted on May 10, 2004. Staff met with the applicant on August 19, 2004 to discuss design alternatives. The applicant is continuing to cooperate with staff to develop an agreeable design solution. Thee has been no formal resubmittal since May 10, 2004. (PA02-0637 — PAPP) • Cyberzone—A Minor Conditional Use Permitforthe establishment and operation of an Internet business to rent computer times for Internet and Microsoft applications within an existing suite of the Promenade Mall. Staff has received conditions of approval from other departments and scheduled the project for the April 7, 2004 Planning Commission Hearing The applicant lost RAMONTHLY.RPT2004\9-2004 Report.doc their lease prior to the hearing, so the application has been continued off calendar in anticipation of another lease space becoming available within the mall. (PRJ00-906 — FISK) Temecula Regional Hospital: A General Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to construct a fitness center, cancer center, two medical/office buildings (4 stories each) and a six story hospital structure all totaling approximately 535,000 square feet, located north of Highway 79 S, south of De Portola and west of Margarita Road. Project was submitted June 30, 2004. A DRC was held on August 18, 2004. Staff and the City Council subcommittee have met with the applicant twice. Staff is still waiting for revised plans and Environmental documents. (PA04-0462, 0463 LONG) Verizon Wireless Telecommunication — A one year extension of time for a previously approved Minor conditional Use Permit (PA01-0019) to co -locate 3 antenna array panels on an existing monopine structure located at the RCWD tank in Chardonnay Hills, 31008 Rancho California Road. A Director Hearing was held on September 9, 2004 where it was re -directed to Planning Commission due to environmental concerns expressed by neighboring property owners. An Initial Study is being prepared to consider aesthetic impacts. This item has not yet been scheduled for Planning Commission. (PA04-0264 PAPP) Small Business Assistance • La Tacqueria: Staff is working with the owners of this Old Town business on a revised plan for an exterior fagade improvement that includes new awnings, paint and signs. A proposal from the contractor is to be submitted to the Planning Department in October. • Rachel' Place — Planning staff is working with this new business in order to help them obtain funding for new signs under the Fagade Improvement Program. • Art Dispora — This new business located in Old Town has submitted designs for new signs and an application for funding under the Fagade Improvement Program. • The Trick Shop: Planning staff is working with this applicant on signs for this new business in Old Town. The final elevations will be submitted to the Old Town Local Review board in November. Special Event Permits • Race For The Cure — An application from the Susan Komen Foundation was submitted in early September for this event that will take place on October 17, 2004, at the Promenade Mall. • Temecula Tractor Race — This event will take place on October 1, 2, and 3 at the Riverside County Flood Control property located at the southwest corner of Jefferson Avenue and Cherry Street. The City of Murrieta has been notified of this activity since it is adjacent to their border. • Norris Pumpkin Patch — A Major Temporary Use Permit (MTUP) for a carnival/pumpkin patch/animal petting zoo to be held south of the Promenade Mall at the southwest corner of Margarita Road and Overland Drive October 8, 2004 — October 31, 2004. (PETERS) Special Projects & Long Range Planning Activities+ The Division also commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or RNAONTHLY.RPT2004\9-2004 Report.doc 10 environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of the major special projects and long range planning activities are as follows: • Comprehensive General Plan Update — The Community Services and Traffic/Safety Commissions are scheduled to review the Draft Updated General Plan on September 13`h and 23rd, respectively, and the Screencheck of the EIR is still expected to available for staff's review in early October. (HOGAN) Santa Margarita River Watershed Planning Project —This interagency project is being overseen by the County of San Diego in cooperation with affected agencies throughout northwestern San Diego County and southwestern Riverside County. Staff members of the Planning and Public Works Departments are participating in the process to ensure that the Study results and recommendations are based upon good information, appropriate science, and that the interests of local residents are protected. A revised draft of the watershed plan is currently being reviewed by Staff. (HOGAN) • Automobile Dealership signage and Special Events — Staff met with the representatives of the Temecula Automotive Dealerships Association to discuss reoccurring signage and special event code violation issues. A follow-up meeting has been scheduled for November 1, 2004. • Staff has prepared a final draft ordinance to codify use restrictions and supplemental standards for "Cyber Cafes:' The final draft was routed to the City Attorney on September 15, 2004. This item has not yet been scheduled for public hearing. (PAPP) • Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan Amendment — Staff is proposing to amend the Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan to resolve commercial zoning issues and existing land uses adjacent to Area 8. (PA97-0443 WEST) • Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment 8.1 and Supplemental EIR — Staff is waiting for the applicant to submit a revised project schedule and the draft of the Specific Plan and Supplemental EIR. (PA03-0402,0403—WEST) • Telecommunications Facilities — Staff has prepared a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for consultants to evaluate the technical reports submitted by new telecommunications. The RFQ was released on October 14, 2004. (WEST) • Architectural Review — Staff has released an RFQ for architectural review services to provide development plan review services similar to the landscape architect review services. The deadline for firms to submit is October 18, 2004. Staff anticipates selecting a firm by mid November 2004. • Supplemental Development Standards (Alcohol Sales) — Staff is developing additional performance standards in order to allow for the distinction between businesses offering the sale of alcoholic beverages (beer and wine only) for non -consumption on premises and those businesses with sales of alcoholic beverages for consumption on same premises. (WEST) • Hillside Development Policy — The policies are being examined for integration into the draft - grading ordinance. Staff is working with GIS to analyze topography, soil types, environmental (habitat), and other constraints. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. R:Vv10NTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc 11 • Procedures to Implement CEQA — Staff initiated project to develop local guidelines and procedure manual for processing CEQA documents, including the adoption of local exemptions. The process will also conform to the new CEQA Guidelines, and will create new templates for standard CEQA forms. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. • Surface Mining Ordinance —The staff and City Attorney had been making final changes based upon feedback from the State prior to submitting this item to the Council for their consideration. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. • Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance — Final changes are being made prior to scheduling this item for a Planning Commission workshop. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. • South Side Street Improvement Project —The former South Side Specific Plan is being modified to design guidelines and a street improvement program for Old Town Front Street between First Street and Highway 79 South. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. • Update of the Citywide Design Guidelines - The consultant submitted a completed draft in February 2004. Staff is currently reviewing the Industrial Guidelines, Special Standards, and an illustrated glossary of design terms. The contract was extended for another year at July 13, 2004 City Council meeting. A consolidated list of staff comments/corrections will be sent to the consultant upon completion of Special Standards Guidelines and the glossary. A presentation to Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled for November 2004. (PAPP) • Margarita Village Specific Plan Amendment. — A minor amendment was submitted to facilitate HOA ownership of the pool, tennis courts and tot lot. Staff met with the applicant on October 61" to discuss the proposed SPA. The applicant is being asked to resubmit their application based on staff comments. Staff anticipates this item going before the Planning Commission in November 2004. (PA04-0486 WEST) • City — Project environmental reviews and permitting: o Overland Drive Extension — Staff reviewed 2nd submittal of the draft initial study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration and has provided comments to Public Works. No resubmittal to date. o Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaping Project — Request from Public Works for Environmental Determination for this project. Previous Negative Declaration has been modified because the project description has changed. The revised N.D. has been routed to Redevelopment, TCSD, and Public Works for comments. Planning has not received comments. Planning will coordinate with Public Works to schedule this item for City Council. (EA-93 — PAPP) o Murrieta Creek Multi -Purpose Trail Project —Staff is assisting the Public Works Department by preparing CEQA and NEPA documents for this project. Staff did a site walkover with biologist and CalTrans coordinator in January 2004. Staff has recommended and prepared Class 4 Categorical Exemption. (EA99 — PAPP) o Diaz Road General Plan Level Improvements — Staff has prepared an initial study to determine the impacts of constructing ultimate improvements on Diaz Road. Staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be prepared. Planning will coordinate with Public Works to schedule this item for City Council. (EA107 — PAPP) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc 12 o 1-15 / SR79 S. Ultimate Interchange Project — Staff is working with Public Works on the NEPA/CEQA determination for this project. (EA111 WEST) General Plan Amendments PA03-0178 TERC 52, LLC — A General Plan Amendment application (and Zone Change PA03- 0177) to change the land use designation on 52.83 acres from Business Park to High Density Residential at the northwest corner of the Rancho California Business Park, adjacent to the Campus project. Staff is awaiting the submittal of additional information and has advised the applicant that the proposal will not go to hearing until the Comprehensive General Plan Update is complete. (PAPP) • Margarita Village General Plan Amendment (PA040391) and Specific Plan Amendment (PA04- 0390) to change the land use designation from VL (very low - .2 to .4 du/acre) residential to LM (low medium — 3 to 6 du/ac) for 18.3 acres along the west side of Butterfield Stage road, north of Chemin Clinet. This is associated with a Tentative Tract Map (PA04-0392) for 36 residential lots ranging in size from 7,200 to 25,000 SF. These applications were submitted on June 2, 2004. A DRC meeting is was held on July 8, 2004. The project was resubmitted on August 2, 2004 and a DRC letter was sent to the applicant on August 26, 2004. Staff is currently reviewing revised plans submitted on October 4, 2004. (KITZEROW) PA04-0411, Nicolas 73 — A General Plan Amendment application (and Zone Change PA04- 0414, and TTM PA04-040415) to change the land use designation on 73 acres from very low density Residential to L-1 at the southeast corner of Nicolas Road and Via Lobo. Pre-DRC was held on July 8, 2004 and DRC was held on for July 15, 2004. Based upon issues raised at DRC and clarified in a follow-up letter the applicant was informed that staff does not support the GPA. Issues related to the overall project density and number of lots proposed on the map will require a resubmittal. The proposal will not go to Public Hearing prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive General Plan update. (PAPP) RAMONTHLY.RPT\2004\9-2004 Report.doc 13 REQUESTS TO SPEAK 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. I Lam' C_Cr�t�hrc r� For Against Subject: Name: S� Y, tEfi Phone: AddressJR � State/Zip: %-4L: " -c r 7 4-4 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 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. Y w� Coyhrrn. For Against Subject: /�9yI Namef�ri Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: /� a %7/Gw✓/ Gow� - 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. Date REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA fter co5mp�ting, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. �b �/ " I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against Subject: Name77�"EeA/ A Address: `" � Phone: I City/State/Zip: lG L--zoL, cry fz s� / 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 Citv Clerk. Thank You. Date For Subject: I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. Against If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name. VC, 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_ ID(2ro �o For Subject: M I wish to speak on Agenda Item No Against L �11C Name: V, Phone: Address: ( City/State/Zip: e ZSff 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. n Date �� - ��-�'i I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. r...� For Against Subject: Name: _�00IM &\.AAW0 Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: lew�cC44 4 (4 %(�Sca 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 `a4- 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No.. c. For Against Subject: f1 Ilor i fI C� e a��r a �C2surut U �rnnr1Pc Name: oSq- r (t r Phone: Address::! City/State/Zip: r ou uQa Ai ZZ5 C'/) 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 n After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. CCJV Date —e2 C -dZ I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. k e a ti'Jk For Against Subject: Name: ����V ST�/z�-, Phone: Address:�� �� � !�� City/State/Zip: �2-mee 9.2S�/ 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 fU - L� - 0'f For Subject: I wish to speak on Agenda Item Against 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 V� d 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For AL Against Subject: Name: I 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 0 ,)- 1 0 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. I For Against Subject: 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/(. • a y I wish to speak on Agenda Item For Against Subject: Aq , o 2- 0 3 "J 2 O "3 7 Name: Co Pn� l l e✓ �✓�-- ,"' City/State/Zip: e w t c.w/ 644 5/2 f90 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 o I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. ! �' For T Against Subject: _ Name: S s- Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: 7Zswtb 6 v Q4, 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 o l Z fv `D y For Subject: T4D-:2.—o3-7Z I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. 1 Lo Against Name: CH-46 liz=l((e Wt spcf/�\ 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. I / Date Ib —c7j-� I wish to speak on Agenda Item No?R 4T' For Against Subjecl-, t NameF�p�j_n4, ��.KEyF—:-?Phone:Rs( o. 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 &M—olnl I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.� For Against Subject: �Nar CWA-rA6� f � Da D31a �,2 D 'p, 0_�71 tt i AWN Address: City/State/Zip: 7Z�m If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: 'c Li 5 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(o% I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. I For Against Subject: 70A/E 0614W69' P,q ba � J� Name�'�N� `�'�,NnPhone: �'0 -3= State/ZiplOt, mea" ' 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 wish to speak on Agenda Item No. — For Against �C Subject: 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. r REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date For Subject: P'1 0 f I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. Against 0 Name: !RF) Derr � City/State/Zip: III, 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: ` Q Name: �6 `( iQ \ \ Phone:" " \—S1 Address: ��� City/State/Zip: 0 ti 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.