HomeMy WebLinkAbout032399 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to partialpate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 69~-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104
ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
MARCH 23, 1999- 7:00 P.M.
5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency
pursuant to Government Code Sections:
1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition and/or leasing of real property located
at 28464 Front Street, Temecula. The negotiating parties are the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Temecula and Dual Development Company, Ed and Kathleen
Dool. Under negotiation is the price and terms of payment to the real property
interests proposed to be conveyed and/or acquired. The Agency/City negotiators
are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer.
2. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 28721 Front
Street, Temecula (APN922-073-017, 922-046-022, and 922-073-024). The
negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and
Cleveland Investment Company. Under negotiation is the price and terms of
payment to the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The Agency/City
negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer.
3. Conference with real property pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 concerning the leasing of real property located at Temecula Mercantile
Building, 42051 Main Street, Temecula. The negotiating parties are the City of
Temecula and the Temecula Chamber of Commerce. Under negotiation are the
price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed to be
conveyed and/or acquired. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson and James
O'Grady.
4. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of an interest in real property located
at proposed right-of-way for Meadows Parkway. The negotiating parties are the
City of Temecula and Lennar Homes, Inc. and McMillan Homes, Inc. Under
negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property interests
proposed to be acquired. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady,
Williams Hughes, and Ronald Pa. ks.
R:%Agenda\032399
:~ 1
5. 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 and/or the Agency. The following claim will be discussed: Westside City,
LLC.
6. Conference witl~ City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.9(b) and (c) with respect to one matter of potential litigation.
With respect to such matter, the City Attorney has determined that a point has
been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City
based on existing facts and circumstances and the City will decide whether to
initiate litigation.
At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 99-07
Resolution: No. 99-20
CALL TO ORDER:
Prelude Music:
Jordan Bellino
Invocation:
Pastor Randy Ponder
FlagSalute:
Mayor Pro Tem Stone
ROLL CALL:
Comerchero, Lindemans, Stone, Roberts, Ford
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Proclamation for International Buildin.~ Safety Week
Proclamation for National Public Health Week
The Wine Country Chapter of the City of Hope
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.
VVhen you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all Public Headng or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to
Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk pdor to the Council addressing that item.
There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers.
R:~Agenda',032399
2
4
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, then (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 Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATON:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of February 9, 1999;
2.2 Approve the minutes of February 18, 1999.
Resolution ADDroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 1999
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 1999.
R:~Agenda\032399
3
7
9
City Council Meeting Schedule - April 1999
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Direct the City Clerk to reschedule the regular City Council Meeting of Apdl 27,
1999, to April 20, 1999, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing
requirements of the Government Code.
Resolution in Support of Developin.cl a Subregional Airport Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
6,1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
SUBREGIONAL AIRPORT PLAN FOR SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA
Student Exchan.qe Scholarship
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve an increase of the $200 per student scholarship to $300 per student for the
Temecula Valley High School Choir members who are traveling to Japan, based on
the total number of travelers decreasing from 52 to 21,
Completion and Acceptance of the City Hall Remodel Project
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Accept the City Hall Remodel Project;
8,2 Accept and record Notice of Completion and release Certificate of Deposit in the
amount of $37,689,00, back to Rizzo Construction, thirty-five days after recordation
of Notice of Completion,
Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County (EDC) FY1998-99
Fundin~ Request
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Approve a contract with the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest
Riverside County which provides funding for Fiscal Year 1998-99 in the amount of
$46,000.
R:~,genda\032399
4
10
11
12
Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24132-1 (located northerly of the intersection of
Amadta'Wav at McCabe Ddve)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Accept the Public Improvements, including subdivision monumentation, in Tract No.
24132-1;
10.2 Authorize reduction in the Faithful Performance security to the warranty amount and
initiation of the one-year warranty period;
10.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety.
Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24132-F (located at the southwesterly comer of
the intersection of Pauba Road at Meadows Parkway)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
11.2
11.3
Accept the Public Improvements, including subdivision monumentation, in Tract No.
24132-F;
Authorize reduction in the Faithful Performance secudty to the warranty amount and
initiation of the one-year warranty period;
Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety.
Acceptance of Public Streets into City-Maintained Street System (within Tract Nos. 24132-
1 and 24132-F - located at the southwesterly corner of the intersection of Meadows
Parkway at Pauba Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
'TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO
THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT
NOS. 24132-1 AND 24132-F)
13 Professi'onal Services A~reement for Ovedand Drive Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Approve a Professional Services Agreement for Materials Testing and Inspection for
Ovedand Drive Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11 - to Kleinfelder, Inc. for
$81,301.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
R:~,Agenda\032399
5
14
13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount for $8,130.10 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount
Acceptance of Easement for Access and Maintenance of Irrigation Facilities for
LandsceDed Median within-Marqadta Road - Lucky's ShoOpin,Q Center at Hi,Qhwav 79
South
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
14.2
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT FOR
PURPOSES OF ACCESSING AND MAINTAING CERTAIN
IRRIGATION FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN PARCEL NOS. 4
AND 5 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28384
Authorize the City Clerk to record the easement document.
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AND
THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
R:~Agenda\032399
6
TEMEGtJ'
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. CSD 99-01
Resolution: No. CSD 99-04
CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Comerchero
ROLL CALL:
DIRECTORS:
Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero
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 vour name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of February 18, 1999.
2
Award of Construction Contract for the Tennis Court Li.Qhting at Temecula Valley High
School - Project No. PW98-10CSD
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Award a construction contract for the Tennis Court Lighting at Temecula Valley
High School- Project No. PW98-10CSD -to Mega Electric Company in the
amount of $122,038.75 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
R:~Agenda~32399
7
2.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $12,203.88 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
3 Authorization to bid and determination of Cate.qorical Exemption for the Construction of
a half-court basketball court and related appurtenances at Butterfield Stage Park
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Determine that the construction of a half-court basketball court and related
appurtenances at Butterfield Stage Park is Categorically Exempt pursuant to
Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines;
3.2Authorize the filing of a Notice of Exemption with the appropriate filing fee for
the project with the County Clerk of Records Office;
3.3 Authorize the preparation of construction documents and release of a formal
public bid for the construction of a half-court basketball court and related
appurtenances at Butterfield Stage Park.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
4 Naming of the Temecula Valley Museum Rotunda
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Approve a recommendation from the Community Services Commission to name
the Temecula Valley Museum rotunda in honor of Tony and Mildred Tobin.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: April 13, 1999, scheduled to follow the City Council Consent Calendar, City
Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\032399
8
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Karel Lindemans presiding
ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. RDA 99-01
Resolution: No. RDA 99-04
Comerchero, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans
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
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve minutes of February 18, 1999.
2 Granting of an Easement for the Rancho Califomia Water District
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~Agenda\032399
9
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTING AN EASEMENT FOR WATER
PIPELINES AND RELATED APPURTENANCES FACILITATING
INFRASTRUCTURE '-IMPROVEMENTS RELATING TO THE
MISSION VILLAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
AGENCY BUSINESS
Approval of funds for employees of Toybox Creations, Inc. to participate in the Employee
Relocation Loan Pro.atom
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING UP TO $30,000 OF
EMPLOYEE RELOCATION PROGRAM FUNDS FOR LOANS
TO EMPLOYEES OF TOYBOX CREATIONS, INC.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Apdl 13, 1999, scheduled to follow the Community Services Distdct Meeting,
City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\032399
10
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public
Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval
of the project(s) at the time of 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.
15
Appeal of the Plannin.cl Commission's Approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0219
(Conditional Use Permit~ - Cox Communications Wireless Personal Communications
System (PCS} with antennas mounted atop a 60-foot hic3h monopole disauised as an
evetureen pine tree (monopine~ at the Rancho California Water District water tank site at
3100 Rancho California Road
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Continue to the April 13, 1999, City Council meeting.
16
Proposed Annexation of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Communities and Related
Imposition of Taxes, Rates, and Charges (Plannin.c~ Application No. PA98-0205)
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ORDERING THE REORGANIZATION
DESIGNATED AS LAFCO NO. 98-1!4-1 INCLUDING THE
ANNEXATION OF THE REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH
SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE
DETACHMENT OF THOSE AREAS FROM THE RIVERSIDE
COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT,
COUNTY AREA 143, AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 152
SUBJECT TO VOTER APPROVAL OF APPLICABLE TAXES,
ASSESSMENTS, AND CHARGES
16.2 Direct staff to prepare materials for an election on the annexation and the imposition
of taxes, rates, and charges within the annexed areas;
16.3
Direct staff to determine the value of written protests received from the property
owners and/or registered voters in the annexation area and report its findings at a
subsequent City Council meeting within 30 days of this hearing.
R:~,genda~,032399
11
17
18
Second Sedes of 1999 General Plan Land Use MaD Amendments (CamDos Verdes
Specific. Plan; Norm Reeves site on Jefferson Road; portions of Kahwea Road and
Avenida del ReDoso and Nob Court; Jefferson Road/Winchester Detention Basin; and
northwest of Winchester and Nicholas Road
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Adopt Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR
No. 348) certified for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan (Planning Application No.
PA99-0016);
17.2
Make a Finding for Planning Application No. PA99-0022 that the impacts of these
General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes constitute a reduction in overall
impacts and, as a result, fall within the environmental impacts previously discussed
in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan;
17.3 Approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration with a De Minimus Impact Finding for
Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
17.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
'A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR
THE SECOND GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
FOR 1999 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS. PA99-0016, PA99-
0022, AND PA98-0511 )
17.5 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 909-
120-036, 909-120-046, 909-281-016, 910-310-007, 957-291-001
THROUGH 030, 957-292-001 THROUGH 004, 911-170-078, 911-
170-085, AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS.
PA99-0022 AND PA98-0511 )
Planning ADplication No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. 1 to Campos Verdes Specific Plan)
which consists of increasing the school site from 10 acres to 20 acres, a reduction of 66
residential parcels, a reduction to the Dark site, and changing3 a portion of the residential
and Dark zoned prol~erty to a commercial zoning classification
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
R:~Agenda\032399
12
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC
PLAN (NO.l) LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF MARGARITA ROAD' AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY
ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) ON 72.7 ACRES
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-
059, 921-090-060, AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0015)
COUNCIL BUSINESS
19 Amendment to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Monthly Coml~ensation
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION NO. 2.40.100 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO MONTHLY
COMPENSATION FOR CITY COMMISSIONERS
19.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
20 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (N PDES} Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING STORMWATER/URBAN RUNOFF
MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROLS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PROGRAM AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
R:~Agenda\032399
13
21 1998-99 Community Service Fundin`G Pro.Gram Slyring Distribution Recommendations
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Review and approve the 1998-99 Community Service Funding Program - Spring
distribution requests per the attached table outlining the committee's
recommendations of seven organizations totaling $38,480,
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: April 13, 1999, 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Ddve, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\032399
14
PROCLAMATIONS
AND
PRESENTATIONS
ITEM
1
ITEM
2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 9, 1999
CLOSED SESSION
A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:00 P.M. It was duly
moved and seconded to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Sections:
1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
concerning the acquisition of real property located at 28721 Front Street, TemeCula (APN 922-073-
017 and 922-0046-022 and 922-073-024). The negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Temecula and First and Front, LLP and Cleveland Investment Company. Under
negotiation is the price and terms of payment to the real property interests proposed to be acquired.
The Agency/City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer.
2. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(a) with respect to two matters of existing litigation involving the City and/or the Agency.
The following cases/claims will be discussed: a) Quality Contractor's Network vs. Temecula Valley
Museum and b) Claim of Westside City II (Bill Dendy).
3. Conference with City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) with respect to
two matters of potential litigation. With respect to each matter, the City Attorney has determined
that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City
and the Agency based on existing facts and circumstances.
4. Discussion of candidates for position of City Manager pursuant to Government Code Section
54957.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilmembers:
Comerchero, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone,
and Ford.
Absent: Councilmember: None.
PRELUDE MUSIC
The prelude music was provided by Eve Craig.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Reverend Lyle Peterson.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Mayor Pro Tem Stone.
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Certificate of Special Achievement to Neil Everett Plummer for attainin.cl EaGle Scout rank
Mayor Pro Tern Stone presented the Certificate to Neil Everett Plummer.
Certificate of Special Achievement to Scott C. Robertson for attainin.a Ea.clle Scout rank
Mayor Pro Tem Stone presented the Certificate to Scott C. Robedson.
Certificate of Special Achievement to Robert Brian Slater for attaining Eagle Scout rank
Mayor Pro Tern Stone presented the Certificate to Robert Brian Slater.
Certificate of Appreciation to Honorable Arunja "Vic" Saravdarian
Mayor Pro Tern Stone presented the Certificate to Honorable Saraydarian who, with
appreciation, was in attendance to accept the Certificate.
Certificate of Appreciation to the Assistance LeaQue of Temecula Valley
Mayor Pro Tern Stone presented the Certificate which was accepted by Ms. Peggy Wiley and
Ms. MaWann Edwards.
Cedificate of Appreciation to Joseph Kicak
Mayor Ford presented the Certificate to retiring Public Works Director Kicak who relayed his
delight with having had the opportunity to work for the City of Temecula.
At this time, Mayor Ford presented to Councilman Comerchero his five-year service pin.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Ms. Kay Williams and Ms. Melody Brunsting, representing the Temecula Town Association on
behalf of the Temecula Rod Run, presented the Councilmembers with Rod Run momentos and
invited all to attend the planned Rod Run festivities.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Mayor Pro Tem Stone advised that he had attended a California League of Cities meeting at
which the fallout of the Vehicle License Fee was discussed, advising that there is no allocation
guarantee to the cities from the State if the economy were to decline but that there will be an
allocation guarantee for the upcoming second and third phase reductions.
B. Impressed with the number of Eagle Scout Certificates the City has presented, Mayor Pro
Tern Stone encouraged all non-profit organizations to apply for the second phase of the City's
Community Services Funding Program, noting that the application deadline is March 5, 1999.
C. Reviewing the ongoing progress of RTA services, Councilman Lindemans noted that in the
near future individuals will be able to travel by bus to Lake Elsinore, Hemet, and Riverside.
D. Commenting on the benefits the City has derived from retiring Public Works Director Kicak's
experience, Councilman Roberrs noted that Mr. Kicak will be greatly missed.
E. Councilman Roberts informed the City Council that he has been selected to serve on the
1999 Transportation Infrastructure and Services Steering Committee which develops policies and
recommendations for consideration and review by the Policy Committee.
F. Councilman Roberrs advised that he will be attending the upcoming Riverside County
Transportation Committee at which a vote will be taken which would allocate $816,000 to the City
for the Jefferson Avenue/Front Street rehabilitation.
G. Mayor Ford advised that he has been appointed as Vice Chairman of the Riverside County
Habitat Conservation Agency and that discussions are pursuing with regard to the multi-species
plan/open space plan for Riverside County, noting that he will keep the Council apprised.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
3
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of January 12, 1999;
2.2 Approve the minutes of January 21, 1999.
(Due to his absence from the January 2'1, '1999, City Council meeting, Mayor Pro
Tem Stone noted that he would be abstaining with regard to this issue.)
Resolution ADDrovin.a List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT
A
4
5
6
7
City Treasurer's Report as of December 31, 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of December 31, 1998.
Citv DeleGation to Voorburg, The Netherlands
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve an official City delegation to travel to Voorburg, The Netherlands in a joint
trip with the Temecula Sister Cities Association.
First Amendment to Acting City Manager Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve the First Amendment to the Employment Agreement.
Property Insurance Renewal
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve the City of Temecula Property Insurance Policy renewal with Reliance
Insurance Company and Royal/Agriculture and Frontier Insurance Company for the
period of February 26, 1999 through February 26, 2000 in the amount of $61,764.
Purchase of One (1) City Vehicle (Truck)
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve the purchase of one (1) 1999 Chevrolet full-size pick-up from Paradise
Chevrolet in the amount of $25,094.36.
Records Destruction Approval
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the
City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
10 State Historical Designation for Burnham Store (Temecula Mercantile)
11
12
13
RECOM M E N DATION:
10.1
Authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter of support forwarding the Point of
Historical Interest Application for the Burnham Store to the State Office of Historic
Preservation.
(This Consent Calendar Item was continued to the meeting of February 23, 1999.)
Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (within Tract No.
23142 -located northeasterly of the intersection of Meadows Parkway at Rancho
California Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED
STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 23142)
Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 23142 (located northeasterly of the intersection
of Meadows Parkway at Rancho California Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Accept the Public Improvements in Tract No. 23142;
12.2 Authorize the reduction in Faithful Performance security to the warranty amount and
initiation of the one-year warranty period;
12.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety.
Margarita Road/Overland Drive and Lon.cl Canyon Creek Improvements Reimbursement
Agreement with Rancho California Water District for Work Performed During Construction
- Project No. PW97-07
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Approve the attached reimbursement agreement with Rancho California Water
District (RCWD) for the cost to relocate existing water improvements necessary for
the construction of Margarita Road/Overland Drive and Long Canyon Creek
Improvements - Project No. PW97-07 - and authorize the Mayor to execute the
agreement;
13.2 Increase the Construction Contingency amount by $47,200.00 to cover the
additional work;
14
15
13.3 Approve an appropriation of $47,200.00 from Reimbursement Revenue to the
project account.
Rancho California Road at Interstate Route 15 - Bridge Widenine and Northbound Ramp
Improvements - Project No. PW95-12- Increase Construction Contin.qency
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Authorize the Acting City Manager to approve change orders with Riverside
Construction Company for Rancho California Road at Interstate Route 15 - Bridge
Widening and Northbound Ramp Improvements (Project No. PW95-12)in an
additional amount of $82,000.00 above the previously approved 10% contingency.
Professional Services A~reement with Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. for the
Final Desi.qn Southbound Off-Ramp and I-15 Widening north of Winchester Road -
Proiect No. PW98-07 - and Northbound On-Ramp Widenin.cl
RECOM M ENDATION:
15.1
Approve the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Temecula and
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. for the final design of the southbound
Off-Ramp, I-15 widening north Winchester Road - Project No. PW98-07 - and
additional widening to the northbound On-ramp from Winchester Road north 400
feet for $122,826.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
15.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $12,282.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount;
15.3
Authorize the transfer of $60,226.00 from the construction budget to the design
budget for the additional design costs associated with a change to the project scope
of work.
16
Professional Services Agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. for
Final Desi.qn Southbound Off-Ramp and I-15 Widening north of Rancho California Road -
Project No. PW98-08
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1
Approve the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Temecula and
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. for the final design of the southbound
Off-Ramp and I-15 widening north Rancho California Road - Project No. PW98-08 -
for $94,368.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
16.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $9,436.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount;
16.3
Authorize the transfer of $48,000.00 from the construction budget to the design
budget for the additional design costs associated with a change to the project scope
of work.
6
17
18
19
20
Professional Services Agreement for Pile Design Revisions and Review and Processincl
of Retaininn Wall Changes for the Overland Drive Overcrossing at Interstate Route 15 -
Project No. PW95-11
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Approve a professional services agreement with TYLIN-InternationaI-McDaniel in an
amount not to exceed $35,500 for foundation pile redesign and review of revised
retaining walls for the Overland Drive Overcrossing at Interstate Route 15 and
authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
17.2 Authorize the Acting City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of 10% of the agreement amount.
Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with Petra Geotechnical, Inc. for
the Rancho California Road/Interstate Route 15 InterchanGe- Project No. PW95-12
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1
Approve Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of
Temecula and Petra Geotechnical, Inc. to provide additional Professional Inspection
Services for the Rancho California Road/Interstate Route 15 Interchange - Project
No. PW95-12 - in an amount not to exceed $29,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to
sign Amendment No. 1.
Professional Services Agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Dou.elas, Inc. for
Additional Improvements for the Rancho California Road InterchanQe
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1
Approve a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Temecula and
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. to provide additional design for the
Rancho California Road Interchange Improvements for $45,503.00 and authorize
the Mayor to execute the contract;
19.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $4,550.30 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount;
19.3 Appropriate $50,100.00 from the General Fund Unreserved fund balance to
Consulting Services Line Item in the CIP Administration operating budget.
Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Street Name Sign Replacement Project -
Project No. PW98-18
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1
Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works
to solicit construction bids for the Street Name Sign Replacement - Project No.
PW98-18.
21
Mamarita Road/Overland Drive Street Improvement Sewer Agreement with Pacific
Century Homes for Work to be Performed during Project No. PW97-07
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1
Approve the attached Agreement with Pacific Century Homes for the cost to install
certain sewer improvements within the Margarita Road/Overland Drive Street
Improvement - Project No. PW97-07 - that is necessary to serve the Pacific
Century Homes project and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement;
21.2 Increase the Construction Contingency by $25,360.00 to cover this additional work;
21.3 Approve an appropriation of $25,360.00 from Reimbursement Revenue to the
project account.
22 Professional Services Agreement for Overland Drive Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1
Approve a Professional Services Agreement for Construction Support Services for
Overland Drive Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11 - to TYLIN International-
McDaniel for $38,270.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
22.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $3,827.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
23 Acceleration of Budgeted Funds for Overland Drive Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1
Approve the acceleration of $4,230,000.00 from the Capital Improvement Budget for
FY 1999-2000 to the current FY1998-1999 budget for the Overland Drive
Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11.
24 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 99-05
RECOMMENDATION:
24.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING SECTIONS 9.14.010 AND 9.14.020 PROHIBITING THE
CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND POSSESSION OF
OPEN CONTAINERS OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN PUBLIC PLACES
MOTION: Councilman Roberrs moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-9,11-13, 15-22,
and 24 (Item No. 10 was continued to the February 23, 1999, City Council meeting; Item Nos. 14
and 23 were pulled for separate discussion; see below). The motion was seconded by Councilman
Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Mayor Pro Tem
Stone who abstained with regard to Item No. 2.2.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS SEPARATELY DISCUSSED
14
Rancho California Road at Interstate Route 15 - Bdd.ae Widening and Northbound Ramp
Improvements - Project No. PW95-12 -Increase Construction Contin.clency
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Authorize the Acting City Manager to approve change orders with Riverside
Construction Company for Rancho California Road at Interstate Route 15 - Bridge
Widening and Northbound Ramp Improvements (Project No. PW95-12)in an
additional amount of $82,000.00 above the previously approved 10% contingency.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone, Public Works Director Kicak presented the staff report (as per
agenda material) with Senior Engineer Hughes further clarifying the proposed change order
increase, commenting on the unpredictable utility conflicts, and noting that the change orders for
this project have been carefully reviewed and monitored by staff and that the proposed costs are
justifiable.
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
23
Acceleration of Bud.aeted Funds for Overland Drive Overcrossinq - Project No.
PW95-11
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1
Approve the acceleration of $4,230,000.00 from the Capital Improvement Budget
for FY 1999-2000 to the current FY1998-1999 budget for the Overland Drive
Overcrossing - Project No. PW95-11.
Public Works Director Kicak reviewed the staff report (of record).
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
25
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial of Plannincl Application No. PA98-0347
(Development Plan) - The desi.Qn, construction and operation of 15 speculative
industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on two parcels
consistinfi of 6.02 acres with associated parking and landscaping (located on the west
side of Commerce Center Drive adjacent to Murrieta Creek north of Via Montezuma)
(Continued from the January 26, 1999, City Council meeting.)
RECOMMENDATION:
25.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AFFRIMING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA 98-
0347 DEVELOPMENT PLAN -THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION
AND OPERATION OF 15 SPECULATIVE INDUSTRIAL,
MANUFACTURING, OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 81,885
SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON TWO PARCELS CONSISTING
OF 6.02 ACRES WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND
LANDSCAPING LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE, ADJACENT TO MURRIETA
CREEK, NORTH OF VIA MONTEZUMA, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-400-017 AND 921-400-044
In light of the submittal time of the information received from the application, Deputy City
Manager Thornhill advised that staff was unable to provide it in the staff report and that staff has
not had the opportunity to fully review the information which Mr. Markham will be orally
reviewing.
At this time, Mayor Ford opened the public hearing.
Referencing submitted material of record (copies provided to the Councilmembers), Mr. Larry
Markham, 41750 Winchester Road, representing the applicant, informed the Council of the
applicanrs willingness to construct a concrete block/tilt-up wall along the south side; reviewed
the parking requirements for office, manufacturing, and warehouse uses, noting that the
proposed project will exceed those requirements, as per the Development Code, by 54 spaces;
and clarified that parking spaces are being assigned to each individual building, advising that
there will be no shared parking.
Mr. Markham further noted the following:
that each individual owner will own the individual building pad and that the
landscaping, driveways, and parking area will be owned by the property
association;
10
· that the proposed CC&Rs have been provided to staff for review;
· that the proposed development will as well fall under the jurisdiction of the
Winchester Commerce Center's CC&Rs, which also prohibits outside storage;
· that the potential tenants/owners have expressed a desire to retain the gated
areas;
that the developer will provide fencing but that the gates will not be installed
unless the particular buyer and/or tenant is desirous to have them installed at
which time a gate could be installed at the owner's own accord;
that the applicant has requested the imposition of two Conditions of Approval '-
one permitting the installation of fencing and gating after the recordation of the
Final Map and after the formation of the property association and another
condition prohibiting outside storage.
If the Council were to disapprove of the proposed fencing and gating plans, Mr. Markham noted
that the applicant would request that the Council approve, at a minimum, fencing between the
various units to clearly delineate the individual parking areas for each unit. With respect to a
suggestion mentioned at the January 26, 1999, City Council meeting, Mr. Markham advised that
the placement of a front gate for the overall project would not be feasible in that it would limit off-
hour deliveries.
Addressing the concern with regard to outside storage and related Code enforcement, Mr.
Markham, for Councilman Comerchero, advised that with the Council's imposition of a Condition
of Approval prohibiting outside storage, the City would have measures in place to address such
a violation.
Councilman Lindemans requested that the proposed individual unit fencing be higher and that it
be moved back, ensuring enough room four parked cars, and that the proposed fencing, for the
middle units, be removed.
By way of overheads, Mr. Markham further elaborated on the proposed fencing and gating plan,
noting that the applicant, at a minimum, would request that the delineating fences be approved
with no gates. Mr. Markham advised that if gates were approved, the necessary access would
be provided to the Fire Department. It was noted, by Mr. Markham, that the parcel merger has
been filed but that it was put on hold after the Planning Commission hearing.
City Attorney Thorson advised that the City Council may impose a Condition of Approval
requiring the removal of the fencing within a specified time if outside storage were to occur;
noted that prior to enforcing the condition, the Planning Commission must hold a public hearing
to determine failure of adhering to the Condition of Approval; suggested that the Council
approve two Conditions of Approval - one to prohibit outside storage and another which would
address the number of allowable violations prior to it being reviewed by the Planning
Commission for possible revocation of the fencing; and clarified that imposition of a condition
with regard to the outside storage would grant the City the authority to address this issue.
Deputy City Manager Thornhill advised, for Mayor Ford, that each property must adhere to its
own parking requirements and if those requirements are not met, the owner must apply for an
adjustment.
11
Commenting on the City's need for such units and noting that once a business outgrows such a
unit and parking requirements are no longer met, the owner/tenant could relocate to a larger site
within the City; therefore, in light of the proposed changes, Mayor Pro Tem Stone, echoed by
Councilman Roberts, spoke in support of the request.
As well commenting on the City's need for such a project, Deputy City Manager Thornhill spoke
in support of the proposed project with the proposed changes relative to fencing material, block
wall, conditions of approval with regard to outside storage and number of allowable violations
prior to it requiring a Planning Commission public hearing. Mr. Thornhill noted that the Fire
Department had expressed no concern with regard to this project.
Echoing Mayor Pro Tem Stone's comment with regard to the City's need for such a project,
Councilman Comerchero relayed his apprehension with regard to the fencing but advised that
his primary concern was with regard to the outside storage, noting that this concern has been
addressed. Although he would favor the elimination of additional fencing, Councilman
Comerchero relayed his support of the project if the elimination of the gates were acceptable.
If the center gates were removed, Councilman Lindemans relayed his support of the project.
Following some additional discussion with regard to the fencing and the gates, it was the
consensus of the City Council that the fencing be set back two parking spaces for each unit,
thereby, providing additional room in front of the gate and less room behind the gate and,
thereby, decreasing the potential space for outside storage.
Mr. Markham voiced no objection to Council's recommendation to set the fencing further back
and as well agreed to eliminate the center gates (6 total) but relayed the applicanrs desire to
retain the cross fencing to properly delineate parking spaces per unit.
In response to City Attorney Thorson's comments, the following motion was offered:
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to direct staff to amend the proposed resolution to
appropriately reflect the changes as recommended by the City Council and to agendize the
matter for the February 23, 1999, City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
At 9:04 P.M., Mayor Ford called a shod recess and reconvened the meeting at 9:16 P.M.
26
Appeal of the Plannin.cl Commission's Approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0219
(Conditional Use Permit) - Cox Communications Wireless Personal Communications
System (PCS) with antennas mounted atop a 60-foot hiqh monopole dis.cluised as an
evergreen Dine tree ("monoDine") at the Rancho California Water District water tank site at
3100 Rancho California Road
RECOMMENDATION:
26.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA98-0219;
26.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
12
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0219 (CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT- APPEAL) UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0219
(CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) TO CONSTRUCT A WIRELESS PERSONAL
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (PCS) FACILITY CONSISTING OF TWELVE
(12) PANEL ANTENNAS, ONE (1) GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS)
ANTENNA, AND SIX (6) CABINETS HOUSING A BASE TRANSCEIVER
STATION (BTS) UNIT AND OTHER ELECTRONIC AND BATTERY
EQUIPMENT. THE ANTENNAS WILL BE MOUNTED ATOP A 60-FOOT HIGH
MONOPOLE DISGUISED AS AN EVERGREEN PINE TREE ("MONOPINE")
LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT WATER TANK
SITE AT 3100 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 953-060-022
Although staff had as well expressed some concern with regard to the aesthetics of the
proposed monopole, Deputy City Manager Thornhill presented the staff report (of record) and
advised that, in light of given studies indicating that such facilities pose no health problems, staff
has no concern with regard to this issue; and advised that the zoning for this facility is in
conformance with the City's General Plan.
City Attorney Thorson noted that Councilman Lindemans had appealed this matter on the basis
of the importance of the issue and the need for the City Council to review it; advised that the
appeal documents are contained in the record; and noted that the applicant has the burden of
proof.
In response to the residents' concern relative to health threats posed by such a facility, City
Attorney Thorson referenced the opinions of several experts in the electromagnetic emissions
field which is that there are not health risks associated with such facilities. Mr. Thorson as well
referenced Federal law which states that no State or local government may regulate the
placement, construction, or modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of
environmental affects of electro'magnetic emissions. He noted that the Federal government has
assumed jurisdiction over this issue which precludes any State/County/City regulations.
At this time, Mayor Ford opened the public hearing.
Mr. Greg Morrison, representing Cox Communications, addressed several concerns/questions
from the City Council, noting the following:
· that the Pacific Bell site is 50' high and that it was constructed in 1996 prior to the
construction of the existing homes;
· that alternative sites were explored but in light of the existing water tank and the
existing pole viewed this as the most suitable location;
· that the proposed pole could be 60' high but that the extra branches for aesthetic
purposes raises the height to 65';
· that he has attempted to address the residents' concerns with regard to the health
issues in various ways including written communications from the American Cancer
Society; Mr. Morrison provided additional explanation of radio signal frequency;
· that the 65' pole raises no FAA concerns;
13
· that a majority of the pole will be located behind the existing water tank and that the
residents will actually see approximately 30' of the pole;
· that additional foliage could be provided to further address the aesthetic appearance
and to hide the panels;
· that the life expectancy of the fake foliage is approximately 5 to 10 years, advising
that the Planning Commission had added a condition requiring inspection of the
foliage every couple of years to ensure aesthetic maintenance.
Mr. Paul Gonzalez, representing the Water District, informed the Councilmembers that he was
in attendance to answer any questions and/or concerns.
Referencing the FCC's ruling regarding the placement, construction, and modification of
personal wireless services, Mr. Larry LeDoux, 32004 Merlot Crest, noted that the ruling does
provide the local agency the ability to regulate placement of such facilities and stated that the
City may deny such a facility.
Concurring with Mr. LeDoux's comment, Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that the City may deny
such a facility as long as it is not based on health concerns as preempted by the Federal
government.
Viewing the proposed project as visually unacceptable, Mr. Frank DiGiacomo, 32032 Merlot
Crest, relayed his opposition to the proposed project and suggested that the City Council
determine whether or not there may be a conflict of interest between the Board Members for
Cox Communications and the Water District.
In response to Mr. DiGiacomo's comment, Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that the Board Members
of the Water District are elected officials and, therefore, must adhere to annual filing
requirements of the Fair Political Practice Commission.
Submitting a petition in objection to the project, Mr. Shawn Bierle, 32016 Merlot Crest,
questioned the cumulative impact additional facilities of this kind would have on the noted health
concerns; viewed the public notification process for this project as limited; objected to the visual
appearance of this facility; and stated that such a facility should not be located in a residential
area.
City Attorney Thorson noted that the City may deny this project as long as substantial evidence
can support the denial and that it not be related to aesthetic appearance.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested that the height of the tower be lowered.
Councilman Lindemans relayed his concerns with such facilities with regard to aesthetic
appearance and health issues.
Viewing the site as aesthetically unpleasing, Councilman Roberts as well commented on the
cumulative impacts such facilities may have on the health issues and, therefore, suggested the
exploration of another location.
Referencing the communication from the American Cancer Society, Mayor Pro Tem Stone
voiced no concern with regard to electromagnetic emissions; noted that the area of discussion
has been zoned to accommodate a facility such as the one which is being proposed; objected to
the proliferation of such poles and, therefore, suggested that the Zoning Ordinance be
14
readdressed and that architectural guidelines for such facilities be created; and stated that such
facilities should require regularly scheduled evaluations to address health concerns. If this
project were approved, Mr. Stone suggested the formation of a subcommittee comprised of City
Councilmembers and the residents in order to create a suitable design.
Although echoing the concern of cumulative impact of such facilities, Councilman Comerchero
spoke in support of the project but relayed his desire that periodic maintenance inspections be
conducted as imposed by the Planning Commission and further clarified that such inspections
should be conducted every two years.
Although he is not of the opinion that these type of facilities create a health risk, Mayor Ford
relayed a concern as to the proliferation of such facilities. If the City were to deny this project,
Mr. Ford noted that the project would be appealed at which time the City would have no
enforcement guidelines. Mayor Ford suggested that Cox Communications explore alternative
sites. Noting that although the zoning for the site is accurate, Mr. Ford advised that such zoning
was initially intended for the Water District tank.
City Attorney Thorson suggested that the public hearing not be closed in order to give the
applicant the opportunity to investigate alternative sites as well as to explore alternative foliage
coverings for aesthetic purposes.
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to keep the public hearing open and to direct staff to
address with the applicant alternative sites as well as address the aesthetic appearance and
that the matter be continued to the March 23, 1999, City Council meeting. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
27
Award of Construction Contract for Pala Road Bridge Project - Project No. PW97-15 -
Federal Project No. BRLS-5459(003)
RECOMMENDATION:
27.1
Award a construction contract for the Pala Road Bridge Project - Project No. PW97-
15 to Granite Construction Company in the amount of $4,398,574.00 and authorize
the Mayor to execute the contract;
27.2 Authorize the Acting City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $439,857.40, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount;
27.3
Accelerate the funding by transferring the budgeted amounts in FY 1999-2000 to FY
1998-1999. The total amount of transfer is $4,600,700.00 to the various accounts
as follows:
· Environmental $ 780,000.00
· Administration $ 820,700.00
· Construction $3,000,000.00
15
Director of Public Works Kicak reviewed the staff report including the amended supplemental
material (of record) and provided clarification as to the timing of the various phases of this
project.
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
On behalf of City staff, Acting City Manager Nelson wished retiring Public Works Director Kicak
and his wife a joyous retirement and noted that Senior Engineer Hughes will be serving as the
Acting Public Works Director.
In closing, he wished his wife, Stephanie, a Happy Birthday.
In light of the contributions the City has bene~ted as a result of retiring Public Works Director
Kicak's experience and background, Mayor Pro Tem Stone requested that the naming of the
Public Works Yard be agendized for the next City Council meeting and suggested that it be
named the Joe Kicak Public Works Yard.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
City Attorney Thorson advised that there were no reportable actions from the Closed Session
under the Brown Act.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:40 P.M., Mayor Ford formally adjourned the City Council meeting to Thursday, February
18, 1999, 5:00 P.M., for the purpose of Closed Session with a Workshop meeting scheduled at
6:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL}
16
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED JOINT TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WORKSHOP MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, t999
An adjourned joint meeting of the City of Temecula City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 5:00 P.M. It was duly moved and
seconded to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section:
1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 28721 Front
Street, Temecula (APN 922-073-017 and 922-046-022 and 922-073-024). The
negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and First
and Front, LLP, and Cleveland Investment Company. Under negotiation is the price
and terms of payment to the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The
Agency/City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilmembers:
Comerchero, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone,
and Ford.
Absent: Councilmember: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. John Telesio, 31760 Via Telesio, Commissioner of the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission, relayed the Commission's desire to function in a more expanded role and
its willingness to serve on a potential Traffic Congestion Committee.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone thanked Mr. Telesio for his attendance and requested that the
Chair or Vice Chair of each Commission attend monthly City Council meetings in order
to brief the Council on specific issues.
Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the Acting Public Works Director will be
attending all Public/Traffic Safety Commission meetings.
By way of a petition, Ms. Laura Minden, 267740 Jefferson Avenue, of Rancon Realty
and representing several concerned business owners, relayed objection to the proposed
Winchester Road median because of the additional traffic congestion it would create as
well as the financial impact it would have on the businesses.
Ms. Angle, Marchese, 41790 Winchester Road, representing C&A Sandwiches, voiced
no objection to the proposed traffic signal but relayed opposition to the Winchester Road
median because of the impact it will have on her business.
Mr. Richard Feck, 310 Via Vera Cruz, San Marcos, owner of a business located at the
corner of Enterprise Circle South and Winchester Road, suggested that only a portion of
the approved improvements be implemented; supported the proposed traffic signal; and
noted that the Winchester Road median will detrimentally impact the value of the
surrounding properties and that the median will not address the traffic problem.
Both Acting Public Works Director Hughes and Senior Engineer Moghadam provided
further clarification of this project, which has been awarded to the contractor, advising
that the City's public notification process was followed and that the traffic signal will be
placed in operation prior to the construction of the median. It was noted that the median
was awarded in an effort to address accident problems and to address the flow of traffic
on Winchester Road.
Mr. Bill Foley, 41625 Enterprise Circle South, echoed previously noted concerns as they
relate to public notification, loss of access to the businesses, and impact on property
value.
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved that this item be properly noticed and that the
matter be agendized for the February 23, 1999, City Council meeting. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORTS
No reports given.
COUNCIL AND AGENCY BUSINESS
Workshop Discussion on Traffic Improvement Proiects
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve a plan for study and implementation of various traffic
improvement projects.
Reviewing the purpose of this workshop, Acting City Manager Nelson commented on the
Category I improvements; referenced action taken at the January 21, 1999, Workshop;
and advised that a status update of the Capital Traffic projects would be provided.
STATUS REPORT
As per overheads, Acting Public Works Director Hughes, in detail, presented a status
report of current traffic projects (as per agenda material), advising that with regard to the
Overland Drive Overcrossing, staff is continuing to explore the possibility of a 24-hour
work schedule.
To ensure that this Overcrossing is completed prior to Mall completion, Mayor Pro Tem
Stone reiterated his desire to pursue a 24-hour work schedule.
Although monetary incentives could be discussed with the developer of the
Overcrossing, Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the developer has indicated no
interest in a 24-hour work schedule and noted that the current contract incentives should
ensure completion of this project as close to the opening of the Mall as possible
Councilman Roberts commented on the length of the left-turn phase for westbound
Winchester Road to northbound Ynez Road and the traffic congestion created in this
area. Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that Caltrans controls the timing
sequence for these intersections and noted that staff will further investigate the matter
and report back at the March 23 or April 13, 1999, City Council meeting.
At a recent meeting with Caltrans, Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that it
was suggested to Caltrans, by the City, that the City fund a Caltrans employee who
would then be solely dedicated to the City in making adjustments and corrections to the
signal timing, advising that currently Caltrans will not permit City staff to make
adjustments to the controllers. Mr. Hughes noted that Caltrans stated that the City's
suggestions would be explored but that it was requested that this suggestion not be
considered until the completion of the Winchester Road ramp and Rancho California
Road at which time the modems will be in operation and City staff will be able to monitor
in-house.
Viewing City staffs suggestion to Caltrans as innovative, both Mayor Pro Tem Stone and
Councilman Comerchero encouraged staff to pursue that route.
In light of the contract the City has with the County for signal maintenance, Councilman
Roberts suggested that if the City were to fund a Caltrans employee, that this individual
as well maintain the County's signals to ensure total synchronization.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested that the City's consultant pursue this concept of
funding a Caltrans employee with Caltrans.
PRIORITY DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL
Urban Desi_Qnation for I-'15 Freeway
Acting City Manager Nelson informed the Council/Redevelopment Agency Members that
a letter has been sent to Caltrans requesting the change in freeway designation from
rural to urban to which Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that Caltrans will
focus on providing assistance to the City to resolve the traffic congestion problems in
exploring ways to get needed intersection accesses possibly without any change in
speed designation and, thereby, retaining the current speed limit.
Riverside County Transportation Committee Fundinfl Results
Acting City Manager Nelson reported that at the February 10, 1999, Riverside County
Transportation Committee meeting, the City received approval for a $816,000 grant and
commended Councilman Roberts as well as the Public Works Department for their
efforts associated with obtaining this grant which will be utilized to improve the pavement
and rehabilitation of Jefferson Avenue. By receiving this grant, Mr. Nelson advised that
previously allocated Measure A funds may now be utilized for another project such as
the realignment of Diaz Road.
Councilman Roberts noted that additional RCTC funding will be available in April through
the Congestion Management Air Pollution Reduction and encouraged staff to pursue
additional funding through this measure.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone commended Councilman Roberts on his efforts.
3
Meadows Parkway Extension
Having reviewed the minutes and the audio tape with regard to this issue, Acting City
Manager Nelson advised that it reflected that the Council was desirous of exploring with
the developers the feasibility of completing construction of Meadows Parkway as soon
as possible but that no direction or commitment was made by the Council to provide any
type of financial assistance for expediting this extension.
Being of the opinion that the City Council should work with the developers on some type
of financing mechanism such as the one utilized for La Serena Way in widening
Margarita Road with a reimbursement agreement tied to building permits.
Mayor Ford suggested that the matter be readdressed during the mid-year budget
review.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that the improvement plans for the full
length of the road have been completed and that the grading of the road system could
begin within 30 days.
If a development reimbursement agreement were approved for Meadows Parkway,
Councilman Comerchero questioned how such an approval could financially impact
other projects and requested that staff further explore his concern.
It was noted that this issue would be reviewed and agendized to a further City Council
meeting.
Immediate Traffic Intersection Modifications - Cate{3ory I Improvements
By way of the Traffic Circulation Improvement Plan (of record), Deputy Director of Public
Works Parks reviewed the previously approved $250,000 Category I projects which are
to be completed prior to the Mall opening. He noted that the City Council's
recommendations and public comments will be forwarded to the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission for review and that monthly updates on these projects will be provided to
the Council.
Advising that any changes will have consequences on other projects, Senior Engineer
Moghadam, in detail, reviewed the Circulation Improvement Plan in addition to various
options including signal phasing.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone stated that the City should proactively engage a mass commuter
traffic plan for the City of Temecula for those business with more than 50 employees.
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved that the Category I improvements be reviewed
by engineering and the Public/Traffic Safety Commission to determine their
effectiveness after which the matter would be readdressed by the City Council and that
an emphasis be placed on expediting as many Category I projects as possible to ensure
completion prior to Mall opening. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone
and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the Category 2 and 3 projects will be reviewed
during the upcoming Capital Improvement Project process.
4
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:41 P.M., the joint City Council and Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally
adjourned to Tuesday, February 23, 1999,-at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Karel Lindemans, Chairman
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
ITEM 3
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
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 $2,754,744.76.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 23rd day of March, 1999.
A'I'rEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
Resos 99-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 99- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula
on the 23rd day of March, 1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
Resos 99-
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
02/25/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
03/04/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
03/11/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
03/11/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
03/04/99 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 03/'23/99 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BYFUND:
CHECKS:
001 GENERAL FUND
165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND
280 REDEVELOFqVlENT AGENCY.-CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
380 RDA - DEBT SERVICE
460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND
470 CFD 98-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND
100 GENERAL
165 RDA-LOW/MOD
190 TCS D
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
174 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
2de RDA-CIP
300 INSURANCE
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
TOTAL BYFUND:
PREPARED BY RETA WESTON, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST
I GE R ,DIRECTOR OF INANCE
I ~:C~.~,`/b,Z~ TING CITY~GER
338;500.60
66,205.18
73,460.99
18,967.49
25,084.79
8,982.91
2,269.22
1,156.80
389,762.76
145,568.49
110,596.06
6,476.82
63,471.66
4,623.57
18,306.74
1,250.00
426,702.02
384,199.39
123,042.24
3,397.48
29,164.16
67.19
169.33
2,101.42
952.54
1,866.32
698.39
1,224.20
3,435.94
, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
1,071,627.56
1,081,910.77
361,461.16
70,586.00
169,159.27
2,754,744.76
2,565,585.49
169,159.27
2,754,744.76
__ , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
17:21
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 12
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
SUPPORT SERVICES
FACILITIES
380 RDA - DEBT SERVICE
460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND
470 CFD 98-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND
AMOUNT
121,333.67
32,666.82
21,592.40
16,935.15
24,946.62
3,103.10
387.95
6,263.32
14,342.88
190.61
14,297.72
1,474.14
1,941.77
1,250.00
426,702,02
384,199.39
TOTAL 1,071,627.56
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
458~5
458~5
458~5
458~5
45845
458~5
45845
45845
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
~5~5
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
46050
54198
54199
54200
17:21
CHECK
DATE
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/24/99
02/22/99
02/23/99
02/23/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
002652
VENDOR
NAME
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
[NSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
INSTATAX
ROBBINS,
EL POLLO
OSCAR~S
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(XRS)
(XRS)
(IRS)
(XRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(ZRS)
(IRS)
(IRS)
(IRS)
(]RS)
(]RS)
(ZRS)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
(EDD)
ROBIN
LOCO
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEOERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEOERAL
000283 FEOERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEOICARE
000283 MEOICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MED[CARE
000283 MEDICARE
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
REFUND: TEMECULA VLLY STARS
REFRESHMENTS:COUNCIL MTG:2/23
OPERATING BUDGET WKSHP 2/25/99
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
280-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
190-183-4982
001-100-999-5260
001-140-999-5260
ITEM
AMOUNT
17,894.29
437.37
3,091.97
8.70
22.04
294.10
126.18
153.03
26.07
664.01
150.17
523.45
4,428.50
131
933.48
2.43
6.18
76.26
34.29
55.40
24.17
140.42
48.87
131.74
25.64
3.21
41.19
.82
1.56
2.67
5.08
4,684.35
145.24
642.43
1.48
3.53
55.74
21.52
56.36
9.39
155.31
32.68
100.99
45.00
90.19
115.29
PAGE 1
CHECK
ANOUNT
29,404.96
5,989.19
45.00
90.19
115.29
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99 17:21
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER
954550 02/23/99 003228
54276 02/25/99 002539
54277 02/25/99 000724
54278 02/25/99 003584
54279 02/25/99 001104
54280 02/25/99 002410
54280 02/25/99 002410
54280 02/25/99 002410
54281 02/25/99
54282 02/25/99
54283 02/25/99 003157
54284 02/25/99 000936
54285 02/25/99 000101
54285 02/25/99 000101
54285 02/25/99 000101
54286 02/25/99
54286 02/25/99
54286 02/25/99
54286
54286
54286
54287
54288 02/25/99
54289 02/25/99
54290 02/25/99
54291 02/25/99 003214
54292 02/25/99 001159
54293 02/25/99 000398
54294 02/25/99 000832
54295 02/25/99 001655
VENDOR
NAME
U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL
3CMA/CITY COI4MUNICATION
A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI
A PLUS RELOCATION SPEC]
A R M A INTERNATIONAL
A t~3MAN~S TOUCH BUILDIN
A t,K3NAN~S TOUCH BUILDIN
A WOHAN~S TOUCH BUILDIN
ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS
ALLING, RICHARD
AMAI/PADGET-THOMPSON
AMERICAN RED CROSS
APPLE ONE~ INC.
APPLE ONE, INC.
APPLE ONE, INC.
003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
02/25/99 003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
02/25/99 003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
02/25/99 003266 ARCUS DATA SECURITY
02/25/99 003388 ARNHART, TIM
000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER
002878 BUSINESS INFORMATION SY
003138 CAL MAT
CAL MAT
CALIFORNIA DEPT OF JUST
CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC PRKG
CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
CFD 98-1 DEBT SERVICE PMT
MEMBERSHIP:G.~K)LNICK:3/99-3/O0
T-SHIRTS FOR SOFTBALL AWARDS
MOVE MUSEUM PIECES:FV AIRPORT
MEMBERSHIP:S.JONES/G.FLORES
FEB JAN1TORIAL SVCS:PARKS
FEB JANITORIAL SVCS:PARKS
JANITORIAL SVCS:WINCH CRK PRK
OVERPAYMENT:ALARM FEE:B95-0352
REFUND: GOLF CLASS
SAN DIEGO WORKSHOP:LANIER:3/31
EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEXTBOOKS
TEMP HELP W/E 1/30 MANANSINGH
TEMP HELP W/E 2/06 MANANSINGH
TEMP HELP W/E 2/13 MANANSINGH
DATA STORAGE CART CTR T20 ARCH
DATA STORAGE MICROBOX ARCHIVAL
APERTURE CARD BOX ARCHIVE
LEASED CTR CONTAINER T20
LEASED CTR MICROBOX #648
LEASED CTR APER.CARD BOX #686
BUCKETS FOR EXPLORERS MUSTER
MAINT/REPAIR EQUIP:STATION ~
CONSULTING FOR NR DATA BASE
CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS
CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS
PROCESSING FEE:EMPLEE PRINTS
MBRSHP:GR/TM:4/1/99-3/31/O0
MEMBERSHIP:G.ROBERTS:1999
HELIUM BALLOON BLOWER
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
470-1040
001-111-999-5226
190-183-999-5380
190-185-999-5250
001-120-999-5277
190-180-999-5250
001-164-603-5250
190-180-999-5250
001-171-4037
190-183-4982
001-1990
190-183-999-5320
001-140-999-5118
001-140-999-5118
001-140-999-5118
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001'120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001-171-999-5235
001-171-999-5212
001-150-999-5248
001-164-601-5218
001-164-601-5218
001-150-999-5250
001-140-999-5226
001-140-999-5226
190'184-999-5301
ITEM
AMOUNT
384,199.39
295.00
151.13
1,052.25
290.00
1,722.00
211.00
211.00
6.00
50.00
195.00
324.00
354.11
441.18
191.57
473.85
16.24
40.60
52.00
8,00
20,00
115,00
456.00
1,275.00
397.60
73.60
84.00
100.00
75,00
11.90
PAGE 2
CHECK
AMOUNT
384,199.39
295.00
151.13
1,052.25
290.00
2,144.00
6.00
50.00
195.00
324.00
986.86
610.69
115.00
456.00
1,275.00
397.60
73,60
8~.00
100.00
75.00
11.90
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
02/25/99 17;21 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54296 02/25/99 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER R-O-W SIGNS & MISC HARDWARE
54296 02/25/99 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER R-O-W SIGNS & MISC HARDWARE
001-164-601-5244
001-164-601-5244
67.34
204.73
272.07
54297 02/25/99 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263
54297 02/25/99 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-164-602-5262
54297 02/25/99 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-170-999-5262
16.39
14.36
14.60
45.35
54298 02/25/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS INSTALL SECURITY SYS:FV AIRPRT 190-185-999-5250
54298 02/25/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS AIRPORT ALRM MONITOR:l/20-3/31 190-185-999-5250
54298 02/25/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS INSTALL ALRM SYS:6TH ST PK LOT 280-199-824-5804
54298 02/25/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 6TH ST ALRM MONITOR:l/22-3/31 001-164-603-5250
350.00
107.25
475.00
65.25
997.50
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONZX OF HENET ANTENNA MOUNTING RACK 320-199-999-5215
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET MISC HAROWARE 320-199-999-5248
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET UHF MALE SOLOER TYPE 320-199-999-5248
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET ANTENNA CABLE 320-199-999-5248
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET LABOR 320-199-999-5248
54299 02/25/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET SALES TAX 320-199-999-5248
54300 02/25/99 002945 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES FOR PARKS 190-180-999-5212
500.00
10.00
40.00
150.00
840.00
15.50
26.40
1,555.50
26.40
54301 02/25/99 003059 COSTCO COMPANIES, INC TABLES FOR THE MUSEUM PROJECT 190-185-999-5220
206.82
206.82
54302 02/25/99 003614 CRESTA VERDE ESCROW, IN 1ST TIME HOMEBUYER:HAY/ESTRELL 165-199-999-5449
54303 02/25/99 001716 DAN'S ROOFING MAINTENANCE FACILITY - REPAIR 340-199-702-5219
22,900.00
225.00
22,900.00
225.00
54304 02/25/99 001393 DATA TICKET, INC.
54304 02/25/99 001393 DATA TICKET, INC.
PRK CIT HEARINGS FOR OCT-NOV98 001-140-999-5250
PRK CIT HEARINGS FOR OCT-NOV98 001-170-999-5250
52.50
52.50
105.00
54305 02/25/99 003006 DEWITT CUSTOM PAINTING RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM:ANDERSON 165-199-813-5804
54305 02/25/99 003006 DEWITT CUSTOM PAINTING RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM:M.FORB]NG 165-199-813-5804
54306 02/25/99 003610 DOMENOE, JIM REIMBURSE FOR CRIME SWEEP 2/10 001-170-999-5292
1,100.00
900.00
146.82
2,000.00
146.82
54307 02/25/99 003457 DOWNTOWN RESEARCH & DEV TRAINING BOOK FOR RDA DEPT 280-199-999-5261
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 WILLIAMS 001-161-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 W[LLIAMS 001-162-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 GORMAN 001-162-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 MILES 001-163-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S [ EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 MILES 001-165-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 MILES 001-164-604-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 HUDSON 001-163-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 YONKER 001-140-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C TEMP HELP (2)M/E 1/29 HILLBERG 165-199-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 HILLBERG 165-199-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C TEMP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 SERVEN 001-164-603-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TENP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 SERVEN 190-180-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 1/29 SERVEN 193-180-999-5118
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 SERVEN 001-164-603-5118
74.95
580,80
580.80
727.05
304.25
304.25
304.25
2,696.92
1,344.19
1,642.05
1~281.60
368.93
368.93
737.86
361.92
74.95
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
02/25/99 17:21 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 SERVEN
54308 02/25/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVlC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 SERVEN
190-180-999-5118
193-180-999-5118
361.93
723.85
12,689.58
54309 02/25/99 000453 ECONOMICS PRESS, INC, T SUBSCRIPTION:"BITS & PIECES" 001'162-999'5228
89.83
89,83
54310 02/25/99 003291 ED HiLL CONSTRUCTION CONSTR.INSPECTZON SVC:MARG.PRK 210-190-119-5804
396.00
396.00
54311 02/25/99 003150 EDGE DEVELOPMENT, INC
54311 02/25/99 003150 EDGE DEVELOPMENT, INC
JAN PRGSS PMT#10:MARG.COHM.PRK 210-190-119-5804
RET. ~/H PMT#10:MARG.CONM.PARK 210-2035
1,108.80
110.88-
997.92
54312 02/25/99 002128 ENGINEERING VENTURES, I JAN SURVEYING SVC:OT PRK LOT 280-199-823-5801
1,600.00
1,600.00
54313 02/25/99 001165 ENTERTAINMENT PUBLICATI PMT FOR ENTERTAINMENT BOOKS 190-183-4980
960,00
960.00
54314 02/25/99 000478 FAST SIGNS
SIGNS:OLD TOWN CONSTRUCTION 280-199-999-5362
192.28
192.28
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-140-999-5230
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-162-999-5230
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-161-999-5230
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-111-999-5230
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 190-180-999-5230
54315 02/25/99 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-1990
20.50
107.25
42.25
19.00
17.50
30.75
237.25
54316 02/25/99 002832 FENCE BUILDERS RES.INPROVEMENT PRGM:M,FORBING 165-199-813-5804
54316 02/25/99 002832 FENCE BUILDERS CREDIT:CUSTI34ER TO PAY VENDOR 165-199-813-5804
54317 02/25/99 003612 FIRE PREVENTION SERVICE REMIT FIRE PREVENTION REVENUE 001-162-4264
54317 02/25/99 003612 FIRE PREVENTION SERVICE LESS ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 001-162-999-5440
3,415.00
50.00-
20,151.25
500.00-
3,365.00
19,651.25
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER JAN:SN:5477-2593-6983'2576 001-110-999-5260
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FEB:SJ:5477-2590-4249'5288 001-100-999-5260
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:SJ:5477-2590-4249'5288 001-120-999'5217
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:SJ:5477-2590-4249'5288 320'199-999'5211
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:SJ:5477-2590-4249-5288 320-199-999'5258
54318 02/25/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FEB:SJ:5477-2590-4249-5288 001-120-999-5261
54319 02/25/99 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, DAY PLANNER BINDERS & REFILLS 001-161-999-5220
13.36
81.92
86.26
324.97
1,295.00
39.51-
188.46
1,762.00
188.46
54320 02/25/99 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, DAY PLANNER BINDERS & REFILLS 190-180-999'5220
76.29
76.29
54321 02/25/99 000184
54321 02/25/99 000184
54321 02/25/99 000184
54321 02/25/99 000184
54321 02/25/99 000184
54321 02/25/99 000184
54322 02/25/99 002141
54322 02/25/99 002141
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
GELS, PAUL
GELS, PAUL
FEB:909-197-5072:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208
FEB:909-676-OZ83:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208
FEB:909-676-6243:PALA COMM PRK 320-199-999-5208
FEB:909-694-4354:PALA COMM PRK 320-199-999-5208
FEB:909-695-3564:ALARM 320-199-999-5208
FEB:909-699-8632:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR -TEM POLICE 001-170-999-5214
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR -TEM POLICE 001-170-999-5214
4,899.83
65.81
28.03
30.66
54.44
28.58
240.00
250.00
5,107.35
490.00
54323 02/25/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT JAN:MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-110-999-5220 63.68
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
02/25/99 17:21 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIQOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54323 02/25/99 000177 GLENN]ES OFFICE PROOUCT JAN:NISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-100-999-5220
54323 02/25/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT SALES TAX 001-100-999-5220
54323 02/25/99 000177 GLENN]ES OFFICE PROOUCT JAN:MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-1990
71.07
5.51
354.25
494.51
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 7' CAT5 CABLES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 14' CAT5 CABLES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE TK 85 DLT 2000 1/2" CARTRIOGES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE POWER STRIPS 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE MOUNT BOXES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE KEYBOARO EXTENTION CABLES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE BLACK INK CARTRIDGES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE BLACK INK CARTRIOGES 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE COMPUTER ADAPTERS 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5242
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221
54324 02/25/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5242
54325 02/25/99 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221
54325 02/25/99 000178 GOLOEN STATE TRADING CO COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221
83.40
119.40
359.90
16.98
44.54
53.70
65.88
5.75
6.22
4.63
5.01
107.40
149.94
11.79
20.48
155.94
3.07
3.32
5.92
6.40
298. OO
5.31
5.74
11.39
12.31
69.44
258.32
1,562.42
327.76
54326 02/25/99 001550 GROSSMONT BANK
REL.RETENTION TO ESCROW:EDGE 210-1035
110.88
110.88
54327 02/25/99 001517 HEALTH & HUMAN RESOURCE EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 001-150-999-5248
394.05
394.05
54328 02/25/99 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES JAN MOTORCYCLE REPAIR:TEN PD 001-170-999-5214
54328 02/25/99 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES PMT FOR NOVEMBER:REF #1889 001-170-999-5214
54329 02/25/99 000863 I P M A IPMA MEMBERSHIP ANNUAL DUES 001-150-999-5226
54330 02/25/99 000205 KIDS PARTIES, ETC. PARTY JUMPS FOR SPR. EGG HUNT 190-183-999-5370
54330 02/25/99 000205 KIDS PARTIES, ETC. SUPERVISION 190-183-999-5370
54331 02/25/99 002023 KING, WENDE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
54331 02/25/99 002023 KING, MENDE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
54331 02/25/99 002023 KING, WENDE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
54332 02/25/99 000206 KINKO'S, INC. PAPER AND PRINTING SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5220
54332 02/25/99 000206 K[NKO~S, INC. PAPER ANO PRINTING SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5222
593.84
11.01
224.00
175.00
75.00
102.00
25.60
249.60
37.71
19.40
604.85
224.00
250.00
377.20
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54332
54333
54334
54334
54335
54335
54335
54335
54335
54336
54337
54337
54338
54339
54340
54341
54342
54343
54344
54345
54346
54347
54347
54347
54347
54347
54547
54347
54548
54349
54350
54351
17:21
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
02/25/99 000206 KINKO'S, INC.
02/25/99 KOSMONT & ASSOCIATES, I
02/25/99 001982 L WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE, I
02/25/99 001982 L WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE, I
02/25/99 001534 LA MASTERS OF FINE TRAV
02/25/99 001534 LA MASTERS OF FINE TRAV
02/25/99 001534 LA MASTERS OF FINE TRAV
02/25/99 001534 LA MASTERS OF FINE TRAV
02/25/99 001534 LA MASTERS OF FINE TRAV
02/25/99 002187 LAKE ELSINORE ANIMAL FR
02/25/99 000596 LEAGUE OF CAL. CITIES
02/25/99 000596 LEAGUE OF CAL. CITIES
02/25/99 002890 LOS ANGELES CELLULAR TE
02/25/99 002011 MARTIN, KATHARINA E.
02/25/99 002693 MATROS, ANOREA
02/25/99 000230 MBIA MUNIFINANCIAL
02/25/99 001205 MCOERMOTT, TIM K.
02/25/99 MEADOW/S, HELEN
02/25/99 001905 MEYERS, DAVID WILLIAM
02/25/99 003241 MILLAR HEATING & AIR, I
02/25/99 002952 MINOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEM
02/25/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 00138/, MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 00138/, MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 00138/, MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
02/25/99 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
02/25/99 MORGAN, OANA
02/25/99 001189 MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT CO
02/25/99 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PAPER AND PRINTING SUPPLIES
"COST OF DOING BUS.SURVEY" BK
CITYWIDE TREE TRIMMING
CITYWIDE TREE TRIMMING
AIR:SIERRA CF:KB/HO:4/19-23/99
AIR:SIERRA CF:LB/CB/TH:4/19-23
AIR:SIERRA CF:LB/CB/TH:4/19-23
AIR:SIERRA CF:LB/CB/TH:4/19-23
ADO'L FEE:CSMFO CF:GR:2/27-3/2
JAN ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
PLANNER CF:DU/RG/RS/AW:3/24-26
PLANNER CF:DU/RG/RS/AW:3/24-26
FEB CELLULAR PHONE SVCS:TEM PD
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
ARBITRAGE REBATE SERVICES
REFUND:REFRESHMENTS FOR PANEL
REFUND:EXCURSION-WELKS PHANTOM
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
AIR CONDITION REPAIRS:CITY HAL
COPIER RENTAL: TEM COMM RECREA
500 FOIL LETTERHEAD STATIONARY
500 FOIL LETTERHEAD ENVELOPES
1000 B/W LETTERHEAD STATIONARY
QTY 1500 B/W ENVELOPES
SALES TAX
BUSINESS CARDS: S.ROSSINI
SALES TAX
WASH OLD TWN STREETS-ROD RUN
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
CLEAN STORM DRAINS IN OLD TWN
MISC SUPPLIES-PW MAINT CREW
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
330-199-999-5220
001-110-999-5228
001-164-601-5402
001-164-601-5402
001-1990
001-161-999-5261
320-199-999-5258
001-162-999-5258
001-140-999-5258
001-172-999-5255
001-161-999-5258
001-1990
001-170-999-5208
190-183-999-5330
190-183-999-5330
380-199-999-5248
001-140-999-5260
190-183-4982
190-183-999-5330
340-199-701-5250
190-182-999-5239
001-100'999-5222
001-100-999-5222
001-100-999-5222
001-100-999-5222
001-100-999-5222
001-161-999-5222
001-161-999-5222
001-164-601-5402
190-183-4990
280-199-824-5804
001-164-601-5218
ITEM
AMOUNT
11.86
175.00
4,960.00
870.00
296.00
158.00
158.00
158.00
10.00
3,712.85
315.00
945.00
125.58
468.00
386.40
1,250.00
60.98
33,00
160.00
47.00
162.70
124.35
141.10
59.60
137.75
35.87
38.25
2.96
618.00
100.00
2,366.70
57.08
PAGE 6
CHECK
AMOUNT
68.97
175.00
5,830.00
780.00
3,712.85
1,260.00
125.58
468.00
386.40
1,250.00
60,98
33.00
160.00
47.00
162.70
539.88
618.00
100.00
2,366.70
57.08
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
02/25/99 17:21 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54352 02/25/99 003590 NETWORK COMPUTING SOLUT COMPUTER REPAIRS & UPGRADES
54352 02~25~99 003590 NETWORK COMPUTING SOLUT LABOR
54352 02/25/99 003590 NETWORK COMPUTING SOLUT SALES TAX
54352 02/25/99 003590 NETWORK COMPUTING SOLUT COMPUTER UPGRADE
54352 02/25/99 003590 NETWORK COMPUTING SOLUT SALES TAX
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
320-199-~99-5215
894.75
300.00
69.34
325.00
25.19
1,614.28
54353 02/25/999 002037 NEXUS INTEGRATED SOLUTI COMPUTER REPAIRS
320-199-999-5215
436.71
436.71
54354 02/25/99 002105
54354 02/25/99 002105
54354 02/25/99 002105
54354 02/25/99 002105
54354 02/25/99 002105
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TO~N TIRE & SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & NAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
C]TY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
190-180-999-5214
190-180-999-5214
001-164-601-5214
001-164-601-5214
001-162-999-5214
170.92
49.37
2,222.96
26.69
65.90
2,535.84
54355 02/25/99 001619 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, ENGINEERING NEWSPAPER AD
001-150-999-5254
219.90
219.90
54356 02/25/99 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING CO., I SPRING EGG HUNT SUPPLIES
190-183-999-5370
700.90
700.90
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54357 02/25/99 003021
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SER
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9°FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9-FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9°FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9"FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9°FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9"FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9°FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
JAN 9°FEB 8 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
000246 MLT PERS
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS MET
000246 PERS MET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS-PRE
000246 PERS-PRE
000246 PERS-PRE
000246 PERS-PRE
000246 PERS-PRE
001-162-999-5208
001-140-999-5208
001-165-999-5208
001-163-999-5208
001-164-601-5208
001-164-604-5208
190-180-999-5208
280-199-999-5208
001-161-~99-5208
001-100-999-5208
001-150-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
001-120-999-5208
001-110-999-5208
001-2130
001-2390
165-2390
190-2390
191-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194-2390
280-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
001-2130
191-2130
192-2130
193-2130
194-2130
541.91
54.66
109.48
182.70
108.99
254.41
437.59
56.11
108.99
170.61
65.34
125.88
59.51
179.16
322.43
24,1(~.(:,8
693.64
3,764.23
13.28
33.93
405.40
196.69
301.77
130.52
690.59
147.85
491.04
263.61
2.81
5.62
39.33
8.43
2,455.34
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99 17:21
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER
VENDOR
NAME
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
/U4OUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
54358 02/25/99 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
SURVIVOR
001-2390
165-2390
190-2390
191-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194-2390
280-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
81,88
1.87
13.87
.05
.14
1.52
.92
.46
1.86
.99
2.18
31,78~.43
54360 02/25/99
54361 02/25/99
003499
PETER VAN GAALE & SONS
PETERSON, CHERYL
FACADE IMPROV PRGM: D.WEBSTER
REFUND: GYMNASTICS - TODDLERS
280-199-813-5804
190-183-4982
5,000.00
42.50
5,000.00
42.50
54362 02/25/99 000580
54362 02/25/99 000580
54362 02/25/99 000580
PHOTO WORKS
PHOTO WORKS
PHOTO WORKS
FILM & PHOTO DEVELOPING
SALES TAX
FILM & PHOTO DEVELOPING
001-111-999-5270
001-111-999-5270
001-161-999-5220
137.50
10.66
29.66
177.82
54363 02/25/99 000254
54363 02/25/99 000254
54363 02/25/99 000254
54363 02/25/99 000254
54363 02/25/99 000254
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PUBLIC NOTICE: 98-14-1
DISPLAY AD: CONM SVCS FUNDING
DISPLAY AD: OLD TWN PRONO
DISPLAY AD: CIP UPDATES
26 WKS SUBSCRIPTION:C. MANGER
001-120-999-5256
001-140-999-5254
280-199-999-5362
001-165-999-5256
001-110-999-5228
66.75
108.00
450. O0
180.00
64.23
54364 02/25/99 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-VARIOUS PARKS 190-180-999-5238
47.10
47.10
54365 02/25/99 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC.
54365 02/25/99 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC.
54365 02/25/99 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC.
54365 02/25/99 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC.
SC-5001339-0 KL
SC-5002330-8 CITY VAN
SC-5001377-0 SR VAN
SC-5003948-6 INFOR SYSTEM
001-100-999-5208
190-180-999-5208
190-180-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
58.80
27.20
44.72
36.10
166.82
54366 02/25/99 001364
54366 02/25/99 001364
54366 02/25/99 001364
R C P BLOCK & BRICK, IN
R C P BLOCK & BRICK, IN
R C P BLOCK & BRICK, IN
54367 02/25/99 000981 R H F INC.
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
54368 02/25/99 000947
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
6 WHEEL STOPS:OLD TWN STREETSC
FREIGHT
SALES TAX
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES
280-199-824-5804
280-199-824-5804
280-199-824-5804
001-170-999-5215
210-165-696-5804
210-165-696-5804
210-165-696-5804
210-165-601-5804
210-165-696-5804
210-190-155-5804
001-164-604-5268
210-165-631-5804
60.00
60.00
9.30
94.00
404.71
112.17
408.85
1,961.80
214.65
45.34
26.94
1,177.40
129.30
94.00
4,351.86
54369 02/25/99 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 01-17-80000-1 VIA EDUARDO 001-164-601-5250 21.59
54369 02/25/99 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 567.24
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54369
54369
54370
54370
54370
54370
54370
54370
54370
54371
54371
54372
54373
54374
54375
54375
54376
54377
54378
54379
54380
54381
54382
54383
54384
54384
54385
54385
54385
54385
54385
54385
54385
54385
54385
17:21
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
002826 REDLANDS CAMERA
002826 REDLANDS CAMERA
000353 RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR
RIVERSIDE CO. CHAPTER B
000418 RZVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R
001365 RIVERSIDE CO. ENVIRONME
001365 RIVERSIDE CO. ENVIRONME
000271 ROBERT BEIN, t~4 FROST &
003566 ROGER PITKIN LANDSCAPE
001942 S C SIGNS
002937 SACKETT CONSTRUCTION
002743 SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH
003597 SAN DIEGO PADRES
000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
000645 SMART & FINAL, iNC.
000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALiF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
000537 SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
CiTY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
VARIOUS WATER METERS
VARIOUS WATER METERS
CiTY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CiTY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
35MM CAMERA FOR TEN. POLICE
SALES TAX
REMOVE WEED ABATEMENT CHRGS
QUINO BUTTERFLY CF:GT/DH:02/26
APERTURE CARDS DUPLICATES
HEALTH PERMIT:PALA CONM 39309
HEALTH PERMIT:SAM HICKS 38184
DEC SVCS:SURVEYING/STAKE WINCH
GARDENING SERVICE - LOPEZ PROP
iNSTALL PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS
REPAIR SIDEWALKS & PRUNE ROOTS
LOCKSMITH SVS-VARIOUS PRK SITE
PADRES BASEBALL EXCURSION 5/8
RECRUITMENT AD: ENGINEERING
SUPPLIES FOR SPRING EGG HUNT
PEST CONTROL SVCS: NA[NT FAC
PEST CNTRL SVCS: SR CENTER
2-06-105-0654 VARIOUS METERS
2-18-363-1902 PAUBA TCl
2-13-079-2377 NWY-79 TCl
2-09-330-3030 WINCH RD TCl
2-09-330-3139 WINCH RD TCl
2-02-351-6800 VARiOUS METERS
2-01-202-7330 VARIOUS METERS
2-01-202-7603 VARiOUS METERS
2-05-791-8807 VARIOUS METERS
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
191-180-999-5240
193-180-999-5240
001-162-999-5214
001-162-999-5263
001-165-999-5214
001-110-999-5214
001-110-999-5263
001-163-999-5214
190-180-999-5214
001-170-999-5242
001-170-999-5242
001-120-999-5250
001-161-999-5258
001-163-999-5220
190-180-999-5250
190-180-999-5250
210-165-686-5804
165-199-812-5804
001-161-999-5256
001-164-d01-5402
190-180-999-5212
190-183-999-5350
001-150-999-5254
190-183-999-5370
340-199-702-5250
190-180-999-5212
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5240
192-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
ITEM
AMOUNT
70,33
769.04
28.00
6.85
120.00
12.00
34.76
12.00
10.00
695.00
53.86
17.00
120.00
5.00
65.00
65.00
130.00
65. O0
3,510.00
3,785.00
41.74
720. O0
257.26
76.64
240.00
64.00
1,980.82
73.64
169.48
134.47
164.21
54.10
24,875.18
9,391.90
4,527.26
PAGE 9
CHECK
AMOUNT
1,428.20
223.61
748.86
17.00
120.00
5.00
130.00
130.00
65.00
3,510.00
3,785.00
41.74
720.00
257.26
76.64
304.00
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
17:21
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 10
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54385
54386
54386
54386
54386
54387
54388
54389
54389
54390
54391
54392
54392
54392
54392
54392
54393
54394
54394
54394
54394
54394
54394
54394
54394
54394
54395
54396
54397
54398
54399
54400
54401
54402
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
001212
001212
001212
001212
SOUTHERN CALIF GAS COMP
SOUTHERN CALIF GAS COMP
SOUTHERN CALIF GAS CONP
SOUTHERN CALIF GAS CONP
003495 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS
003318 TARTAGLIA, MARIO
003318 TARTAGLIA, NARIO
003442 TEMECULA BUILDING CONPA
TEMECULA LIONS CLUB
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY
TEMECULA VALLEY BAPTIST
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
THOMPSON, ROBERT
THURSTON, DEBBIE
001483 TOM DOOSON & ASSOCIATES
003228 U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL
002065 UNISOURCE
003043 UNITED CHURCH OF THE VA
000332 VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATE
001881 WATER SAFETY PROOUCTS,
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
2-18-017-8972 MARGARITA TC1
021 725 0775 4 SIXTH ST
095 167 7907 2 PAUBA RD
101 525 0950 0 PUJOL ST
133 040 7373 O MAINT FAC
ELECT LINE EXT:YNEZ/WINCH RD
FACADE IMPROV PGM: J. LASKIN
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
FACADE IMPROV PRGM: J. LASKIN
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
RECOGNITION PLAQUES:POLICE DPT
ENGRAVING FOR RECOGNITION
VENDOR DISCOUNT
SALES TAX
EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER AWARDS
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CiTY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
STATE OF THE CITY PRESENTATION
REFUND: TCC MULTIPURPOSE ROOM
REFUND: GYMNASTICS-TERRIFIC 25
PROF SVCS FOR THE REGIONAL CTR
CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT
PAPER SUPPLIES FOR DEPTS
OLD TWN HOLIDAY PERFORHANCE
JAN PLAN CHECK SERVICES
LARGE RESCUE TUBE FOR AQUATICS
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
191-180-999-5319
190-181-999-5240
001-171-999-5240
190-184-999-5240
340-199-702-5240
210-165-683-5804
280-199-813-5804
190-183-99~-5330
190-183-999-5330
280-199-813-5804
190-2900
001-170-999-5292
001-170-999-5292
001-170-999-5292
001-170-999-5292
001-150-999-5265
190-2900
001-162-999-5260
320-199-999-5260
001-161-999-5260
190-180-999-5260
001-140-999-5260
001-164-604-5260
280-199-999-5260
001-171-999-5261
001-170-999-5261
190-183-4994
190-183-4982
001-2620
460-1040
330-199-999-5220
280-199-999-5362
001-162-999-5248
190-183-999-5310
ITEM
AMOUNT
340.19
160.64
239.74
64.33
175.29
303.60
375.22
432.00
336.00
2,630.02
100.00
144.00
442.80
154.44-
33.51
61.63
100.00
25.00
100.00
50.00
25.00
50.00
50.00
25.00
50.00
50.00
17.00
42.50
806.00
426,702.02
513.57
400.00
4,426.80
126.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
41,711.25
640.00
303.60
375.22
768.00
2,630.02
100.00
527,50
100.00
425.00
17.00
42.50
806.00
426,702.02
513.57
400.00
4,426,80
VOUCHRE2
02/25/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54402
54402
54402
54402
54403
54403
17:21
CHECK
DATE
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
02/25/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
001881
001881
001881
001881
000345
000345
VENDOR
NAME
WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS~
WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS,
WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS,
WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS,
XEROX CORPORATION BILL]
XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PROGUARD HENS SWIM SUIT
NECK LANYARD ROYAL RED
FOX 40 LIFEGUARD WHISTLES
FREIGHT
COPIER METER USAGE i STN 84
5765 COLOR COPIER USAGE
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-183-999-5310
190-183-999-5310
190-183-999-5310
190-183-999-5310
001-171-999-5217
330-199-999-5239
ITEM
AMOUNT
300.00
38.70
150.50
29.44
297,39
565,48
PAGE 11
CHECK
AMOUNT
~44.~4
862.87
TOTAL CHECKS 1,071,627.56
VOUCHRE:~
03/04/99
13:58
CITY OF TERECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
PAGE 10
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
165 RDA DEV- LOid/ROO SET ASIDE
190 :COle4UNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVZCE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVZCE LEVEL C
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R
210 CAPITAL IRPROVERENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPRENT AGENCY - CIP
300 ZNSURANCE FUND
320 ZNFORRATION SYSTENS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
AMOUNT
53,793.09
4,698.11
18,345.80
1,461.68
11.06
2,479.19
1,132.05
4.80
801,047.58
121,902.09
61,912.85
5,703.30
517.97
8,901.20
TOTAL 1,081,910.77
VOUCHRE2
03/04/99 13: 58
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
54404 03/01/99 003604 REBEL TOURS
54404 03/01/99 003604 REBEL TOURS
AIRFARE:SISTER CITY:4/99:DELEG 001-101-999-5280
AIRFARE:SISTER CITY:4/99:DELEG 001-1170
517.00
1,551.00
2,068.00
54405 03/02/99 MEXICANA
COUNCIL MTG REFRESHMENT 3/2/99 001-100-999-5260
89.85
89.85
54408 03/04/99 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 001-2310
54408 03/04/99 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 190-2310
54408 03/04/99 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 340-2310
54408 03/04/99 000116 A V P VISION PLANS COBRA/GREEK/VISION/MARCH 001-1180
609.60
29.75
18.58
18.58
676.51
54409 03/04/99 001391 ADOLPH KIEFER & ASSOC., LIFEGUARD UNIFORMS
54409 03/04/99 001391 ADOLPH KIEFER & ASSOC., FREIGHT
190-183-999-5310
190-183-999-5310
1,255.55
15.00
1,270.55
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 CANCER 001-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 EXP PROT 001-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 EXP PROT 190-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 EXP PROT 300-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 HOSP IC 001-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 STD 001-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 STD 190-2330
54410 03/04/99 003552 AFLAC 003552 STD 300-2330
262.10
202.13
55.80
5.47
17.50
555.20
112.00
8.00
1,218.20
5~11 03/04/99 000440 AGLOW PHOTOGRAPHY BUSINESS PHOTOS JO/GT/SN 001-110-999-5250
185.33
185.33
54412 03/04/99 001916 ALBERT A. WEBB ASSOCIAT NOV PROF SVCS:O.T.STREETSCAPE 280-199-824-5801
54412 03/04/99 001916 ALBERT A. WEBB ASSOCIAT NOV PROF SVCS:O.T.STREETSCAPE 280-199-822-5802
16,703.28
18,190.00
34,893 · 28
54413 03/04/99 001538 ALBERT GROVER & ASSOCIA PROF DESIGN SVCS:MARG/PIO PICO 210-165-700-5802
54413 03/04/99 001538 ALBERT GROVER & ASSOC[A PROF DESIGN SVC:MARG/PAUBA RD 210-165-699-5802
1,835.00
1,535.00
3,370.00
54414 03/04/99
AMERZCAN FIRE JOURNAL PUB.RENEWALS:STATION 84/75/12 001-171-999-5228
68.85
68.85
54415 03/04/99 003607 AMERICAN FIRST AID & SA MISC. SAFETY EQUIP:PW CREW 001-164-601-5218
54415 03/04/99 003607 AMERICAN FIRST AID & SA SUPPLIES FOR FIRST AID KITS 340-199-701-5250
54415 03/04/99 003607 AMERICAN FIRST AID & SA SUPPLIES FOR FIRST AID KITS 340-199-702-5250
139.00
62.87
62.87
264.74
54416 03/04/99 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP:DEGANGE:4/1/99-3/31 001-161-999-5226
54416 03/04/99 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP:DONAHOE:IO/1-9/30 001-161-999-5226
280.00
274.00
554.00
54417 03/04/99 003616 AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARM AS FIRE ALRM SYS:ND/KC:3/9-10/99 001-171-999-5261
420.00
420.00
54418 03/04/99 002085 BARNEY & BARNEY RENEW PROPERTY INS:BIND615728 300-1655
54418 03/04/99 002085 BARNEY & BARNEY RENEW PROPERTY INS:BIND615733 300-1655
54418 03/04/99 002085 BARNEY & BARNEY RENEW PROPERTY INS:BIND615735 300-1655
54418 03/04/99 002085 BARNEY & BARNEY RENEW PROPERTY INS.:BIND615737 300-1655
54419 03/04/99 002541
BECKER, WALTER KARL SIDEWALK REPAIRS:VAR.LOCATIONS
54420 03/04/99 003595 BRIDLEVALE HOA
54421 03/04/99 000667
HAR:HOA(298)ASSESS:C,CHRISTINA
CALIFORNIA DEPT OF CONS CPA LICENSE RENEWAL 98-99:GR
001-164-601-5402
165-199-812-5804
001-140-999-5226
24,766.00
25,000.00
8,400.00
3,600.00
4,980.00
42.00
150.00
61,764.00
4,980.00
42,00
150.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
03/04/99 13:58 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54422 03/04/99 CALVARY CHAPEL OF MURRI REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
100.00
100.00
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 001-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 165-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 190-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 191-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 192-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 193-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 194-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 280-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 300-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 320-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LiFE INS 330-2360
54423 03/04/99 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 340-2360
548.67
13.01
103.80
.33
.98
10.29
5.84
6.49
3.24
13.00
7.09
15.26
728.00
54424 03/04/99 CARTER, SUZANNE M. REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
100.00
100.00
54425 03/04/99 CHUDY, HYRNA REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
100.00
100.00
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 001-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 165-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 190-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 191-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 192-2380
54426 03104/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 193-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 194-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 280-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 300-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 320-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 330-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 LTD 340-2380
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 001-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 165-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 190-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 191-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 192-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 193-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 194-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 C[GNA 003553 STD 280-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 300-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 320-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CI6NA 003553 STD 330-2500
54426 03/04/99 003553 CIGNA 003553 STD 340-2500
54428 03/04/99 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA JAN WINDOW CLEANING:CITY HALL 340-199-701-5212
54428 03/04/99 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA FEB WINDOW CLEANING:CITY HALL 340-199-701-5212
1,265.36
37.20
219.02
.76
1.93
22.34
10.85
16.41
7.12
37.36
8.40
27.53
1,7~.23
51.94
305.71
1.06
2.69
31.16
15.14
22.90
9.94
52.14
11.73
38.45
45.O0
45.OO
3,963.37
90.00
54429 03/04/99 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS JAN PROF SVC:MARG.SIDEWALK PRJ 210-190-154-5804
54430 03/04/99 002631 COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. FEB TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION 001-164-602-5406
225.00
800.00
225.00
800.00
VOUCHRE2
03/04/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54431
54432
54433
54434
54435
54436
54436
54436
54436
54436
54436
54437
54437
54437
54437
54437
5443?
54437
54437
54437
54437
54437
54437
54437
54458
54438
54439
54439
54440
54441
54441
54442
54442
54443
54444
54444
54444
54444
13:58
CHECK
DATE
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/9~
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/~9
03104/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
002106
003606
002466
001380
001380
001380
001380
001380
001380
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
001056
000165
000165
003397
003397
003174
003174
000166
000166
001135
00018~
000184
00018~
000184
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VENDOR ITEM
NAME DESCRIPTION
CRUISE HOLIDAYS
REFUND: DUPLICATE BUS.LIC.PMT
DA FAMILY SUPPORT 002106 SUPPORT
DECISION ONE CORPORATIO PHONE SUPPORT SERVICES
DEPT PARKS/REC-FOUR RIV REFUND:DEPOSIT - REF P08386
DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY MAR ELEVATOR MAINT/SVC:CTY HAL
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 WILLIAMS
TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 WILLIAMS
TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 GORMAN
TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/12 THORNSLE
TEMP HELP (Z)W/E 2/lZ DEGANGE
CREDIT:BILLING ERROR
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
JAN LDSC MAINT:WINCH. CREEK PK
IRRIGATION REPAIRS:SPORTS PARK
LDSC MAINTENANCE:RC RD MEDIANS
LDSC MAINTENANCE:CITY HALL
IRRIGATION REPAIRS:SPORTS PARK
LDSC MAINTENANCE:CRC
LDSC MAINTENANCE:SPORTS PARK
LDSC MA]NTENANCE:YNEZ MEDIANS
LDSC MAINTENANCE:FIRE STATION
LDSC MAINTENANCE:FIRE STATION
LDSC MAINTENANCE:FIRE STATION
CREDIT:PRICE DIFF.PER CONTRACT
CREDIT:PRICE DIFF.PER CONTRACT
FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC.
FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC.
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
FIRE ENGINEERING
FIRE ENGINEERING
PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION 73
PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION 84
FIRE RESCUE MAGAZINE PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION
FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE
FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE
PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION 73
PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION 84
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO LOT BOOK REPORT:HELTON
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO LOT BOOK REPORT:PATTERSON
FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M JAN PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
FEB:909-SO6-2626:TEM.P.D.
FEB:909-SO6-6506:GENERAL USAGE
FEB:909-676-3526:FIRE ALARM
FEB:909-693-O956:GENERAL USAGE
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-199-4056
190-2140
320-199-999-5215
001-170-4055
340-199-701-5212
001-161-999-5118
001-162-999-5118
001-162-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
190-180-999-5415
190-180-999-5212
191-180-999-5415
340-199-701-5415
190-180-999-5212
190-182-999-5415
190-180-999-5415
191-180-999-5415
190-180-999-5415
190-180-999-5415
190-180-999-5415
191-180-999-5415
340-199-701-5415
001-162-999-5230
001-163-999-5230
001-171-999-5228
001-171-999-5228
001-171-999-5228
001-171-999-5228
001-171-999-5228
165-199-813-5804
165-199-813-5804
001-150-999-5250
001-170-999-5229
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
ITEM
AMOUNT
35.00
82.50
118.73
44.00
202.00
551.76
551.76
945.17
2,952.49
2,858.40
4.26-
1,062.18
277.07
684.00
432.00
272.26
750.00
255.00
105.00
1,245.00
45.00
135.00
15.20-
9.60-
10.00
17.25
24.95
28.50
25.95
27.97
27.97
150.00
150.00
170.00
304.69
22.05
81.24
56.14
PAGE 3
CHECK
AMOUNT
35.00
82.50
118.75
44,00
202.00
7,855.32
5,237.71
27.25
53.45
25.95
55.94
300.00
170.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
03/04/99 13:58 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AHOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54444 03/04/99 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM FEB:909-694-4356:HINTERGARDT 320-199-999-5208
54444 03/04/99 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM FEB:909-694-8927:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208
54444 03/04/99 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM FEB:909-699-7945:CRC FIRE ALRM 320-199-999-5208
54445 02/04/99 003336 GARAGE DOOR SERVICE COM RES.IMPROVE.PRGM:M.FORBING 165-199-813-5804
29.85
27.08
54.16
735.00
575.21
735.00
54446 03/04/99 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO MlSC COHPUTER SUPPLIES
320-199-999-5221
322.79
322.79
54447 03/04/99 GRAESSER, RAYMOND REFUND: SERVICE LEVEL R 195-180-4005
4.80
4.80
54448 03/04/99 001697 HALL, NANCY LEE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
204.80
204.80
54449 03/04/99 001013 HINDERLITER, de LLAMAS 1ST QTR 99 CONSULTING FEE
54449 03/04/99 001013 HINDERLITER, de LLAMAS QTRLY SALES TAX RECOVERY FEE
001-140-999-5248
001-140-999-5248
900.00
494.53
1,394.53
54450 03/04/99 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 1,864.40
54450 03/04/99 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 165-2080 18.76
54450 03/04/99 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 190-2080 211.51
54450 03/04/99 000194 I c M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 280-2080 39.69
2,134.36
54451 03/04/99 001429 INACOH INFORMATION SYST MS WINDOWS SVC TERMINAL SERVER 320-1980 405.00
54451 03/04/99 001429 INACOM INFORMATION SYST MS WINDOWS TERMINAL SRV CAL 4. 320-1980 1,035.00
54451 03/04/99 001429 INACOM INFORMATION SYST LABOR 320-1980 921.60
54451 03/04/99 001429 INACOH INFORMATION SYST LABOR - SOFTWARE INSTALLATION 320-1980 912.14
3,273.74
54452 03/04/99 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL CRC POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-182-999-5212
253.21
253.21
54453 03/04/99 000199 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVIC 000199 IRS GARN 001-2140 275.27 275.27
54454 03/04/99 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
54454 03/04/99 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
956.00
144.00
1,100.00
54455 03/04/99 001123 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIE MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:PW CREW 001-164-601-5218
54455 03/04/99 001123 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIE FREIGHT 001-164-601-5218
54455 03/04/99 001123 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIE SALES TAX 001-164-601-5218
122.50
4.00
9.80
136.30
54456 03/04/99 001982 L WILLIANS LANDSCAPE, I CITY WIDE TREE TRIMMING SVCS 001-164-601-5402
54456 03/04/99 001982 L WILLIANS LANDSCAPE, I EMERGENCY TREE TRIMMING SVCS 001-164-601-5402
54457 03/04/99 002887 MCKINLEY EQUIPMENT COR LIFT SVC-MAINT FACILITY 340-199-702-5212
4,975.00
640.00
106.47
5,615.00
106.47
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COHP 003076 DENTALML 001-2340 2,792.05
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COHP 003076 DENTALNL 165-2340 103.83
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALNL 190-2340 289.07
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COHP 003076 DENTALML 193-2340 20.13
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE CONP 003076 DENTALML 280-2340 62.29
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE CQNP 003076 DENTALML 300-2340 20.76
54458 03/04/99 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COHP 003076 DENTALML 340-2340 83.06
54458 03/04/99 003076 NET LIFE INSURANCE CONP COBRA/GREEK/DENTAL/MARCH 001-1180 83.06
54459 03/04/99 001905 MEYERS, DAVID WILLIAM TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
416.00
3,454.25
416.00
VOUCHREZ
03/04/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54460
54460
54460
54460
54460
54461
54461
54461
54461
54462
54462
54463
54464
54465
54466
54467
54467
54467
54468
54469
54469
54470
54470
54470
54471
54472
54472
54472
54475
54475
54475
54475
54475
54474
13:58
CHECK
DATE
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM
NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT
003241
003241
003241
003241
003241
001384
001384
001384
001384
000228
000228
OO3574
000718
002037
002139
002139
002139
002292
002292
002105
002105
002105
000240
001383
001383
001383
003218
003218
003218
003218
003218
MILLAR HEATING & AIR, I
MILLAR HEATING & AIR, I
MILLAR HEATING & AIR, I
NILLAR HEATING & AIR,
MZLLAR HEATING & AIR, I
MINUTEMAN PRESS
MINUTEMAN PRESS
MINUTEMAN PRESS
MINUTEMAN PRESS
MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO
MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO
MORAMARCO, ANTHONY J.
NALLEY, JOE
NATIONAL RECREATION &PA
NEXUS INTEGRATED SOLUTI
NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT
NORTH COUNTY TINES - AT
NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT
NORTON, LINDA
OASIS VENDING
OASIS VENDING
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING
P M W ASSOCIATES, INC.
P M W ASSOCIATES, INC.
P M W ASSOCIATES, INC.
PELA
PELA
PELA
PELA
PELA
PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO
001958
QTR HVAC SVC AT CRC 190-182-999-5250
QTR HVAC SVC AT TCC 190-18~-999-5250
QTR HVAC SVC AT CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250
QTR HVAC SVC AT MAINT FACILITY 340-199-702-5250
QTR HVAC SVC AT SR CENTER 190-181-999-5250
BUSINESS CARDS:POLICE DEPT
SALES TAX
BUSINESS CARDS: POLICE DEPT
SALES TAX
001-170-999-5222
001-170-999-5222
001-170-999-5222
001-170-999-5222
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES
001-170-999-5262
001-165-999-5263
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
190-183-999-5330
REFUND: DOG OBEDIENCE
190-183-4982
MEMBERSHIP:HERMAN PARKER 21539 190-180-999-5226
REPAXR/MAZNT OF COMPUTER EQUIP 320-199-999-5215
RECRUITMENT AD: ENGINEERING
RECRUITMENT AD:FACILITY CUSTOD
1YR SUBSCRIPTION SVC: C,M,
001-150-999-5254
001-150-999-5254
001-110-999-5228
REFUND: KUNDALINI YOGA
190-183-4982
COFFEE/KITCHEN SUPPLY SERVICES 340-199-701-5250
COFFEE/KITCHEN SUPPLY SERVICES 340-199-702-5250
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & NAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & NAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & NAINT
001-164-601-5214
001-162-999-5214
190-180-999-5214
REMOVE PED XING/ADD SLOW SCHOL 001-164-601-5402
LOW MOD,RDA & ECON CONSULTING
LOW MOD,RDA & ECON CONSULTING
LOW MOD,RDA & ECON CONSULTING
280-199-999-5248
165-199-999-5248
001-111-999-5248
LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK SVS
LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK SVS
LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS
LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS
LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS
191-180-999-5248
193-180-999-5248
193-180-999-5248
193-180-999-5248
193-180-999-5248
500.00
150.00
1,300.00
100.00
150.00
38.25
2.96
76.50
5.93
84.39
16.59
72.00
60.00
215.00
44.00
56.67
75.92
84.00
37.00
406.78
135.59
119.62
25.95
25.95
1,515.00
2,724.60
2,724.60
961.62
675.00
450.00
76.50
60.75
87.75
001958 PERS L-T 001-2122 75.84
PAGE 5
CHECK
AMOUNT
2,200.00
123.64
100.98
72.00
60.00
215.00
44.00
214.59
37.00
542.37
171.52
1,515.00
6,410.82
1,350.00
54475 03/04/99 002498 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC GEOTECHNICAL TEST:RANCHO/I-15 210-165-601-5804 448.75
54475 03/04/99 002498 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC GEOTECHNICAL TEST:WINCH/I-IS 210-165-697-5804 338.75 787.50
VOUCHRE2 CiTY OF TEMECULA
03/04/99 13:58 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-110-999-5220
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-150-999-5260
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-150-999-5265
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-161-999-5220
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-161-999-5260
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-161-999-5263
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-162-999-5242
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-164-601-5260
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-170-999-5220
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-180-999-5260
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-180-999-5263
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5320
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-183-999-5320
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-184-999-5220
54476 03/04/99 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 190-184-999-5301
55.47
14.78
69.11
21.31
48.32
10.00
9.01
45.96
50.59
21.93
19.21
48.39
42.01
32.31
7.99
496.39
54477 03/04/99 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-120-999-5230
54477 03/04/99 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-171-999-5230
54477 03/04/99 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-161-999-5230
55.65
35.25
48.75
137.65
54478 03/04/99 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC NOTZCE: 99-05 001-120-999-5256
54478 03/04/99 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC HEARING: PA99-0022 001-161-999-5256
54478 03/04/99 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN 32 WKS SUBSCRIPTION:C.MANGERS 001-110-999-5228
8.25
22.00
79.05
109.30
54479 03/04/99 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF NAMEPLATES/HOLDERS COUNCIL MTG 001-100-999-5220
54479 03/04/99 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF NAMEPLATES/HOLDERS COUNCIL MTG 001-100-999-5222
54479 03/04/99 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF NAMEPLATES/HOLOERS COUNCIL MTG 190-180-999-5220
54479 03/04/99 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF NAMEPLATES/HOLDERS COUNCIL MTG 190-180-999-5222
27.48
24.24
9.16
32.32
93.20
54480 03/04/99 RANCHO CABALLO
ADVANCED FIREARMS TRAINING 001-170-999-5261
200.00
200.00
54481 03/04/99 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240
54481 03/04/99 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 191-180-999-5240
54481 03/04/99 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 193-180-999-5240
829.24
9.62
1,665.97
2,504.83
54482 03/04/99 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE R-O-W ABATEMENT BUTTERFIELD 001-164-601-5402
275. O0
275.00
54483 03/04/99 000418 RIVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R FILING EXEMPTION:BUTTERFIELD 190-180-999-5250
78.00
78.00
54484 03/04/99 000418 RIVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R FILING EXEMPTION:ROTARY PRK 210-190-162-5804
78.00
78.00
54485 03/04/99 000418 RIVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R FILING EXEMPTION:SANTA GERTRUD 210-190-147-5802
78.00
78.00
54486 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION JAN PRGSS:RANCHO CA/I-15 COs 210-165-601-5804
5448~ 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION JAN PRGSS:RANCHO CA/I-15 C0~12 280-199-822-5804
54486 03/04/~9 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION JAN PRGSS:RANCHO CAL/I-15 C0#4 210-165-601-5804
54486 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION JAN PRGSS:RANCHO CAL/I-15 210-165-601-5804
5448~ 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION JAN PRGSS: WINCH/I-15 PW97-03 210-165-697-5804
54486 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION OVRCHG:CO~12 WIDEN FRONT ST 280-199-822-5804
54486 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION JAN PRGSS:RNCH/I-15 210-2035
5448~ 03/04/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION JAN PRGSS:WINCH/I-15 210-2035
40,681.40
78,669.03
300,000.00
267,337.49
52,566.65
2,000.00-
68,668,79-
5,256.67-
VOUCHRE2
03/04/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54486
54487
54488
54489
54490
54491
54491
54492
54493
54494
54495
54495
54495
54496
54497
54497
54497
S4497
54498
54499
54500
54501
54501
54501
54501
54502
54502
54502
54502
54502
54502
54502
54502
54503
13:58
CHECK
DATE
03/04/99
03104199
03/04/99
03104199
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
0~/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
002181
003282
002709
003587
001942
001484
001484
000278
003492
003601
000~45
000~45
000~45
000519
000537
000537
000537
000537
003596
000574
003599
000305
000305
000305
000305
001547
001547
001547
001547
001547
001547
001547
001547
000168
VENDOR
NAME
RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION
RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION-
RIVERSIDE, CITY OF
RIZZO CONSTRUCTION, INC
S C SIGNS
SAHARA WATERPROOFING
SAHAIL~ WATERPROOFING
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
SCHOLASTIC SPORTS
SIERRA PACIFIC ELECTRIC
SMART & FINAL, INC.
SRART& FINAL, INC.
SMART & FINAL, INC.
SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SUMMERWINDS SWEET ADELZ
SUPERTONER
T Y INTERNATIONAL
TARGET STORE
TARGET STORE
TARGET STORE
TARGET STORE
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
REVERSE RETENTION FOR CREDIT
RETENTION TO ESCROW ACCT
REGIONAL RADIO RECYCLING ADS
ADDITIONAL ELECT WORK-CITY HAL
INSTALL PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS
C.HALL:SEAL EXTERIOR WINDOWS
RETENTION W/H INVOICE 6900
RECRUITMENT AD:PW SR INSPECTOR
CITY SUPPORT:SCHOLASTIC SPORTS
INSTALL BREAKERS:OLD TWN STSCP
TEEN ACTIVITIES SUPPLIES
TEEN ACTIVITIES SUPPLIES
OLD TWN MERCHANT MTG SUPPLIES
PEST CTRL:RNCHO VISTA SNACKBAR
2-14-204-1615 FRONT ST
2-15-830-2307 FRONT ST
2-02-351-4946 SIXTH ST
2-02-502-8077 VARIOUS METER
OLD TOWN HOLIDAY FESTIVITIES
HP LASER PRINTER MAINTENANCE
JAN PROF SVCS:OVRLND OVRCRSS
RECREATION ACTIVITIES SUPPLIES
RECREATION ACTIVITIES SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES FOR SR CENTER
RECREATION ACTIVITIES SUPPLIES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
001547 UN DUES
SUNSHINE FUND
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
210-2035
210-1035
194-180-999-5254
210-199-808-5804
001-120-999-5244
340-199-701-5610
340-2035
001-150-999-5254
001-100-999-5250
280-199-999-5362
190-183-999-5320
190-183-999-5320
280-199-999-5362
190-180-999-5212
340-199-701-5240
190-199-999-5240
190-181-999-5240
340-199-702-5240
280-199-999-5362
320-199-999-5215
210-165-604-5804
190-180-999-5301
190-180-999-5301
190-181-999-5301
190-180-999-5301
001-2125
190-2125
191-2125
192-2125
193-2125
194-2125
320-2125
330-2125
001-2170
ITEM
AMOUNT
200.00
68,468.79
1,000.00
1,104.00
975.00
5,000.00
500.00-
446.82
185.00
226.00
115.43
76.06
82.76
39.00
18.91
42.32
646.45
1,066.69
75.00
536.67
2,136.48
180.96
274.72
50.71
26.93-
492.00
82.00
1.03
2.05
14.35
3.07
20.50
20.50
47.36
PAGE 7
CHECK
AMOUNT
663,529.11
68,468.79
1,000.00
1,104.00
975.00
4,500.00
446.82
185.00
226.00
274.25
39.00
1,774.37
75.00
536.67
2,136.48
479.46
635.50
47.36
VOUCHRE2 CiTY OF TEMECULA
03/04/99 13:58 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR iTEM ACCOUNT ITEM
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAHE DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54504 03/04/99 TEMECULA PLAY AND LEAN REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
54505 03/04/99 000]07 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY ENGRAVING FOR CiTY HALL PLAQUE 001-150-999-5265
100.00
6.34
100.00
6.34
54506 03/04/99 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED HGH SCH PRK USAGE PRMIT:INV395 194-180-999-5254 44.00
44.00
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 0]/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 03/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
54507 0]/04/99 000642 TEMECULA
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 001-1020 3,013.68
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 165-1020 290.00
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 190-1020 589.65
CiTY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 194-1020 20.00
CiTY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 193-1020 1.00
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 280-1020 190.00
CiTY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 300-1020 10,00
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 320-1020 350.00
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 330-1020 80.00
CITY OF - FLE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 340-1020 5.00
4~549.33
54508 03/04/99 003149 TERRA-CAL CONSTRUCTION~ CHRGED FOR INCOMPLETED ITEMS 210-190-143-5804 21,720.00-
54508 03/04/99 003149 TERRA-CAL CONSTRUCTION, JAN PRGSS PMT:TEM DUCK POND 210-190-143-5804 169,898.59
54508 03/04/99 003149 TERIL~'CAL CONSTRUCTION, REVERSE RETENTION ON CM 210'2035 2,172.00
54508 03/04/99 001149 TERIL~-CAL CONSTRUCTION, RETENTION:JAN PRGSS:DUCK POND 210'2035 16,989.86-
133,360.75
54509 03/04/99 002111 TOGO'S REFRESHMENTS:RANCHO WEST MTG 001-110-999-5223 193.90
54509 03/04/99 002111 TOGO~S SALES TAX 001-110-999-5223 1.55
195.45
54510 03/04/99 003583 TOP DAWG TERMITE COMPAN FUMIGATE MUSEUM ARTIFACTS 190-185-999-5250 2,400.00
2,400.00
54511 03/04/99 003366 TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CON MAINT FACILITY MODiFiCATiONS 210-190-158-5804
54511 03/04/99 003366 TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CON EXTRA ~a]RK WAS NOT AUTHORIZED 210-190-158-5804
5,557.85
978.85-
4,579.00
54512 03/04/99 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE YELLOW STREET TAPE - PW MAINT 001-164-601'5218 239.97
54512 03/04/99 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE YELLOW STREET TAPE-PW MAINT 001-164-601-5218 76.82
316.79
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VL REVER 001-2510 181.40-
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LiFE iNS. 002107 VOL LiFE 001-2510 163.60
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 7.68
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 192-2510 .34
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LiFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 1.70
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LiFE INS. 002107 VOL LiFE 194-2510 3.40
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LiFE 340-2510 4.68
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VL ADVAN 001-2510 191.70
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 175.90
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRAMS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LiFE 190-2510 7.68
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 192-2510 .34
54513 03/04/99 002107 TIL~NS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 1.70
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LiFE 194-2510 3.40
54513 03/04/99 002107 TRANS-GENERAL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.68
383.40
54514 03/04/99 003560 TRAMSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 001-2360 126.62
54514 03/04/99 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 165-2360 3.01
54514 03/04/99 003560 TRAMSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 190-2360 23.96
VOUCHRE2
03/04/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54514
54514
54514
54514
54514
54514
54514
54514
54514
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54515
54516
54516
54516
54516
54516
54516
54516
54517
54517
54517
54517
54517
54517
54517
54517
54518
54519
54520
54521
54522
54522
13:58
CHECK
DATE
03/04/99
03/04/~9
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03104199
03/04/999
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
03/04/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
003560
003560
003560
003560
003560
003560
003560
003560
003560
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
000389
000389
000389
000389
000389
000389
000389
000325
000325
000325
000325
000325
000325
000325
000325
003261
002092
000345
000345
VENDOR
NAME
TRANSAMER I CA
TRANSAMER l CA
TRANSAMER l CA
TIL~NSAMERICA
TRANSAMER I CA
TRANSAMER I CA
TRANSAMER I CA
TRANSAMER I CA
TRANSAMER I CA
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C N/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBILA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA)
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
UNITED WAY
VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE,
VEASEY, KENNY
WILDLAND FIREFIGHTER
WINTER GRAPHICS SOUTH
XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
OO356O AD&D
003560 AD&D
003560 AD&D
001065 DEF CONP
001065 DEF CONP
001065 DEF COHP
001065 DEF CUMP
001065 DEF CONP
001065 DEF CUMP
001065 DEF CONP
001065 DEF CUMP
001065 DEF CUMP
001065 DEF CUMP
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000325 UW
000325 UW
000325 UW
000325 UW
000325 UW
000325 UM
OOO325 UW
000325 UW
RELEASE STOP NOTICE=COPP MATER
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
PUBLICATION RENEWAL:STATION
DESIGN OLD TWN MERCHANT SIGNS
FIERY 200 SERVICE AGREEEMENT
XEROX 5343 JAN LEASE PMT
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
191-2360
192-2360
193-2360
194-2360
280-2360
300-2360
320-2360
330-2360
340-2360
001-2080
165-2080
190-2080
192-2080
193-2080
194-2080
280-2080
300-2080
320-2080
340-2080
001-2160
165-2160
190-2160
280-2160
320-2160
330-2160
340-2160
001-2120
165-2120
190-2120
280-2120
300-2120
320-2120
330-2120
340-2120
280-2038
190-2900
001-171-999-5228
280-199-999-5250
330-199-999-5239
330-199-999-5217
ITEM
AMOUNT
.08
.23
2.38
1.34
1.49
.74
3.00
1.64
3.51
7,193.30
210.23
1,615.92
2.50
33.17
25.01
85.23
83.34
635,06
158.33
507.64
164.77
674.12
52.53
21.96
30.84
65.54
228.22
3.76
20.33
1.6~,
.24
3.81
5.00
2.00
2,190.00
100.00
45.00
4,562.75
110.00
242.77
PAGE 9
CHECK
AMOUNT
168.00
10,042.09
1,517.40
265.00
2,190.00
100.00
45.00
4,562.75
352.77
TOTAL CHECKS 1,081,910.77
VOUCHRE2
03 / 11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE 12
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOO SET ASIDE
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORHATION SYSTEMS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
AROUNT
153,886.02
28,840.25
33,522.79
570.66
127.11
3,400.62
749.22
1,152.00
67,011.46
9,323.52
48,492.60
540.00
3,749.68
2,631.46
7,463.77
TOTAL 361,461.16
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
CHECK
DATE
VENDOR
NUMBER
VENDOR
NAME
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6258
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
6566
54523
54524
54525
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/999
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/10/99
03/08/99
03/09/99
03/09/99
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000283
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
000444
003617
002185
003059
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATA)((IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTAT/Q((IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTAT/O((IRS)
INSTATAX (IRS)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTAT/O((EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTAT/Q((EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
INSTATAX (EDD)
QUALITY CONTRACTORS NET
POSTMASTER - TEMECULA
COSTCO COHPANIES, INC
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 NEDICARE
000283 NEDICARE
000283 NEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
TEM VLY MUSEUM SETTLEMENT AGMT
ANNEXATION WKSHP MAIL:VAIL/RED
MICROI,/AVE:DO~NSTAIRS KITCHEN
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
280-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
300-199-999-5207
001-110-999-5230
340-199-701-5242
19,276.94
423.12
3,683.62
8.70
21.94
301.71
125.35
178.00
28.72
610,88
115.26
487.79
4,692.48
128.10
1,039.55
2.44
6.17
76.05
61.06
24.28
135.22
41.66
125.43
33.01
2.56
44.93
.70
1.46
2.06
4.38
5,055.19
150.17
806.85
1.47
3.53
57.68
21.40
59.69
10.77
145.91
24.38
94.59
47,500.00
762.50
150.84
31,628.61
6,520.73
47,500.00
762.50
150.84
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54526
990309
54529
54530
54530
54531
03/10/99
03/09/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
ROUNDTABLE PIZZA
000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO
003304 ADAMS ADVERTISING, INC.
AGUIAR, ESTELA
AGUIAR, ESTELA
001281 ALHAMBRA GROUP
99-00 BDGT WKSHP STAFF MMBERS
1ST TIME HOMEBUYER:HELLER
MAR BILLBOARD AD:OLD TOWN
CREDIT: SEC.DEP./ROOM RENTAL
CREDIT: SEC.DEP./ROOM RENTAL
FEB DESIGN SERVICES:DUCK POND
001-140-999-5260
165-199-999-5449
280-199-999-5362
190-2900
190-183-4990
210-190-143-5802
66.17
24,000.00
1,700.00
100.00
304.00
250.00
66.17
24,000.00
1,700.00
404.00
250.00
54532
54532
54532
54532
54532
54532
54532
54533
54534
54535
54535
54535
54535
54535
54535
54536
54537
54537
54537
54538
54539
54540
54541
54542
54543
54544
54545
03/11/~9
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
003285
003285
003285
003285
003285
003285
003285
003429
0O0101
003266
003266
003266
003266
003266
003266
002987
001323
001323
001323
000622
002541
003126
002099
003214
000128
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMER[PRIDE UNIFORM SERV
AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV
ANDREN REALTY LP
APPLE ONE, INC.
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARCUS DATA SECURITY
ARMSTRONG DEVELOPMENT S
ARROWHEAD MATER, INC.
ARROWHEAD WATER, INC.
ARROWHEAD MATER, INC.
BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER
BECKER, WALTER KARL
BECKMAN, DAVID
BOONGAARDEN, DENNIS
BURRITT, VICKI
BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES
CAL MAT
CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES,
UNIFORMS FOR TCSD MAINTENANCE
FLR.MATS/TCYdEL RNTL.~ SR.CTR.
FLR.MATS/TO~dEL RNTL.~ CRC
FLR.MATS/TO~IEL RNTL.~ TCC
FLR.MATS/TO~EL RNTL.~ CTY.HALL
FLR.MATS/TO~/EL RNTL.~MTNC.FAC.
UNIFORMS FOR PW NAINT CREWS
RE-ISSUE: CFD 88-12 SALES TAX
TEMP HELP W/E 2/20 NANANSINGH
DATA STORAGE CART CTR T20 ARCH
DATA STORAGE MICROBOX ARCHIVAL
APERTURE CARD BOX ARCHIVE
LEASED CTR CONTAINER T20
LEASED CTR MICROBOX #648
LEASED CTR APER.CARD BOX #686
ENG SVCS:PUJOL ST SIDEMALKS
FEB:DRINKING WATER:CITY HALL
FEB:DRINKING WATER:CITY HALL
FEB:DRINKING WATER:CRC
ELECTRICAL SVCS:SENIOR CENTER
CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS
REFUND:OVERPMT OF PA99-0044
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
CREDIT: GYMNASTICS - BEG. TUMB
MAR RESTROOM/FACILITY RENTAL
FEB:CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS
FEB 99:WORKERS' CONP INSURANCE
190-180-999-5243
190-181-999-5250
190-182-999-5250
190-184-999-5250
340-199-701-5250
340-199-702-5250
001-164-601-5243
001-2030
001-140-999-5118
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-52T/
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
001-120-999-5277
210-165-826-5802
340-199-701-5250
340-199-701-5250
190-182-999-5250
190-181-999-5212
001-164-601-5402
001-2650
190-183-999-5330
190-183-4982
28Q-199-999-5234
001-164-601-5218
001-2370
28.00
37.75
90.16
52.56
85.80
35.40
65.64
23,326.14
278.64
473.85
20.44
40.60
52.00
8.00
20.00
1,780.00
209.91
64.87
24.53
208.25
4,685.00
788.00
276.00
45.00
826.00
1,664.43
2,850.59
395.31
23,326.14
278.64
614.89
1,780.00
299.31
208.25
4,685.00
788.00
276.00
45.00
826.00
1,664.43
VOUCHRE2
0]/11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUHBER
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
ITEH
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AHOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54545
54546
54547
54548
54549
54550
54551
54552
54552
54553
54553
03111199
03111199
03111199
03111199
03111199
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
OS/11/99
0]/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES
FEB 99:MORKERS' CONP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS~ COHP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS' COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS~ COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS' COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS' COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS~ COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS' COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS~ COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS~ CUMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:WORKERS' COMP INSURANCE
FEB 99:MORKERS' CUMP INSURANCE
000413 CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH REGULATORY APP FEE:S.GERTRUDIS
001267 CALIFORNIA DEPT OF HOTO REGISTRATION:C.M. VEHICLE 1999
000152 CALIFORNIA PARKS & RECR SAFETY INSP.CERT.COURSE:7/7-9
001590 CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPHEN 1999 ANNUAL CONF:HEYER:3/17-19
000111 CARL WARREN & CO., INC. M.HEBB/P.HANG/C.LEE:2/26/99
002534 CATERERS CAFE, THE
REFRESHMENTS:3/12/99 NTG:C.H.
000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER "NO PARKING" BIKE LANE SIGNS
000135 CENTRAL CITIES SiGN SER SALES TAX
001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC MAR ALARM HONITORING:CRC
001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC MAR ALARM MONITORING:SR CENTER
165-2370
190-2370
191-2370
192-2370
193-2370
194-2370
280-2370
300-2370
320-2370
330-2370
340-2370
190-181-999-5112
210-190-147-5802
001-110-999-5226
190-180-999-5261
165-199-999-5258
300-199-999-5205
001-120-999-5260
001-164-601-5244
001-164-601-5244
190-182-999-5250
190-181-999-5250
65.51
832.55
.64
1.64
37.57
16.42
24.17
6.09
41.73
12.67
240.33
4.09
662.00
351.00
450.00
429.00
164.00
59.26
2,187,50
169.53
50,00
45.00
4,134.00
662.00
351.00
450.00
429.00
164.00
59.26
2,357.03
95.00
54554
54555
54555
54556
54556
54556
54556
54557
54557
54557
54558
54558
54559
54560
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
001555
CHRISTOPHERSON FIRE PRO
TCC FIRE SUPPRESSION SYS.TEST 190-18~-999-5250
002147 CONPLIHENTS, CDNPLAINTS BUNNY SUIT FOR EGG HUNT SAT
002147 COMPLIMENTS, COMPLAINTS SALES TAX
000442
000442
000442
000442
000447
000447
000447
001393
001393
002~)0
CUMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
CUMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
CUMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
COMTRONIX OF HEHET
COMTRONIX OF HEHET
COMTRONIX OF HEHET
DATA TICKET, INC.
DATA TICKET, INC,
DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATE
DEAMER APPLIANCE SERVIC
003383
190-183-999-5370
190-183-999-5370
ALARM MONITORING - CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250
ALARM MONITORING-MTNC.FACILITY 340-199-702-5250
ALARH MONITORING - TCC 190-18~-999-5250
ALARM NONITORING:6TH STREET 001-164-60]-5250
INSTALL (3) RADIOS:PW TRUCKS
INSTALL (3) RADIOS:PW TRUCKS '
INSTALLATION OF LIGHT BARS
001-163-999-5610
001-165-999-5610
310-1910
JAN PARKING CIT. PROCESSING
JAN PARKING C1T. PROCESSING
001-140-999-5250
001-170-999-5250
MAR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 001-110-999-5248
EQUIP.REPAIR/MAINT:FIRE STN 84 001-171-999-5215
79.01
225.00
17.44
210.00
135.00
210.00
87.00
360.00
180.00
540.00
278.50
278.50
2,000.00
201.60
79.01
242.44
642.00
1,080.00
557.00
2,000.00
201.60
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
03/11/99 11:56 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUNBER NANE DESCRIPTION NUHBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54561 03/11/99 003068 DILLON CONSULTING ENGIN CONSULT SVC:SI4OKE CTRL SYS:MAL 001-162-999-5248
375.00
375.00
54562 03/11/99 002701 DIVERSIFIED RZSK
FEB 1999 SPECIAL EVENT INS. 300-2180
586.92
586.92
54563 03/11/99 003384 DRAIN PATROL
PLUMBING SVCS AT FiRE STN 84 001-171-999-5212
54.00
54.00
54564 03/11/99 001714 DREAM ENGINEERING, INC. ENG SVCS:TVHS TENNIS CT LIGHTS 210-190-155-5802
54564 03/11/99 001714 DREAM ENGINEERING, INC. REINB:TVHS TENNIS CT LIGHTING 210-190-155-5802
500.00
32,20
532.20
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 MILES 001-163-999-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVlC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 MILES 001-165-999-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVlC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 MILES 001-164-604-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 HUDSON 001-163-999-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 HILLBERG 165-199-999-5118
54565 03/11/9~ 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 SERVEN 001-164-603-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S i EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 SERVEN 190-180-999-5118
54565 03/11/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV[C TEMP HELP (2)W/E 2/26 SERVEN 193-180-999-5118
308.31
308.31
308.30
2,414.24
1,368.38
368.93
368.93
737.86
6,183.26
54566 03/11/99 000453 ECONOMICS PRESS, INC. T PUB:(3) BETTER SUPERVISION 001-162-999-5228
77.22
77.22
54567 03/11/99 ELARDO, LEA CREDIT: COOKING W/TIA 190-183-4982
15.00
15.00
54568 03/11/99 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL PARTNERING WRKSHP:3/OI:OVRLND 210-165-604-5801
54568 03/11/99 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL PARTNERING WRKSHP:3/OI:OVRLND 001-1270
272.45
272.44
544.89
54569 03/11/99 ESCONDIDO E.Y.E. POLAROID LAW ENFORCEMENT KIT 001-170-999-5242
54570 C~/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION REPAIRS:MARG.ROAO 191-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE iRRiGATiON REPAIRS:RANCHO CAL. 191-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION REPAIRS:R.C.ARAGON 190-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE iRRIGATION REPAIRS:NAKAYAMA PK 190-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE LOSC MAINTENANCE:RCSP 190-180-999-5415
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE STUMP REMOVAL:VIA OEL CAMPO 001-164-601-5402
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE IRRIG.REPAIRS:SIGNET SERIES 193-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE iRRiGATiON REPAIRS:MARG.SLOPE 193-180-999-5212
54570 03/11/99 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE LDSC MAINT/REPAIR:NARG.PARK 190-180-999-5212
54571 03/11/99 002832 FENCE BUILDERS RES. IMPROVEMENT PRG:T.ANDERSON 165-199-813-5804
54571 03/11/99 002832 FENCE BUILOERS CREOIT:HOREOWNER TO PAY OIRECT 165-199-813-5804
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FEB:JS:5477-2590-3378-9798 001-100-999-5258
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:RR:5477 2590 3378 9277 001-100-999-5258
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:RR:5477 2590 3378 9277 001-100-999-5260
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:SF:5477-2590-3378-9236 001-100-999-5258
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:GR:5477-2590-3378-9913 001-140-999-5260
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:GR:5477-2590-3378-9913 001-140-999-5258
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:GT:5477-2590-3379-O515 001-161-999-5228
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:GT:5477-2590-3379-0515 001-161-999-5224
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FEB:AE:5477-2590-3379-0432 001-162-999-5220
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:AE:5477-2590-3379-0432 001-162-999-5258
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARO CENTER FEB:JK:5477-2590-3379-0556 001-1990
110.00
40.66
59.08
92.36
205.41
739.67
60.00
984.00
121.00
1,560.00
1,56~.00
413.00-
228.00
228.00
12.50
360.00
28.77
88.00
56.48
53.87
554.75
88.00
22.00
110.00
3,862.18
1,150.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
03/11/99 11:56 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NIlE DESCRIPTION NUMBER
iTEM
IlOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54572 03/11/99 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FEB:HP:5477-2590-0803-1143 190-1990
711.81
2,432.18
54573 03/11/99 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, DAY PLANNER REFILL:S.BROWN 001-161-999-5220
73.37
75.37
56576 03/11/99 000184 G T E CAL]FORNIA- PAYM FEB:909-695-1178:NARG.COMM.PRK 320-199-999-5208
56.06
56.06
56575 03/11/99 001355 G T E CALIFORNIA, INC. FEB ACCESS-RVSD CO. OPEN LINE 320-199-999-5208
320.00
320.00
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT HEAVY DUTY 3 HOLE PUNCH 001-120-999-5242
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT SALES TAX 001-120-999-5242
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-120-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-120-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-161-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-140-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-150-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-161-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-162-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 190-184-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-170-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 165-199-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 280-199-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT FEB:MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-111-999-5220
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT LABEL TAPE CARTRIDGE CLEAR 001-120-999-5277
54576 03/11/99 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT LABEL TAPE CARTRIDGE WHITE 001-120-999-5277
54577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
56577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
54577 03/11/99 000186
HANKS HARDWARE INC.
HANKS HARDWARE INC.
HANKS HARDWARE INC,
HANKS HARDWARE INC.
HANKS HARDWARE INC.
HANKS HARDWARE INC,
HANKS HARDWARE ]NC,
HANKS HARDWARE INC.
FEB:MISC. RECREATION SUPPLIES
FEB:HAINTENANCE SUPPLIES
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:C.HAL
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:C.HAL
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:CRC
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:PARKS
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:TCC
FEB:MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES:O.T.
190-180-999-5301
001-164-601-5218
360-199-701-5212
340-199-701-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-180-999-5212
190-184-999-5212
280-199-999-5362
54578 03/11/99 002372 HARMON, JUDY TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-~-5330
73.81
5.72
254.99
73.03
157.02
167.62
7.68
255.55
62.20
106.74
51.12
21.55
50.82
50.81
13.36
23.95
24.63
72.71
167.90
23.22
74.90
623.17
633.93
85.08
129.17
546.80
1,402.60
1,810.08
546.80
54579 03/11/99 HART, CRYSTAL CREDIT: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
100.00
100.00
54580 03/11/99 001429 INACOM INFORMATION SYST NET~K)RK CLIENT SERVICES
320-199-999-5250
135,00
135.00
54581 03/11/99 002465 INLAND EMPIRE CALIF STA PRINCIPAL SPONSORSHIP FEE 001-111-999-5270
500.00
500.00
54582 03/11/99 003223 K E A ENVIRONMENTAL, IN
54583 03/11/99 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE
54583 03/11/99 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE
54584 03/11/99 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT
54585 03/11/99 001982 L WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE, I
JAN BIOLOGICAL SVCS:PALA RD BR
TEMP HELP W/E 2/14 FOWLER
TEMP HELP W/E 2/21 FOWLER
JAN:CONSULT SVCS:TEM.SHUTTLE
TREE TRIMMING:S-8 VILLIAGES
210-165-631-5801
001-150-999-5118
001-150-999-5118
280-199-999-5250
193-180-999-5415
805.07
104.00
104.00
1,873.75
180.00
805.07
208.00
1,873.75
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
03/11/99 11:56 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54585 03/11/99 001982 L WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE, I REMOVE BRKN BRNCH:S-8 VILLAGES 193-180-999-5415
54585 03/11/99 001982 L WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE, I CREDIT:BILLING ERROR 193-180-999-5415
30.00
5.00-
205.00
54586 03/11/99 001534
54586 03/11/99 001534
54586 03/11/99 001534
LA HASTERS OF FINE TRAV
LA HASTERS OF FINE TRAV
LA HASTERS OF FINE TRAV
PLANNERS CF:UBNOSKE:3/24-26/99 001-161-999-5258
PLANNERS CF:GUERRIERO:3/24-26 001-161-999-5272
PLANNERS CF:WEBSTER:3/24-26/99 001-161-999-5272
169.00
169.00
169.00
507.00
54587 03/11/99 LIEBERG, JILL CREDIT: WHAT'S COOKING 190-183-4982
6.00
6.00
54588 03/11/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 1/31BELIAN 001-171-999-5118
54588 03/11/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 1/31BELIAN 001-162-999-5118
54588 03/11/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPOP-,4RY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 01/31 HILL 190-180-999-5118
54588 03/11/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 2/7 HILL 001-161-999-5118
54589 03/11/99 003090 MARGARITA MIDDLE SCHOOL CHOIR PERFORMANCE-OLD TWN HLDY 280-199-999-5362
512.00
341.34
62.65
455.60
300.00
1,371.59
300.00
54590 03/11/99 001256 MARRIOTT HOTEL HTL:DU,P.COMMISSIONERS:3/24-26 001-161-999-5258
54590 03/11/99 001256 MARRIOTT HOTEL HTL:DU,P.COMMISSIONERS:3/24-26 001-161-999-5272
54590 03/11/99 001256 MARRIOTT HOTEL HTL:DU,P.CONMISSIONERS:3/24-26 001-161-999-5272
54591 03/11/99 002011 MARTIN, KATHARINA E. TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
259,60
834.43
74.17
78,40
1,168.20
78.40
54592 03/11/99
54592 03/11/99
54593 03/11/99
54594 03/11/99
000220 MAURICE PRINTERS~ INC.
000220 MAURICE PRINTERS~ INC.
5000 EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS
SALES TAX
000843 MCDANIEL ENG. JAN ENG SVCS:PALA RD BRIDGE 210-165-631-5802
PUBLICATIONS:SMALL HOUSES/ARCH
003608 MCGRAW HILL COMPANIES,
001-150-999-5222
001-150-999-5222
280-199-999-5261
461.00
35.73
4,763.38
109.53
496.73
4,763.38
109.53
54595 03/11/99 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
54596 03/11/99 MONTOYA, ANGELA
G~ING DIRT ROADS AFTER RAINS 195-180-999-5402
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900
1,152.00
100.00
1,152.00
100.00
54597 03/11/99
54598 03/11/99
54599 03/11/99
54599 03/11/99
54599 03/11/99
54599 03/11/99
54600 03/11/99
54601 03/11/99
54601 03/11/99
54601 03/11/99
001189 MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT CO
002037 NEXUS INTEGRATED SOLUTI
INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK DRAIN
TELEPHONE MAINT & REPAIRS
280-199-824-5804
320-199-999-5215
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLAY AD:PLANNING COMMISSION 001-120-999-5254
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLAY AD:LOCAL REVIEW OLD TW 001-120-999-5254
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLAY AD:RDA ADVISORY 001-120-999-5254
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLAY AD: CIP PRJT UPDATES 001-165-999-5256
REFUND: MARTIAL ARTS-TAEK CAMP
OBLACHINSKI, ROBERT
190-183-4982
002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-162-999-5214
002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-164-601-5214
002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MA[NT 001-162-999-5214
3,100.00
44.00
184.57
184.57
123.05
172.22
112.00
69.43
97.50
358.82
3,100.00
44.00
664.41
112.00
525.75
54602 03/11/99 002652 OSCAR~S LUNCHEON:ONE STOP WKSHP 3/1/99 001-111-999-5269 231.61
54602 03/11/99 002652 OSCAR'S LUNCHEON:ONE STOP WKSHP 3/1/99 001-111-999-5269 70.41 302.02
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54603
11:56
CHECK
DATE
03/11/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
VENDOR
NAME
PARK, KAREN
CiTY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
REFUND: TINY TOTS-CREATiVE BEG
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 MLT PERS
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES# RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS CEMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54604 03/11/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR
54606 0~/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 KAISER
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO
54606 03/11/99 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS REV
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-183-4982
001-2130
001-2130
001-2390
165-2390
190-2130
190-2390
191-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194-2390
280-2130
280-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
001-2130
191-2130
192-2130
193-2130
194-2130
001-2390
165-2390
190-2390
191-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194"2390
280-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
001-2090
165-2090
280-2090
001-2090
190-2090
001-2090
001-2090
190-2090
340-2090
001-2090
001-2090
190-2090
193-2090
001-2090
001-2090
ITEM
AMOUNT
65.00
322.43
9.85
23,730.95
693.6~
3.99
3,946.90
13.31
33.83
392.97
195.75
1.20
301.77
130.52
690.59
149.98
490.86
263.61
2.81
5.61
39.33
8.44
1.87
14.8~
.05
.14
1.48
.92
1.86
1.01
2.18
43.82
111.43
37.14
18.92
83.52
2.14
367.99
57.86
27.42
8.48
197.83
31.81
1.67
168.84
1,158.87-
PAGE 7
CHECK
AMOUNT
65.00
31,527.85
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
CHECK
DATE
VENDOR
NUMBER
VENDOR
NAME
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54606
54607
54607
54608
54608
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
000245
002498
002498
000580
000580
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR, PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INBUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INBUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR, PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245
PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR. PRE
PETRA GEOTECHNICAL~ INC
PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC
PHOTO I~RKS
PHOTO I,a:)RKS
AETNA SO
AETNA SO
AETNA SO
AETNA SO
AETNA SO
BLSHIELD
BLSHIELD
BLSHIELD
CIGNA
CIGNA
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
HELTHNET
KAISER
KAISER
PACZFZCR
PACZFZCR
PACZFZCR
PC
PERS CHO
PERS DED
PERS-ADM
CM-ADMIN FEE ADJUSTMENT
SEPT PROF SVCS:RANCHO CAL/I-15
OCT PROF SVCS:RANCHO CAL/I-15
PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR CIP
PHOTO DEVELOP. FOR PW MAINT.
001-2090
165-2090
190-2090
194-2090
280-2090
001-2090
190-2090
280-2090
001-2090
300-2090
001-2090
190-2090
191-2090
192-2090
193-2090
194-2090
280-2090
330-2090
340-2090
001-2090
190-2090
001-2090
190-2090
193-2090:
001-2090
001-2090
001-2090
001-2090
001-150-999-5250
210-165-601-5801
210-165-601-5801
001-165-999-5250
001-164-601-5250
459.37
215.65
251.60
83.86
71.89
1,185.7~
374.25
4.65
871.91
40.84
6,680.16
834.69
16.49
54.25
424.58
263.02
4.99
164.41
870.29
2,233.26
164.83
4~082.74
802.90
19.72
16.00
2,535.16
1,158.87
118.58
.99-
6,505.00
8,072.50
66.27
36.14
24,003.69
14,577.50
102.41
54609
54609
54609
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
000253
000253
000253
POSTMASTER
POSTMASTER
POSTMASTER
EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS
EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS
EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS
001-120-999-5230
001-161-999-5230
001-1990
48.75
55.00
46.35
150.10
54610
54610
54610
54611
54612
54613
54613
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
000254
000254
000254
003621
002612
000947
000947
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN
QWEST
RADIO SHACK, INC.
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RECRUITMENT ADS:SR PW/FAC CUST
PUBLIC HEARING: PA98-0511
PUBLIC HEARING: PA98-0512
LONG DISTANCE SVCS:CITY HALL
MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES
BLUEPRINTS: ~INCHESTER/I-15S
BLUEPRINTS: WINCHESTER/I-15S
001-150-999-5254
001-161-999-5256
001-161-999-5256
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5221
210-165-697-5804
210-165-697-5804
629.05
19.00
17.25
1,194.18
22.79
992.11
326.75
665.30
1,194.18
22.79
1,318.86
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54614
54614
54615
54615
54615
54615
54615
54615
54615
54615
54616
54617
54618
54618
54618
54619
54620
54620
54620
54620
54621
54622
54623
54624
54625
54625
54626
54627
54627
54628
54629
54630
54631
11:56
CHECK
DATE
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
000262
000262
000907
000907
000907
000907
000907
000907
000907
000907
001500
003591
003591
003591
000266
000353
000353
000353
000353
000268
003587
000271
003566
002670
002670
000403
000434
000434
002681
VENDOR
NAME
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
RANCHO CAR MASH
RANCHO CAR gASH
RANCHO CAR WASH
RANCHO CAR gASH
RANCHO CAR MASH
RANCHO CAR WASH
RANCHO CAR WASH
RANCHO CAR gASH
REGIONAL TRAINING CENTE
REGIONAL WTR QUALITY CN
RENES COMMERCIAL RANAGE
RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE
RENES COMMERCIAL RANAGE
R l GHTWAY
RIVERSIDE CO, AUDITOR
RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR
RIVERSIDE CO, AUDITOR
RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR
RIVERSIDE CO. HABITAT
RIZZO CONSTRUCTION, INC
ROBERT BEIN, kin FROST &
ROGER PITKIN LANDSCAPE
SAN GORGONIO GIRL SCOUT
SAN GORGONIO GIRL SCOUT
SCHILBER, DARLENE
SCHNEIDER-LJUBENKOVw JU
SCHNEIDER-LJUBENKOV, JU
SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA
SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS
SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS
SILVER LEGACY RESORT &
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
01-99-02003-0 FLOATING METER
02-79-10100-1D]AZ RD
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS
SUPERVISOR~S ACADEMY:SALAZAR
PRMT:SANTA GERTRUDIS UNDERCROS
WEED ABATEMENT SANTIAGO/FRONT
WEED ABATEMENT BUTTERFIELD STG
TRASH PICK-UP:SANTIAGO/FRONT
RIVERTON PARK TOILET RENTAL
NOV 98 PARKING CIT ASSESRENTS
NOV 98 PARKING CZT ASSESRENTS
OCTOBER 98 PRKZNG CXT ASSESMNT
OCTOBER 98 PRKZNG CZT ASSESMNT
FEBRUARY 99 K-RAT
CITY HALL REMOOELING:BUZLD OPT
JAN SVCS:SANTA GERTRUDZS TRAIL
GARDENZNG SVCS:CITY (34NED PROP
REFUND: ROOM RENTAL/SECURITY
REFUND: ROOM RENTAL/SECURITY
REFUND: COOKING WITH TIA
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TEN ELEM SCHOOL POOL MAINT
ANNUAL SIERRA CF:HAFELI:4/18
SIERRA CF:YONKER:O4/19-Z3/99
HOTEL:KB,LB,HO:SIERRA CF:4/20
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-164-601-5250
190-180-999-5240
001-165-999-5214
001-110-999-5214
001-110-999-5263
001-163-999-5214
001-164-604-5214
001-164-604-5263
190-180-999-5214
190-180-999-5263
001-162-999-5261
210-190-147-5802
001-164-601-5402
001-164-601-5402
001-164-601-5402
190-180-999-5238
001-2265
001-2260
001-2265
001-2260
001-2300
210-199-808-5804
210-190-147-5802
165-I~-812-5804
190-183-4990
190-2900
190-183-4982
190-183-999-5330
190-183-999-5330
190-180-999-5212
320-199-999-5258
001-140-999-5261
001-161-999-5261
ITEM
AMOUNT
187.55
90.19
25.54
18.00
31.04
26.00
12.00
22.70
36.00
25.97
450.00
500.00
275.00
1,500.00
50.00
62.89
275.00
1,205.00
165.00
1,907.50
10,665.00
36,585.00
300.00
50.00
30.00
100.00
15.00
121.60
228.00
439.60
350.00
350.00
721.05
PAGE 9
CHECK
AMOUNT
277.74
197.25
450.00
500.00
1,825.00
62.89
3,552.50
10,665.00
36,585.00
300.00
50.00
130.00
15.00
349.60
439.60
350.00
350.00
721.05
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
11:56
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 10
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54632
54633
54634
54635
54635
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54636
54637
54637
54638
54639
54640
54640
54641
54641
54642
54643
54644
54645
54645
54646
54647
54648
54648
54648
54648
CHECK
DATE
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
:
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
002681
003002
003002
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
000537
003467
003467
000311
000306
003366
003366
000320
000320
003125
003615
003615
003497
003620
001342
001342
001342
001342
VENDOR
NAME
SILVER LEGACY RESORT &
SJURSEN, CONNIE
SMITH, JUDY
SMOOTHILL SPORTS DISTR[
SMOOTHILL SPORTS DISTRI
SOUTHERN CAL]F EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL]F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SPECTRUM POOL PRODUCTS
SPECTRUM POOL PRODUCTS
TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SC
TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE &
TOP, AN DEVELOPMENT & CON
TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CON
TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS
TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS
TRANS TECH ENGINEERS
U.S. FLAG ETIQUETTE ADV
U,S, POSTAL SERVICE
UNITED GREEN MARK
UNITED GREEN MARK
VAIL RANCH MIDDLE SCHO0
gARNER SPRINGS RANCH
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY,
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY,
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY,
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY,
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUMBER
HTL:YONKER:SIERRA CF:4/19-23 001-140-999-5261
REFUND: COOKING WITH TIA
190-183-4982
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
190-2900
SKATE PARK EQUIPMENT
SKATE PARK EQUIPMENT
190-183-999-5305
190-183-999-5305
2-11-007-0455 SIXTH ST
2-10-747-1393 MONROE PED
2-10-331-2153 PUJOL ST
2-00-397-5042 CITY HALL
2-15-671-5518 PALA TC I
2-18-348-6315 MARGARITA TCl
2-18-555-7006 MORENO RO TCl
2-18-373-9903 MARGARITA
2-18-528-9980 SANTIAGO RD TC1
66-77-795-1890-01 MORENO RO
67-77-863-1535-91MCCABE/TMS
001-164-603-5240
190-199-999-5240
190-184-999-5240
340-199-701-5240
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
001-164-603-5319
190-180-999-5240
191-180-999-5319
190-185-999-5240
190-180-999-5240
75FT LANE LINES FOR CRC POOL
FREIGHT
190-183-999-5380
190-183-999-5380
CHOIR PERFORMANCE-OLD TWN HLDY 280-199-999-5362
IRRIG.SUPPLY-VARIOUS PARKS 190-180-999-5212
REPAIRS TO STORM GRATES 001-164-601-5401
P.C.C. REPAIRS a VARIOUS LOCAT 001-164-601-5402
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW ADMIN
001-162-999-5220
001-164-604-5220
TRFFC SIGNAL DESIGN:VIA LAS CO 210-165-671-5802
FLAG ETIQUETTE SERVICE
001-120-999-5250
REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT
190-2900
CONTROLLER REMOTE-CITY PRKS
SALES TAX
190-180-999-5242
190-180-999-5242
CHOIR PERFORMANCE-OLD TWN HLDY 280-199-999-5362
EXECUTIVE MGMT RETREAT-3/13/99
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES - TCC
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES-SR CTR
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES - CRC
001-150-999-5260
340-199-701-5212
190-184-999-5212
190-181-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
ITEM
AMOUNT
242.00
15.00
100.00
48.52
261.57
310.58
41.38
552.03
3,903.36
140.67
86.24
112.41
2,571.55
198.10
20.05
2,880.46
2,331.28
140.84
150.00
22.13
391.00
4,810.25
25.55
83.54
4,665.00
60.00
100.00
921.12
71.39
150.00
1,484.80
227.20
100.54
233.02
337.32
CHECK
AMOUNT
242,00
15.00
100.00
310.09
10,816.83
2,472.12
150.00
22.13
5,201.25
109.09
4,665.00
60.00
100.00
992.51
150.00
1,484.80
898,08
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54649
54650
54651
54652
54652
54652
11:56
CHECK
DATE
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
03/11/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
000339
002109
000345
000345
000345
VENDOR
NAME
WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY
WHITE CAP
I.ffNDHAN PALM SPRINGS HO
XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
XEROX CORPORATION BiLLi
XEROX CORPORATION BiLLI
CiTY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
iTEM
DESCRIPTION
JUDICIAL UPDATES PUBLiCATiONS
NISC SUPPLIES-PW MAINT CREW
HTL:MEYER:CRA CF:03/17-19/99
LEASE AGRMNT FOR TCC COPIER
FEB LEASE: 5100A COPIER
INTEREST ON LEASE OF 5100A
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-120-999-5228
001-164-601-5218
280-199-999-5258
190-184-999-5239
330-2800
330-199-999-5391
iTEM
AMOUNT
101.55
312.46
188.08
67.08
1,735.12
PAGE 11
CHECK
AMOUNT
101.55
312.46
188.08
2,187.11
TOTAL CHECKS 361,461.16
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
12:05
CITY OF TEHECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
210 CAPITAL IHPROVEHENT PROJ FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORHATION SYSTEHS
AMOUNT
9,487.82
15,440.40
5,936.82
39,720.96
TOTAL 70,586.00
VOUCHRE2
03/11/99
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
54655
54656
54657
54658
54658
54659
54659
54659
12:05
CHECK
DATE
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
03/23/99
VENDOR
NUMBER
003179
002695
001719
003576
003576
00078~
000783
000783
VENDOR
NAME
CONTRERAS CONSTRUCTION
J A S PACIFIC CONSULTIN
L P A, INC.
SYS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
SYS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
TONAR ELECTRONICS, INC.
TONAR ELECTRONICS, INC.
TONAR ELECTRONICS, INC.
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
REL.RET:COSMIC/AGENA SIDEWALK
INSPECTOR SVC:CLARK/RAY/ROOECK
JAN DESIGN SVCS:TEM, LIBRARY
COMPUTER WORKSTATION
SALES TAX
LIGHT BAR WITH PREEMPTION
CONTROLLER FOR LIGHT BAR
FREIGHT
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
210-2035
001-162-999-5118
210'199-129'5802
320-1970
320-1970
310-1910
310-1910
310-1910
ITEM
AMOUNT
9,640.40
9,487.82
5,800.00
36,864.00
2,856.96
4,664.19
1,223.97
48.66
PAGE 1
CHECK
AMOUNT
9,640.40
9,487.82
5,800.00
39,720.96
5,936.82
TOTAL CHECKS 70,586.00
ITEM 4
DIRECTOR OF FIN C~'~
CITY EAGER ~~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
March 23, 1999
City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 1999
PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director ~
Jesse Diaz, Accountant ~
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of
January 31, 1999.
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio and
receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government Code Sections 53646
and 41004 respectively. The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government
Code Sections 53601 and 53635 as of January 31, 1999.
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
None
1. City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 1999
2. Schedule of Assets, Liabilities, and Fund Equity as of January 31,
1999
3. Fund Equity Detail by Fund as of January 31, 1999
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Report
As of January 31, 1999
Cash Activit~ for the Month of January
Cash and Investments as of Janua~ 1, 1~
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of January 31, 1999
52,524,231
8,632,126
(5,179,256)
55,977,101
Cash and blvestments Portfolio:
Maturity/ ContrectoaF
Termination Market
Type of Investment Institution Yield Date Value
Petty Cash City Hall n/a $ 1,500 $
General Checking Union Bank n/a ( 188,291 )
Sweep Aoootmt UnionBank 4.010 % 45,081
(Money Market Account) (Highmark U.S. Treasury)
Benefit Demand Deposits Union Bank n/a 6,056
Local Agency Investment Ftmd State Treasm'er 5.265 % 43,269,187
Certitic4~ of Deposit Community Bank 5.000 % 393,535
(Retention Escrow)
Saving Account California Bank Trust 4.950 % 149,122
(Retention Escrow)
Savings Aecouat Union Bank 4.880 % 208,799
(Retention Escrow)
Savings Ac~oant California Bank Trust 2.900 % 31,416
(Retention Escrow)
Checking Ac~oont Union Bank n/a 7,199
(Parking Citations)
Trust Accounts- CFD 88-12 U.S. Bank (First Am. Trensuty) 4.242 % 3,098,790
(Money Market Ao~oant)
Reserve Ac~oant- CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2017 1,531,469
(Investment Agreement)
Delinq. Main. Reserve Accoont- CFD 88-12 CDC Funding Cotp 5.423 % 9/1/2017 500,000
(Investment Agreement)
Trust A~,oonts- CFD 98-1 U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 4.242 % 121,013
(Money Market Account)
Reserve A~c~unt- CFD 98-1 State Trensm'er 5.265 % 929,000
(Local Agency hvestment Ftmd)
Trust Ac~ouats - Measure A U.S. Bank (First Anm Treasury) 4.242 % 57,725
(Money Market Account)
Trust Ac~otmts-TCSD COPs U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 4.242 % 17,714
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Accoant-TCSD COPs Bayeris~he Landesbank 6.870 % 10/1/2012 502,690
(Investment Agreement)
Trust Ac~ounts-RDA Bonds U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 4.242 % 3,846,176
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Accoant-RDA Bonds Bayetische Landesbank 7.400 % 2/1/2013 1,448,920
(Investment Agreement)
$
Par/Book
Balance
1,500
(188,291) (1)
45,081
6,056 (1)
43,26~187 (2)
393,535
149,122
208,799
31,416
7,199
3,098,790
1,531,469
500,000
121,013
929,000
57,725
17,714
502,690
3,846,176
1,448,920
55,977,101
(1)-This mount is net of outstanding checks.
(2)-At January 31, 1999 total market value (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency Investment Fond (LAIF) was $37,256,851,338.
The City's proportionate share of that value is $43,795,903.
All investments are liquid and currently available.
The City of Temecula's portfolio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds will be available to meet
budgeted and actual cxpcnditures ofthc City of Tcmcoula for thc next six months.
City of Tem ecula
Schedule of Assets, Liabilities, and Fund Balances
As of January31, 1999
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Due from other fun&
Land held for resale
Prepaid assets
Deposits
F~xed assets-net
Total assets
city (1)
Community
Services
District
$ 35,405,809 $ 2,458,989
4,103,374 125
73~695 139,480
530,401
99,599
506,850 (11,067)
892,981
$ 42,273,709 $ 2,587,527
Redevclopm~nt
10,485,426
1,20~945
377,368
2,220,245
$ 14,285,984
Community
Facilities
Districts (2)
$ 7,626,877 $
1,124,300
$ 8,751,177 $
55,977,101
5,306,444
1,251,543
2,750,646
99,599
1,620,083
892,981
67,898,397
Liabilities and fund equity:
Liabilities:
Due to other funds
Other liabilities
Total liabilities
$ 563,588 $ 139,479
6,100,843 199,208
$ 377,368 $ 171,108 $ 1,251,543
983,142 ~434,367 11,717,560
6,664,43 1 338,687 1,360,510 4,605,475 12,969, 103
Fund equity:
Cunttibutr~l capital 1,281,781
R~tained ~rnings 920,532
Fund balances:
R~s~rved (3) 14,700,176
Designated (3) 14,200,517
Unde~ignated 4,506,272
87~230
1,371,610
Total fund equity 35,609,278
2,248,840
Total liabilities and fund equity $ 42,273,709 $ 2,587,527 $
7,702,960
5,222,514
12,925,474
14,285,984
1,124,300
3,092,650
(71,248)
4,145,702
$ 8,751,177 $
1,281,781
920,532
24,404,666
23,887,291
4,435,024
54,929,294
67,898,397
(1) Includes General Fund, CIP Fund, Gas Tax Fund, and other special revenue funds.
(2) Includes CFD 88-12 (Ynez Corridor) and CFD 98-1 (Winehestor Hills).
(3) Reservations and designations of fund balance are detailed on the following pages.
ITEM 5
APPROVAL
CiTY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
March 23, 1999
City Council Meeting Schedule - April 1999
RECOMMENDATION: Direct the City Clerk to re-schedule the regular City Council Meeting of
Apdl 27, 1999 to Apdl 20, 1999 and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements
of the Government Code.
BACKGROUND: It has been recommended by members of the City Council to reschedule the
meeting of Apdl 27, 1999 to April 20, 1999, since three members of the City Council; Mayor Ford,
Councilmember Comerchero and Councilmember Lindemans will be representing the City on the
Sister City trip to Voorburg, Holland. All City Councilmembers have indicated that they are
available to meet on April 20, 1999.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ITEM 6
DIRECTOR OF FINA
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
(City Council
Shawn Nelson, Acting City Manager
March 23, 1999
SUBJECT:
Resolution in Support of Developing a Subregional Airport Plan
PREPARED BY: Allie Kuhns, Senior Management Analyst ~
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUBREGIONAL AIRPORT
PLAN FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
BACKGROUND: With an ever increasing amount of air traffic in Southern California, Los
Angeles International Airport (LAX) has commenced expansion measures to accommodate the
growing passenger activity in that region. In response to this expansion, several public entities have
expressed a desire not to expand LAX, but to develop a Subregional Airport Plan that addresses
all of Southern California. This plan is intended to identify areas not only on the coast, but also
inland areas that can support a major regional airport, and that would provide a logical location for
high volumes of passenger and cargo traffic.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has approved a Joint Resolution for the
General Assembly, on which the proposed attached resolution for the City of Temecula is based.
To further support SCAG's efforts, the Westem Riverside Council of Governments has requested
that local government agencies provide a resolution of support for a Subregional Airport Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Attachments: A. Resolution No. 99-__
RESOLUTION NO. 99-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUBREGIONAL AIRPORT
PLAN FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
NOW BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare as
follows:
Access to commercial and cargo aviation opportunities is important to economic vitality
and job creation throughout the region. Aviation demand within the entire region is
forecast to exceed 157 million air passengers per year and 8.9 tons of cargo per year
by 2020.
The Los Angeles Department of Airports has initiated a revision of the Masterplan for Los
Angeles International Airport (LAX) that advocates expansion of its passenger activity
from 60 million air passengers per year to an expected 98 million per year and its cargo
activity from its current 1.7 million tons per year to an expected 4.2 million per year.
Airport officials estimate that the expansion of LAX to accommodate the proposed level
of aviation activity would cost as much as 12 billion dollars, and would necessitate the
expenditure of billions of dollars more to lessen its impact on the ground transportation
system.
The proposed expansion, given LAX's location in the built-out, intensely congested west
side of the South Coast Air Basin where its contribution to air pollution is greatest,
appears to be a high-cost, high-impact approach to meeting the region's needs for
added aviation capacity.
There are at least nine other developing or existing commercial airports in Southern
California, several of which are located in areas expected to experience the greatest
growth in population and employment over the next 20 years, while the LAX area is
expected to experience the region's least growth.
Developing airport capacity in areas of high growth and lower infrastructure costs rather
than concentrating airport development at LAX may be an environmentally superior,
lower cost, and more equitable strategy for serving future growth in air commerce in
Southern California.
The development of airport resources in the high-growth areas of the region will lead to
a more equitable distribution of jobs and opportunities for economic growth, while
reducing the burden on the regional transportation system.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve that the City of Temecula
supports the Southern Califomia Association of Governments in its efforts to develop a Subregional
Airport Plan for Southern California that includes one or more fully-developed alternatives that
distribute the growth in airline passenger and cargo operations among the region's commercial
aviation facilities, with full consideration given to both freight and passenger ground access, and the
economic and environmental opportunities and impacts associated with each alternative.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this
of ,1999.
day
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution
No. 99-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular
meeting thereof held on the __ day of ,1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
ITEM 7
DIRECTOR OF FINA E
CITY MANAGER ~'~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
{~City Council
Shawn Nelson, Acting City Manager
March 23, 1999
SUBJECT:
Student Exchange Scholarship
PREPARED BY: Allie Kuhns, Senior Management Analyst.~.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve an increase of the $200 per student
scholarship to $300 per student for the Temecula Valley High School Choir members who are
traveling to Japan, based on the total number of travelers decreasing from 52 students to 21.
BACKGROUND: During the November 17, 1998 Meeting, the City Council approved an
appropriation of $10,400 ($200 per student) to provide scholarship funds for the members of the
Temecula Valley High School Choir to travel to Japan in May, 1999. The purpose of this trip is for
the Choir to perform for Temecula's Sister City, Nakayama, Japan, as well as the TVHS sister high
school in Sasebo.
Originally, the entire 52-member Choir was to travel to Japan for these concerts. However, since
that time when the appropriation was approved, the number has decreased to 21 members. This
decrease in participation was partially due to the costs associated with this trip.
If approved, the total amount allocated to the TVHS Choir for this trip would be $6,300, which is
$4,100 less than the original appropriation of $10,400.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ITEM 8
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
Acting City Manager/City Council
Anthony J. Elmo, Chief Building Official
DATE:
March 23, 1999
SUBJECT:
Completion and Acceptance of the City Hall Remodel Project
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Accept the City Hall Remodel Project and
2. Accept and record Notice of Completion and release Certificate of Deposit, in the amount of
$37,689, back to Rizzo Construction thirty-five days after recordation of Notice of Completion.
BACKGROUND: On January 26, 1999, the City of Temecula entered into a contract agreement
with Rizzo Construction, to perform necessary improvements to maximize the use of office space
and make existing space more efficient within City Hall. This agreement specified compensation
for this work to be in the amount of, $37,689. In response to the City Council approving the addition
of engineering staff to the Public Works/Engineering Department, it was necessary to study ways
to maximize the use of available space in City Hall. It was determined that by relocating the building
inspection staff to the maintenance building, and adding a combination of private offices and
systems furniture work stations and relocating Redevelopment staff to the area vacated by the
building inspection staff, five (5) work stations would be made available for new engineering staff
in the Public Works\Engineering Department area. This work also established necessary office
space for the Fire Marshall and Fire Plans Examiner. As of this date, the project is complete.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
R:\BROCKMEI\AGENDA\RIZZO NOTICE OF COMPLETION. DOC ] 3/17/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE
"undersigned") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that it has paid in full for all materials, supplies,
labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the undersigned or by any of the
undersigned's agents, employees, or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of its contract with
the City of Temecula with regard to the building, erection, construction or repair of that certain work
improvement known as: "Towx-, tuLo, C; ~r,~{ ~4raX\ ~:~,t~tk\ V)v~ ~_c"~ Lo,_ ~ ,
, situated ~n the Community of
The undersigned declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which
would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a stop notice of any unpaid sums owning to the
undersigned.
Further, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the undersigned
does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and in
t~vor of the undersigned and the City of Temecula or which relate in any way to work performed by the
undersigned with regard to the above referenced construction project.
Further, the undersigned expressly acknowledges its awareness of and waives the benefits of 1542 of
the Civil Code of the State of California which provides: "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
to him must have materially effected settlement with the debtor".
This release is intended to be a full and general release of any and all claims which the undersigned
now has or .may, in the future, have against the City of Temecula and/or its agents and employees with regard
to any matter arising from the construction or the above referenced project or the contract between the City
and the Contractor with respect thereto whether such claims are now known or unknown or are suspected or
unsuspected.
Dated:
By:
(Title)
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. Box 9033
43200 Bueineee Perk Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR
RECORDER'S USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California 92590.
3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to Rizzo Construction Co. to perform the
following work of improvement:
REMODEL OF TEMECULA CITY HALL
4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to
the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official of City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the
City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on March 23, 1999. A Certificate
of Deposit was given as collateral by said company as required by law.
5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of
Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: REMODEL OF TEMECULA
CITY HALL.
6. The street address of said property is: 43200 Business Park Drive.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 23rd day of March, 1999.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk
I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty
of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF
COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside by said City Council.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 23rd day of March, 1999.
Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk
ITEM 9
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council -
Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manag~'Y~
March 23, 1999
Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County (EDC)
FY1998/99 Funding Request
Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a contract with Economic Development
Corporation of Southwest Riverside County which provides funding for Fiscal Year 1998-99 in the
amount of $46,000.
DISCUSSION: On October 13, 1998, the City Council approved $45,000 in funding for the
Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County (EDC). This represented
approximately half of the $91,000 that had been allocated in the FY98-99 Operating Budget for this
purpose. The EDC had requested the smaller amount because they had just been re-formed as
a regional EDC, and were in the process of preparing an annual work plan.
The EDC has recently contracted with Steve Harding of Urban Futures to assist them in preparing
a strategic plan to assist their efforts. The EDC is requesting an additional $46,000 to help them
prepare this plan and for operational funds for the balance of this fiscal year. If approved, this
would represent the full amount of funding that the Council had allocated in our current budget.
Attached is a letter from the EDC to support their funding requests.
FISCAL IMPACT: The FY98-99 budget, includes $91,000. The 1998-99 Operating Budget
includes a line item for Economic Development Partners (Acct. 001-111--999-5264).
ATTACHMENT:
Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County
FY1998/99 Funding Request
Agreement Between the City of Temecula and the Economic Development Corporation
of Southwest Riverside County
R:\SYERSK\FUNDING.99 3/15/99 jrm
ATTACHMENT 1.
Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County
FY1998~99 Funding Request
Southu,est Riverside County
March 11, 1999
James B. O'Grady
Assistant City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mr. O'Grady:
A little over five months ago, I wrote to you on behalf of the newly formed organization
entitled the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County. At that
time you had recently joined the City of Temecula as Assistant City Manager and we had
recently received approval from the Board of Directors of our organization to form the
regional organization. I believe that the expectations of that date have changed for both
of us, albeit in a positive manner.
Once we embarked upon the program of a regional alliance, we began to investigate the
possibilities that such an alliance could foster. We held workshops with the Board of
Directors, some of whom had just joined the Board as a result of the regional
collaboration, to determine what the specific goals and objectives of the newly formed
entity might be. Those sessions were productive and represented a beginning for the
strategic planning that we hoped would soon take place. Although that process has not
been concluded, I believe that we are on the path to forward development with the
workshops scheduled to take place today and on March 18, 1999. There is a very old
saying that "ROME wasn't built in a day", but succeeded in being remembered as one of
the best efforts mankind has made in a civilized world. I believe that we can succeed
with our endeavor given the time, patience, support and effort that you and the City of
Temecula have shown this organization in the past five months.
I have enclosed an outline of the current and projected tasks performed by the Economic
Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County on behalf of the City of
Temecula as well as our community partners. You have been given monthly reports of
the activities of the EDCSWRC as well as a year end activity report. An outline for
todays workshop along with copies of the summary for the prior workshops held in the
fall of 1998 are enclosed for your review of the strategic planning process thus far. I
would be pleased to offer such further information and documentation as you may
request.
Post Office Box 1388 · Temecula, CA 92593-1388 · Office 909/695-5130 · FAX 909/695-5126
James O'Grady
City of Temecula
Page Two
The EDCSWRC has kept a close watchful eye to the bottom line while maximizing staff
time in pursuit of the best interest of its membership. There are no plans to change that
method of operation. The EDCSWRC will continue to adhere to an austere program that
targets resources in the best possible manner for the organization. At this time,
EDCSWRC requests that the City of Temecula continue its support of the regional effort
with the funding of the previously budgeted sum of Forty-Six Thousand Dollars
($46,000.00). We welcome your comments and suggestions.
Ve ly, ~o~
~cutive Director
EDC-Southwest Riverside County
Outline for Workshop #1
March 11r 1999
PurpoN of Workshop No. 1
B,
C.
D.
E.
F.
General Approech and Framework of Workshop
Review Existing Policy end $1rategy Documents
Review, Reaffirm or Redefine the Organization's Mission
Review, Reaffirm or Redefine the OrganizatJon's Goals
Review, Reaffirm or Redefine the Organization's Objectives
Develop s Short Term Implernenlatlon Work Plan
General Approaoh and Framework of Workshop
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Economic Development Strategic Planning Process
The Evolving Foundations of Economic Development
Shared Vision
81rategic Aclion Plan
Implementation Work Plan
Evaluation & Monitoring
Review of bbUng Policy end Strategy Documents
A, Draft Economic Development b'tndegy
B. Practical Vision Meldx
C. Business Deve4opment Committee Matrix
Outreach/Political Action Committea MatTiX
Tourism Development Committee Matrix
Current Reality (Challenges) for ,Southwest Riverside County
Defining Reddining the Mission
A
B.
C.
Review of ExieUng Mission Statement
Eight Guidelines for Development Policy
Reaffirm and/or Redefine Mission Statement
De~ing the EDC's Sitoft -Term Goab
A
B.
C.
Review of Existing Goals
Reaffirm and/or Redefine Short-Term Goals
PrioritiLe Short-Term Goals
De~n~ _ ,'t,,:ng the EDC's Short-Term CL,jgQtlvee
A Review of Existing Objectives
B. Reaffirm and/or Redefine Short-Term Objectives
C. Priodlize Short-Term Objective
Deqvllc~p Shod-Term b~lll~lllll,ll~llOII Work Progrim
k Resource Identirmetion
1. Fiscal
2. Staffing
B. VVork Plan-Balance of Fiscal Year 1998-99
C. Work Plan-Fiscal Year 199900
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DRAFT REGIONAl- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
FISCAL YEAR 1998-99
INTRODUCTION
Regional economic development planning requires extensive analysis and
adequate resources. Planning should be done by the organization that will
ultimately be responsible for implementing or coordinating the regional
economic development strategy that is developed.
The task is to set specific goals for economic growth and then design
programs and activities to accomplish the goals.However, economic
development does not take place overnight. Planning economic
development is a "long term approach to community capacity building that
will assist local institutions to re-orient themselves to improving the
economic potential of a given area."
We are embarking on a new era of collaborative regionalized governance.
It will be those regions that prize alertness and fresh thinking, which
approach the future with a sense of adventure and experimentation, which
engage their citizens, that will have the best run at the globalized age. We
have the opportunity to create such a region, one that will bridge political
jurisdictions, build public-private relationships, rethink complex issues, and
get results.
WHER R IS THE REGION ECONOMICx4 LL E~
Basic industries are the foundation of a sustainable economy. These are
the industries that generate income by exporting goods or services to
buyers outside the area. Supplier industries sell directly to basic industries
in and outside the local area. They provide goods and services that are
needed by other businesses. Consumer and nonbasic industries provide
for the needs of the local market, and are thus ultimately dependent on
basic and supplier industries. The most important thing that the regional
EDC can do is to understand the market in which our basic industries
compete and the nature of their specific competitive requirements.
According to the Economic Development Strategy developed for
Southwest Riverside County as a part of the Economic Development
Strategy prepared for Riverside County in 1995, basic industries comprise
31.7% of our regional economic pie. Supplier industries account for 28.9%
and nonbasic industries account for 39.4%.
The study performed for Riverside County by Economic Strategies Group
suggests that the economic potential for Southwest Riverside County lies in
services and other office users, and the growing assembly of medical device
companies as conduits for high-end manufacturing. In general the best
industry clusters for this region include high-tech and health care
technology, people services and travel and supplier industries. These
industries make sense for our region in terms of the present focus in the
region, the available work force, and the quality location for tourism related
industries. These industries value quality of life attributes and area image
that are assets of our region.
In developing the economic strategy we should adhere to the facts
presented. Health services, business services, retail trade, winery related
industries, and tourism are the best industry clusters to develop. Our basic
industry targets from an industrial perspective are biomedical instrument
products, industrial machinery and equipment, semiconductors/software
and high tech industry and miscellaneous light manufacturing.
By focusing on our basic industries, finding out what services and supplies they
interact with and targeting those industries, we will enhance our position in the
competitive marketplace for industry that is clean, supports a high wage base
and attracts like -kind to our region.
CURRENT STRATEGIES
WORK PR 0 GRAM
In order to achieve the desired goals of attracting and retaining targeted
industry to our region, we must establish a workplan that will provide a
roadmap to success. It is vital that when designing the workplan, it is
understood that it is a work-in-progress rather than a finished product.
1998-99 WORKPLAN OBJECTIVES
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF JOBS AVAILABLE TO THE
REGIONS RESIDENTS.
REDUCE NU~IBER OF RESIDENTS CO~..EMUTING LONG
DISTANCES.
PRESERVE AND INCREASE WHERE POSSIBLE THE ANNUAL
PER CAPITA WAGE/SALARY OF RESIDENTS.
DEVELOP ENHANCED REGIONAL COLLABORATION FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
4
WORKPLAN
A. Business Relations
· Visitation
· Intervention
· Resource Development
· Expediting/Regulator] Review
B. Business Development/Enhancement
· Attraction/Recruitment
· Expansion
· Start-Ups
· Resource Development
C. Community/Outreach And Collaboration
· Community Outreach/Information Dissemination
· Interagency/Inter-Community Relations
· Promotions/Public Relations/Media Campaigns
· Member Relations
D. Education
· Accessibility
· Training/Employment 1 ,inks
· Curriculum Development
5
TASKS/ACTIONS
A. Business Relations
1. Conduct Visitation Program.
2. Conduct four workshops annually on timely issues.
3. Periodic reviews of regulatory provisions to identify obstacles to
economic growth.
4. Develop and maintain a business resource user library at the
regional office.
5. Initiate an inter-business referral network.
6. Host individual lunches for CEO' s of top regional companies.
7. Mobili~.e expediting teams to assist businesses with regulatory
processes.
Team.
B. Business Development/Enhancement
1. Develop a series of target lists for attraction efforts. Focus will
include health related Coio, mdm, etc.) technology, plastics,
electronics, light manufacturing. Cluster development will be
evaluated and formulated.
Make mail and personal contact with CEO's of target list, and
with unsolidted inquiries, trade show contacts and magazine
adverdsing responses.
6
3. Design and distribute to CEO's business focused attraction
products that differentiate the region from countless other
communities issuing slick marketing materials.
4. Evaluate financial incentive programs that exist locally.
5. Maintain current useable data relevant to business decision
makers.
6. Design, develop and maintain a comprehensive building and
property directory and database.
7. Attend trade shows as appropfi_ate; custom design handout
materials; follow up leads.
C. Community/0utteach and CollaboratiOn
1. Conduct four member luncheons.
2. Maintain memberships/seats/participatory relationships with
community groups and area governments.
3. Pit/issue four newsletters annually.
4. Review TVEDC web site and update periodically.
5. Public presentations/image enhancement.
6. Prepare press releases/medi~ campaigns.
7. Design a community outreach video presentation.
8. Prepare an action alert system on issues relevant to economic
development.
7
D. Education
1. Team with all area educators to expand the number and type of
educational opportunities at local/neighborhood sites.
2. Team with area educators to develop special curricula expressly to
fill an identified void in the business community.
e
Coordinate with local industry to identify hbor/education needs
and current training expertise for cross-use (business to business
training).
e
Survey local community to develop base of expertise of local
active and retired professionals; formuhte outline to utili~.e these
professionals in training/teaching programs.
5. Develop and maintain a list of technical assistance proriders and
training opportunities.
8
DRAFT REGIONAL OPERATING BUDGET
1998-1999
REVENUE
Membership
City Participation
County Participation
Special Events
Quarterly Luncheons
Interest Income
Miscellaneous
60,000
176,000
25,000
11,000
3,600
2,500
100
Total Revenue
$ 278,200.00
EXPENDITURES
Total Personnel Services
Total Direct Operating Expense
Total Program Expense
Total Equipment Expense
Total Expenditures
166,920.00
33,384.00
69,550.00
8,346.00
$ 278,200.00
9
MARKETING
"If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there."
The marketing plan is a written document detMling a product's marketing and
financial objectives and recommending programs and strategies for achieving
these objectives.
The four P's of marketing: · Product
· Price
· Promotion, and
· Place
may be translated for economic development purposes into: · Product
· Market, and
· Delivery
Regionally, our product is a high quality area, with strong potential for attracting
choice industries. We traditionally have had the lowest crime rates and the
highest quality secondary education schools in Riverside County. We have a
large supply of available land for industrial and commercial development.
Our workforce is relatively high skilled, educated and tr_Mnable. We are
developing our recreational and cultural resources and our citizens have a
wide range of local events to choose from. Our tourism efforts are bringing
us ever closer to being known as a destination location for the travel industry.
We are a "pro-business" region and our cities are making every effort to
attract quality businesses to the area.
The market for our region has been defined as North San Diego County,
Orange County, and Los Angeles when referring to industrial development
and manufacturing. With regard to tourism, that is a much harder scope to
define. All dries in the region have existing or planned amenities that will
draw from a large base.
l0
The key underlying assumptions that must be considered no matter what
mechanisms axe used for the delivery system are:
· Companies don't make dealsions; peopk do.
· People don't make dedsionsfir3,our.reasons. Thq make them
fir their reasons.
· Given alternatives that am approximately equal, people will
make the choices that best fad~tate their jobs.
The objective of the delivery system is: (1) to contact the people who make
decisions about company locations and facilities; (2) let them know that your
community has the resources they need to meet theix locational and operation
reqnirements and that you will facilitate theix evaluation of your community
and the eventual location of theix company there; and, (3) have them respond
to you with a positive interest.
That's about all you can hope to accomplish in the initial marketing program.
Other techniques axe used, of course, after the contact has been made and
the decision maker has expressed an interest in our community.
DRAFT MARKETING BUDGET
1998-1999
Outreach Materials
Business Development Kit
Demographic Package
Testimonial Piece
5,000
5,000
3,000
Selected Industry Outreach
Trade Show Partidpation $ 5,000
Research Specific Industries 3,000
Business Relation Committee Materials2,000
Site Selection/Target Industry Tours3,000
Business Media Outreach
Press Materials
Public Relations Program
$ 5,000
3,000
Real Estate Outreach
Outreach to Industrial/Commercial
Brokers, Developers and Lenders
3,000
Selected Advertising
Pit Ads
Advertising
$ 3,000
18,350
*Total Marketing Budget
$ 58,350
*Total is a portion of the Direct Program Expense
in the Operating Budget
0
Z
0
U
· , C::
~ 0
ANALYSIS
Conduct
Economic
Assessment
Identity
Local
Issues
Economic
Development
Corporation
~outawest
Riverside
Count~
FO~m~ON
Endion
Def'me
Goals/Objectives.
Develop
· '..~'. Strategic Actions.
Finalize
: Strategic Plan
IMPLEMENTATION
Assign Assign
Organizational Organ/zational
Responsibilities Responsibilities
Formulate
Organizational
Strategic Action Plans
Develop
Work Programs
.. EVALUATION
.. Monitor
Preview
Performance
Analyze
Impact
i REGZONAL
ECONOH;[C
i DEVELOPIv!ENT
WORKSHOP
i October 20, -1998
by
i Michael Beck
i and
3ira Spee, Ph.D.
'
,
.....
:.:::
THE EDC OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP
October 20, 1998
(Initial Wor~dng Document)
General Goals
Business Retention
Business Attraction
Growing Existing Businesses ('C-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-~dening)
Assist in the FraserraYon of ~e 'Quality of Life" of the valley through the
enhe, nc, ement of:.
1. Th~ !iv~bili~/of lhe area by making the valley the place tD live. work and
play·
2. The educational qualib/and epportunities a{ tBe K-12, community college
and un]versit), levels.
3. The preservation, crm~t;on and expansion of commun~ am.riffles
including:
a. Parks
b. Recreation
c. Preservation or a~'fcultural and equestrian facilPjes
d. Cultural
e. Hea~ Care
The Fiodl3zetbn or Konon~ development while minimizing the impacts on
the environmenL Main concerns are:
a. Air Qualib/;. and
b. The maintenance of low crime rates
I!.
IlL
General Immediate Obiectives
I~estnjcture Bo~ird of Directors 1o include key stakeholders, i.e., "Money Players"
and Insfjtufions.
Comport]on may includ'e lS(?) Members including a representative from:
a. One of three (3) school dis~cts; ~
b. One of three (3) major water districts; and
An exchange of Board seats with fie Inland Empire Economic
Pa~'tnership (IEEF).
B, Develop Work Ran with dearly defined implementation steps.
C. Develop funding mechanisms
To be set as soon as possible to develop the 'w~rk 'plan. TI~e Board restructuri~3 and
funding plans to follow.
i
REGTONAL
ECONOMTC
DEVELOPMENT
WORKSHOP
Octobe 28, i998
i:iii~'i3im Speed, Ph.D.
-
0
~ 0
r,r,f,j
REG'rONAL
ECONOM'rC
D EVE LOP Ivl E NT
WORKSHOP
November 4, 1998
Jim Spee, Ph.D.
Anunmmo3 pu~)
el~nllnD ;ms .unoff,
0 0
..a o ,,o - E~
E ~ "~ ~oEu ~
o 0
ATTACHMENT 2.
Agreement Between the City of Temecula and
the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
REGARDING
THE PROVISION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
This Agreement, made in triplicate, this 23rd day of March, 1999, by and between the CITY
OF TEMECULA, a Municipal Corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the State of California, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and the ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY, a Califomia
nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "EDC") with reference to the following facts which
are acknowledged by each party as true and correct:
RECITALS
A. The City is desirous of promoting its advantages as a business, industrial, and residential
center; disseminating information relative thereto, and of properly following up and giving
consideration to inquiries made relative to the various activities of City of Temecula ("City") and
its possibilities as such to residential, industrial, and business interests.
B. The EDC has special knowledge, experience and facilities for accomplishing economic
development activities.
C. The City now desires to retain the EDC to accomplish various economic activities and
the EDC is willing to be so retained pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDC
1.1
The EDC shall undertake, during the 1998-99 fiscal year, to carry on the EDC
activities as listed in Exhibit #1, which is attached to and made a part of this
agreement. These services include business relations, business development,
community outreach, and education programs. These duties may be adjusted from
1
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\USERPUBL\WOLN1CKG\EDCAGREEMENT.doc
1.2
time to time as agreed upon by the EDC and the City.
The EDC shall prepare and submit to the City a report of its economic development
activities, including measurements of the EDC Activities listed in Exhibit # 1, at the
end of each month.
2. PAYMENT TO EDC
2.1 In consideration of the services to be performed by the EDC for the City as set forth
in paragraph 1 hereof, the City hereby agrees to pay the EDC, the sum of $46,000. This shall be
considered a payment for services rendered from January 1, 1999 through June 30, 1999. Any
additional funding shall require a written amendment to this Agreement approved by the City
Council.
2.2 In the event the City should desire any additional services, the EDC may, upon
request of the City, fumish a proposal including, an itemized statement of the estimated cost thereof,
and the City may modify or alter the proposal, or may reject the proposal in its entirety at its sole
discretion, or may direct the submission of a new proposal which may be accepted, altered or
rejected. Upon the final approval of any such proposal and execution thereof by the EDC and the
City, as herein provided, the City will pay to the EDC the cost thereof and the EDC shall perform
the services set forth in the proposal. All money due for carrying out said plan or proposal shall be
supported by a detailed statement of the EDC showing the basis of said claims, and certified by
proper officers of the EDC.
3. INDEMNIFICATION
The EDC agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the City and its elected officials,
officers, agents, and employees free and hannless from claims for damage to persons or property by
reason of the EDC's acts or omissions or those of the EDC's employees, officers, agents or invitees
in connection with their services rendered hereunder to the maximum extent allowed by law.
4. INSURANCE
The EDC shall secure from a good and responsible company or companies doing insurance
business in the State of California, pay for and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of
this Agreement a policy of workers compensation and employers' Liability Insurance in which the
City is the named insured or is named as an additional insured with the EDC and shall fumish a
Certificate of Liability Insurance to the City Manager of the City of Temecula before execution of
this Agreement. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy or any subsequent
2
\XTEMEC FS201\DATA\USERPUBL\WOLNICKG\EDC AGREEMENT.doe
endorsement attached thereto, the protection offered by the policy shall:
4.1 Include the City as the insured or named as an additional insured covering the
services to be performed under this Agreement against all claims arising out of, or in connection
with, the Agreement.
4.2 Include the City, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of
their duties under this Agreement against all claims arising out of, or in connection with, the
Agreement. Provide the following minimum limits:
General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
C,
Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: Workers'
Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers' Liability limits of $1,000,000 per
accident.
4.3 The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers,
officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the
City.
4.4 Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided that, in the
event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever, the City of
Temecula shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, retum receipt requested, not less than
thirty (30) days before.
4.5 Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City
of Temecula. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible
or self-insured retention as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the EDC shall
procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation claim administration and
defense expenses.
5. ATTORNEY'S FEES
Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning the provisions of this
Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attomey's fees, in
addition any other relief to which it may be entitled.
3
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA\USERPUBL\WOLNICKG\EDC AGREEMENT.doc
6. TERM
This Agreement shall be effective for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1998, and terminating June
30, 1999.
6.1 This Agreement may be terminated for any reason, by either party upon thirty (30) days
written notice with any sums due and payable hereunder for services actually performed.
6.2 The EDC shall promptly fumish the City of Temecula, upon the completion of EDC's
operating year, certified copies of its annual operating statement
7. 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.
4
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\USERPUBL\WOLNICKG\EDC AGREEMENT.doe
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Temecula has caused it corporate name and seal to be
hereunto subscribed and affixed by the Mayor and attest to the City Clerk, both thereunto duly
authorized, and the EDC has hereunto subscribed this contract the day, month and year hereinabove
written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF
SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Bonnie Renz-Hanna, President
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
Phil Oberhansley, Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
5
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\USERPUBL\WOLNICKG\EDC AGREEMENT.doc
Economic Development Corporation
Southwest Riveraide County
Schedule of Benefits
City of Temecula
Business Development
Package response to leads generated from variety of sources,
Local Real Estate Brokers w/-w/o national affiliates, California
Trade and Commerce (through IEEP) and Community. There
have been 71 responses prepared from all sources in this fiscal
year to date.
Leads generated through targeted Marketing Program -
EDCSWRC. These leads will be generated through the
program being developed as part of the ongoing strategic
planning process.
Access to development of and maintenance of "Business
Analyst" Software from ESRI supporting
Demographic Profile for Southwest County Region. This project
is targeted to be part of the overall service program provided by
EDCSWRC.
Participation in trade shows representation through California
Trade and Commerce. During this fiscal year to date,
EDCSWRC has attended six major trade shows and
participated in a local Business Expo.
Business Retention
Participation in Active Business Relations Committee
conducting monthly business visitations. Committee has
conducted sixty-seven visitations via telephone or in person and
has conducted two tours of manufacturing facilities in this fiscal
year to date.
Development of and access to real estate database of all
industrial and manufacturing businesses in Southwest Riverside
County via hard copy and linkage to EDC Website. This project
is targeted to be part of the overall service program provided by
EDCSWRC.
Schedule of Benefits
Page Two
Business Retention: Continued
Business Survey - Recently received grant from Riverside
County Workforce Development Board will provide for Survey of
all businesses in Southwest Riverside County including, but not
limited to expansion plans, employee needs and training,
assistance from public resources.
Business Resource Guide - Recently received grant
from Riverside County Workforce Development Board will
provide for development and distribution of Resource Guide for
Southwestern Riverside County both in hard copy and via CD-
Rom.
Marketing and Outreach
Participation in Core 21 and CONNECT, Temecula
EDC Southwest Riverside County is a participant in both
programs whose goal is to bring high tech industry to the region
via assistance with technology transfer and venture capital
alliances.
Representation through participation with utility providers
EDISON, GTE, GAS COMPANY, EMWD, RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT. Dissemination of rate and
fee schedules and facilitation with developers is planned to be
added to EDCSWRC work tasks.
Representation with education programs and job training
opportunities conducted by universities, junior colleges and high
school academies serving Southwest Riverside County. EDC is
an advisory member of the ACCESS program developed by Mt.
San Jacinto College; EDC is working with the City in
establishing joint marketing materials with UCR and the UCR
Technology Park.
EDC is a committee representative in the recreation economic
development program now being established by MWD in
connection with the Eastside Reservoir Project.
Schedule of Benefits
Page Three
Marketing and Outreach: Continued
EDC serves in a liaison capacity with the Southwest Riverside
Manufacturer's Council and the Chambers of Commerce for the
Cities of Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake.
EDC is a participant in the development of the One Stop Career
Center being established in the City of Temecula, which will
bring together job recruitment and training entities along with
social service praticioners in Southwest Riverside County.
EDC is a sponsoring member of the first annual Career Fair
held in Southwest Riverside County that will bring together
employers and employees in the region. This event is planned
to continue on an annual basis.
· EDC publishes quarterly newsletter highlighting the Cities in
Southwest Riverside County and the activities of the EDC.
Targeted marketing program is being developed for direct mail,
internet presence and interactive media presentation for EDC of
Southwest Riverside County
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
FOR
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 9
MARCH 23, 1999
Southwest Riverside County
March 19, 1999
Mr. Jim O'Grady
Assistant City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92593
Dear Jim:
Attached is information in answer to those questions that were asked at your
subcommittee meeting earlier in the week. I hope this supplemental material will
provide the answers you seek. If not, please do not hesitate to ask for further
clarification. The EDC wants to respond to our community supporters with a
clear understanding of the services we provide.
Also enclosed is a proxy to be signed by Councilman Roberts authorizing
Councilman Comerchero to act in his place and stead at any meeting held by the
Board of Directors or the Executive Committee of the organization·
"ud~ Staats
· ecutive Director
Post Office Box 1388 · Temecula, CA 92593-1388 · Office 909/695-5130 · FAX 909/695-5126
NOTES TO OPERATING BUDGET
In December of 1998, the Board of Directors officially adopted the attached
operating budget. Treasurer, Randy Williams requested that the budget reflect
the anticipated revenue as of that date.
City Participation is reflected as:
Temecula $ 45,000.00
Murrieta $ 60,000.00
Lake Elsinore $ $ 5,000.00
Total $110,000.00
Revenue received to date, March 1, 1999:
Temecula
Murrieta
Lake Elsinore
$ 45,000.00
$ 20,000.00 - (Monthly payments of $10,000.00 are
Scheduled for March - June, 1999)
$ 5,000.00
In the first six months of the fiscal year when the regional collaboration was being
discussed, Brad Hudson, Director of the County of Riverside EDA committed that
additional funds would be given to the regional effort over and above their normal
$5,000.00 contribution. An agreement was received in late December outlining
the specific terms of the agreement between the County and the newly formed
regional EDC.
The Board of Directors of EDCSWRC approved entering into an agreement with
the County of Riverside in January of 1999 for the fiscal year 7-1-98 to 7-1-99.
The terms of the agreement provided that EDCSWRC would market the
unincorporated areas designated as: Temescal Canyon, Winchester, French
Valley, Rancho California and the Wine County, as well as the Cities of Canyon
Lake, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Temecula.
The annual compensation for the services to be rendered is $25,000.00.
That contract has not been executed and funds have not been received from the
County of Riverside.
In addition, the County of Riverside had offered to contribute $5,000.00 toward
the City of Lake Elsinore's contribution so that they could have two seats on the
Board of Directors. The County has been invoiced for the contribution but
EDCSWRC has not received payment.
EDC SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
OPERATING BUDGET
JULY 1, 1998 TO JUNE 30, 1999
REVENUE
Membership - Cash $ 54,600.00
City Participation $110,000.00
County Participation $ 833.00
Special Events $ 12,000.00
Quartedy Luncheons $ 2,000.00
Interest Income $ 175.00
Miscellaneous $ 200.00
TOTAL REVENUE
$179,808.00
EXPENDITURES
Total Personnel Services
$101,958.00
Direct Operating Expense
Advertising
Consulting Fees
insurance
Office Supplies
Maintenance Supplies
Minor Equipment
Telephone
Postage
Printing/copying/binding
Dues/memberships
Conference/training
Travel
Meals/entertainment
Rent
Intemet
Taxes & License
Miscellaneous Expenses
Total Direct Operating Expense
$ 720.00
$ 2,200.00
$ 1,924.00
$ 2,500.00
$ 100.00
$ 200.00
$ 2,688.00
$ 1,600.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 300.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 1,600.00
$ 100.00
$ 10,800.00
$ 400.00
$ 400.00
$ 200.00
$ 31,732.00
Direct Program Expense
Membership Ddve
Membership Commissions
Public Relations
Newsletter Expense
Quarterly Luncheons
Trade Show Attendance
Golf Toumament
Total Direct Program Expense
2,208.00
100. O0
2,500.00
2,000.00
200.00
6,000.00
$ 13,008.00
Equipment Expense
Equipment lease $
Service Agreement $
Software/Hardware $
Total Equipment Expense
720.00
1,174.00
4,666.00
$ 6,560.00
TOTALEXPENDITURES
$153,258.00
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES $ 26,550.00
MARKETING/OUTREACH:
Funds for the specific programs outlined in the Draft Marketing Budget (part of
the original request submitted) have not been allocated.
A one page promotional piece was designed and produced early in the year and
it was anticipated that this would serve until a complete marketing/promotional kit
could be designed. Although it was anticipated that that task would be
accomplished by now, it has not.
Discussions have been held concerning production of a video for the region,
however, with projected costs of $19,000.00 to $25,000.00 that also has been
placed on hold until funding sources can be identified.
We have continued to produce the newsletters and they have served as a buffer
until a marketing piece can be designed and funded.
We have updated the website and are in the process of developing it further and
promoting it on the World Wide Web.
In February of 1999, the Board of Directors approved the hiring of Stephen
Harding to assist in the implementation of the action plan that would be used to
promote the goals and objectives of the organization. A copy of the attachment
outlining the scope of Mr. Harding's contract is attached for your review.
ATTACHMENT "A"
The Assignment
UFI understands that The Economic Development Corporation-Southwest Riverside County, (the 'EDC')
has an adopted Mission Statement, Strategic Plan and an actual Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The
EDC has also recently broaden its scope by expanding the corporation's focus to a sub-regional level
including the Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Temecula. This new focus also includes the
unincorporated areas of Riverside County generally sun'ounding the boundaries of these three (3)
munidpalities.
It is defining and implementing this new expanded role that requires outside professional advisory services.
Specifically, the EDC is seeking assistance in implementing the activities outlined in the shod term
objectives of the Regional Economic Development Strategy and Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1998-99. It is
UFI's understanding that 'Shod Term' shall be defined to cover activities for the balance of Fiscal Year 1998-
99 and Fiscal Year 1999-00. This assignment would require UFI to act as an 'extension' of staff in the
clarification, definition and implementation of the activities referenced in the these two (2) documents.
Specifically, UFI would :~_~-~_.'st the EDC in: 1) Redefining the actual Board and Committee structure to reflect
the new sub-regional representation; and 2) Developing implementation task activities and time frames for
the Committees and staff. In addition, the EDC is requesting actual supplemental implementation services.
The Approach
GiVen that the EDC has an adopted Mission Statement, Strategic Plan and Work Plan, the focus of the
assignment is to assist the EDC in preparing the internal organization for actual implementation. UFI's
approach is to develop the policy, budgetary and organizational framework necessary to implement. UFI
is also prepared to assist in specific implementation activities on an as needed basis. As a basis for this
proposal, the EDC staff has provided UFI with the following documents to assist in defining the Scope of
Work and the Approach UFI will undertake for this assignment:
1) Draft Regional Economic Development Strategy-Fiscal Year 1998-99
2) Work Program and Work Objectives-Fiscal Year 1998-99
3) Draft Marketing Budget-Fiscal Year 1998-99
4) Pracb~al Vision Matn~ for Southwest Riverside County
5) Current Reality (Challenges) for Southwest Riverside County
6) Business Development Committee Marx
7) Oulreach/Political Action Committee Matrix
8) Tourfsm Development Committee Matrix
From this documentation, UFI will work with the EDC Board of Directors, Executive Committee and staff to
develop a prioritization of activities outlined in the above referenced documentation. The list of objectives
and specific activities to be implemented seem very aggressive given the resources available to the EDC.
Therefore, UFI would propose working with the entire organization in developing a clear set of realistic list
of activities to be accomplished over the 'Shod Term'. This list of activities will be developed with a
Schedule of Performance and a List of the Parties responsible for actual implementation. UFI will provide
technical assistance to the EDC Board, Committees and staff in the actual development of the budgetary
requirements and procedures required in the implementation of spedtic activities.
Work Tasks
Task 1:
Task 2:
Workshop No. One
UFI will conduct one (1) workshop with EDC Board and staff to discuss preparation of the
spedtic objectives and work activities to be conducted in the Shod-Term. The purpose of
the work shop will be to pdoritize the EDC's Shod-Term Work Program as it relates to the
EDC's Mission Statement and overall Goals and Objectives.
Work Shop No. Two
Given the new regional focus of the EDC, UFI will conduct one (1) workshop with the EDC
Board and staff to discuss the potential Mure operational structure of the organization. The
purpose of this exercise is to dadfy the EDC's Goals and Objectives as outlined in Work
Shop No. 1, the EDC's work program and defining the roles of the individual members, the
Committees, the Board and the EDC staff.
Task 3:
Develop EDC Short Term Objectives
--: :- _ ...... Predicated on the results of the aforementioned workshops, UFI will prepare a Shod-Term
· - : ':-*' :~ List of Objectives for EDC Board review and approval.
Task 4:
Develop EDC Short Term Work Activities List and Performance Schedule
Again, as a part of the aforementioned workshop, UFI will prepare a Short Term Work
Activities List with a Performance Schedule Crime to Complete) for EDC Board review and
approval. The responsible parties for implementation shall also be highlighted.
Task 5:
Task 6:
Task 7:
Prepare an Organizational Structure and Policies and Operations Manual
UFI will develop an Organizational Structure Plan and Polides Operations Manual for Board
review and approval. This effod would be predicated on the direction developed from the
above reference Work Shop(s).
Develop a Five Year Budgetary Program
Predicated on both the shod and long term goals and objectives of the EDC, develop a f'Ne
year programmatic budget for Board review and approval.
Supplemental Implementation Services
UFI is prepared to provide implementation services, technical assistance and training for
implementation activities on an as needed basis and at the request and direction of the
EDC. Additional work task must be authorized by the EDC pdor to commencement by UFI.
UFI will provide the EDC with a scope of work, fee estimates and time schedules applicable
to any subsequent work effod pdor to proceeding.
The above referenced 'Tasks' are proposed to be accomplished starting from the date of receiving a notice
to proceed from the EDC:
Task Number
To Be Completed W'~hin
30 days from authodzation
2
30 days from authorization
3
45 days from authorization
4
45 days from authorization
5
90 days from authorization
6 120 days from authodzation
7 As Requested
It is anticipated fiat Tasks 1-6 will be completed within 120 days from receipt of the initial authorization to
proceed by the EDC. The above referenced dates are predicated on the timeliness of the EDC in scheduling
required meetings and supplying any information required by UFI for the completion of each Task.
cosT'~)F sERVIcEs:
UFI will complete the above referenced tasks I through 6 as specified for a fixed professional services fee
of $23,280.00. Task 7 would be performed at the houdy rate of $140.00. The Professional Services fee
does not include out-of-pocket expenses such as photocopying, travel expenses and electronic data files.
As incurred, these items will be invoiced at cost, plus a 10% administrative and handling fee. All costs as
specified above would be payable on a monthly basis as incurred.
PROXY
I, Ron Roberts, a voting member of the Board of Directors of Temecula
Valley Economic Development Corporation doing business as the Economic
Development Corporation Southwest Riverside County revoke any previous
proxies and appoint Jeff Comerchero as my proxy to attend any meeting of the
Board of Directors or Executive Committee, and any adjournment of those
meetings and to vote, execute consents, and otherwise represent my
membership in the same manner and with the same effect as if I were personally
present at the meeting as to any and all matters to come before the Board of
Directors or the Executive Committee.
Date:
Ron Roberts
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
FOR
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 9
MARCH 23, 1999
Southwest Riverside County
March 19, 1999
Mr. Jim O'Grady
Assistant City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92593
Dear Jim:
Attached is information in answer to those questions that were asked at your
subcommittee meeting eadier in the week. I hope this supplemental material will
provide the answers you seek. If not, please do not hesitate to ask for further
clarification. The EDC wants to respond to our community supporters with a
clear understanding of the services we provide.
Also enclosed is a proxy to be signed by Councilman Roberts authorizing
Councilman Comerchero to act in his place and stead at any meeting held by the
Board of Directors or the Executive Committee of the organization.
ud~ Staats
.ecutive Director
R~st ()ffice Box 1388 · Temccula. CA 92593-1388 · ()ffice 909/695-5130 · FAX 909/69%-'~ 126
NOTES TO OPERATING BUDGET
In December of 1998, the Board of Directors officially adopted the attached
operating budget. Treasurer, Randy Williams requested that the budget reflect
the anticipated revenue as of that date.
City Participation is reflected as:
Temecula $ 45,000.00
Murrieta $ 60,000.00
Lake Elsinore $ $ 5,000.00
Total $110,000.00
Revenue received to date, March 1, 1999:
Temecula
Murrieta
Lake Elsinore
$ 45,000.00
$ 20,000.00 - (Monthly payments of $10,000.00 are
Scheduled for March - June, 1999)
$ 5,000.00
In the first six months of the fiscal year when the regional collaboration was being
discussed, Brad Hudson, Director of the County of Riverside EDA committed that
additional funds would be given to the regional effort over and above their normal
$5,000.00 contribution. An agreement was received in late December outlining
the specific terms of the agreement between the County and the newly formed
regional EDC.
The Board of Directors of EDCSWRC approved entering into an agreement with
the County of Riverside in January of 1999 for the fiscal year 7-1-98 to 7-1-99.
The terms of the agreement provided that EDCSWRC would market the
unincorporated areas designated as: Temescal Canyon, Winchester, French
Valley, Rancho California and the Wine County, as well as the Cities of Canyon
Lake, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Temecula.
The annual compensation for the services to be rendered is $25,000.00.
That contract has not been executed and funds have not been received from the
County of Riverside.
In addition, the County of Riverside had offered to contribute $5,000.00 toward
the City of Lake Elsinore's contribution so that they could have two seats on the
Board of Directors. The County has been invoiced for the contribution but
EDCSWRC has not received payment.
EDC SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
OPERATING BUDGET
JULY 1, 1998 TO JUNE 30, 1999
REVENUE
Membership - Cash $ 54,600.00
City Participation $110,000.00
County Pafficipation $ 833.00
Spedal Events $ 12,000.00
Quarterly Luncheons $ 2,000.00
Interest Income $ 175.00
Miscellaneous $ 200.00
TOTAL REVENUE
$179,808.00
EXPENDITURES
Total Personnel Services
$101,958.00
Direct Operating Expense
Advertising
Consulting Fees
Insurance
Office Supplies
Maintenance Supplies
Minor Equipment
Telephone
Postage
Pdnting/copyinglbinding
Dues/memberships
Conference/training
Travel
Meals/entedainment
Rent
Intemet
Taxes & License
Miscellaneous Expenses
Total Direct Operating Expense
$ 720.00
$ 2,200.00
$ 1,924.00
$ 2,500.00
$ 100.00
$ 200.00
$ 2,688.00
$ 1,600.00
$ 3,000°00
$ 300.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 1,600.00
$ 100.00
$ 10,800.00
$ 400.00
$ 400.00
$ 200.00
$ 31,732.00
Direct Program Expense
Membership Ddve $
Membership Commissions $
Public Relations $
Newsletter Expense $
Quaderty Luncheons $
Trade Show Attendance $
Golf Toumament $
Total Direct Program Expense
2,208.00
100.00
2,500.00
2,000.00
200.00
6,000.00
$ 13,008.00
Equipment Expense
Equipment lease $
Service Agreement $
Software/Hardware $
Total Equipment Expense
720.00
1,174.00
4,666.00
$ 6,560.00
TOTALEXPENDITURES
$153,258.00
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES $ 26,550.00
MARKETING/OUTREACH:
Funds for the specific programs outlined in the Draft Marketing Budget (part of
the original request submitted) have not been allocated.
A one page promotional piece was designed and produced eady in the year and
it was anticipated that this would serve until a complete marketing/promotional kit
could be designed. Although it was anticipated that that task would be
accomplished by now, it has not.
Discussions have been held concerning production of a video for the region,
however, with projected costs of $19,000.00 to $25,000.00 that also has been
placed on hold until funding sources can be identified.
We have continued to produce the newsletters and they have served as a buffer
until a marketing piece can be designed and funded.
We have updated the website and are in the process of developing it further and
promoting it on the World Wide Web.
In February of 1999, the Board of Directors approved the hiring of Stephen
Harding to assist in the implementation of the action plan that would be used to
promote the goals and objectives of the organization. A copy of the attachment
outlining the scope of Mr. Harding's contract is attached for your review.
ATTACHMENT "A"
The Assignment
UFI understands that The Economic Development Corporation-Southwest Riverside County, (the 'EDC')
has an adopted Mission Statement, Strategic Plan and an actual Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The
EDC has also recently broaden its scope by expanding the corporation's focus to a sub-regional level
including the Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Temecula. This new focus also includes the
unincorporated areas of Riverside County generally surrounding the boundaries of these three (3)
munidpalities.
Iris defining and implementing this new expanded role that requires outside professional advisory services.
Spedfically, the EDC is seeking assistance in implementing the activities outlined in the short term
objectives of the Regional Economic Development Strategy and Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1998-99. It is
UFI's understanding that 'Short Term' shall be defined to cover activities for the balance of Fiscal Year 1998-
99 and Fiscal Year 1999-00. This assignment would require UFI to act as an 'extension' of staff in the
clarification, definition and implementation of the activities referenced in the these two (2) documents.
Specifically, UFI would assist the EDC in: 1) Redefining the actual Board and Committee structure to reflect
the new sub-regional representation; and 2) Developing implementation task activities and time frames for
the Committees and staff. In addition, the EDC is requesting actual supplemental implementation services.
The Approach
Given that the EDC has an adopted Mission Statement, Strategic Plan and Work Plan, the focus of the
assignment is to assist the EDC in preparing the internal organization for actual implementation. UFI's
approach is to develop the policy, budgetary and organizational framework necessary to implement. UFI
is also prepared to assist in specffic implementation activities on an as needed basis. As a basis for this
proposal, the EDC staff has provided UFI with the following documents to assist in defining the Scope of
Work and the Approach UFI will undertake for this assignment:
1) Draft Regional Economic Development Strategy-Fiscal Year 1998-99
2) Work Program and Work Objectives-Fiscal Year 1998-99
3) Deft Marketing Budget-Fiscal Year 1998-99
4) Practical Vision Matrfx for Southwest Riverside County
5) Current Reality (Challenges) for Southwest Riverside County
6) Business Development Commfftee Matrix
7) Outreach/Political Acb~n Committee Matrix
8) Tourfsrn Development Committee Marfix
From this documentation, UFI will work with the EDC Board of Directore, Executive Committee and staff to
develop a prioritization of activities outlined in the above referenced documentation. The list of objectives
and specffic activities to be implemented seem very aggressive given the resources available to the EDC.
Therefore, UFI would propose working with the entire organization in developing a clear set of realistic list
of activities to be accomplished over the 'Short Term'. This list of activities will be developed with a
Schedule of Performance and a List of the Parties responsible for actual implementation. UFI will provide
technical assistance to the EDC Board, Committees and staff in the actual development of the budgetary
requirements and procedures required in the implementation of spedtic activities.
Work Tasks
Task 1:
Task 2:
Workshop No. One
UFI will conduct one (1) workshop with EDC Board and staff to discuss preparation of the
spedtic objectives and work activities to be conducted in the Short-Term. The purpose of
the work shop will be to pdoritize the EDC's Short-Term Work Program as it relates to the
EDC's Mission Statement and overall Goals and Objectives.
Work Shop No. Two
Given the new regional focus of the EDC, UFi will conduct one (1) workshop with the EDC
Board and staff to discuss the potential Mure operational structure of the organization. The
purpose of this exercise is to clarify the EDC's Goals and Objectives as outlined in Work
Shop No. 1, the EDC's work program and defining the roles of the individual members, the
Committees, the Board and the EDC staff.
Task 3: Develop EDC Short Term Objectives
_ .-: - ~_~ *- -- :.--~ Predicated on the results of the aforementioned workshops, UFI will prepare a Shod-Term
.... List of Objectives for EDC Board review and approval.
Task 4: Develop EDC Short Term Work AcUviUes List and Performance Schedule
Again, as a part of the aforementioned workshop, UFI will prepare a Short Term Work
Activities List with a Performance Schedule (Time to Complete) for EDC Board review and
approval. The responsible parties for implementaUon shall also be highlighted.
Task 5:
Tuk6:
Task 7:
Prepare an Organizational Structure and Policies and Operations Manual
UFI will develop an Organizational Structure Plan and Polides Oparetions Manual for Board
review and approval. This effort would be predicated on the direction developed from the
above reference Work Shop(s).
Develop a Five Year Budgetary Program
Predicated on both the shod and long term goals and objectives of the EDC, develop a five
year programmatic budget for Board review and approval.
Supplemental ImplementaUon Services
UFI is prepared to provide implementation services, technical assistance and training for
implementation activities on an as needed basis and at the request and direction of the
EDC. Additional work task must be authorized by the EDC prior to commencement by UFI.
UFI will provide the EDC with a scope of work, fee estimates and time schedules applicable
to any subsequent work effod pdor to proceeding.
Time Frame
The above referenced "i'asks' am proposed to be accomplished starting from the date of receiving a notice
to proceed from the EDC:
Task Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
To Be Completed W'rthin
30 days from authorization
30 days from authorization
45 days from authorization
45 days from authorization
90 days from authorization
120 days from authorization
As Requested
It is anticipated that Tasks 1-6 will be completed within 120 days from receipt of the initial authorization to
proceed by the EDC. The above referenced dates are predicated on the timeliness of the EDC in scheduling
required meetings and supplying any information required by UFI for the completion of each Task.
UFI will complete the above referenced tasks I through 6 as specified for a fixed professional services fee
of $23,280.00. Task 7 would be performed at the houdy rote of $140.00. The Professional Services fee
does not include out-of-pocket expenses such as photocopying, travel expenses and electronic data files.
As incurred, these items will be invoiced at cost, plus a 10% administrative and handling fee. All costs as
spedfied above would be payable on a monthly basis as incurred.
PROXY
I, Ron Roberts, a voting member of the Board of Directors of Temecula
Valley Economic Development Corporation doing business as the Economic
Development Corporation Southwest Riverside County revoke any previous
proxies and appoint Jeff Comerchero as my proxy to attend any meeting of the
Board of Directors or Executive Committee, and any adjournment of those
meetings and to vote, execute consents, and otherwise represent my
membership in the same manner and with the same effect as if I were personally
present at the meeting as to any and all matters to come before the Board of
Directors or the Executive Committee.
Date:
Ron Roberts
ITEM 10
APPROVAL
CiTY A'I'I'ORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Coundl
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24132-1 (Northerly of intersection of
Amarita Way at McCabe Drive)
PREPARED BY: ~/Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council
ACCEPT the Public Improvements, including subdivision monumentation, in Tract No. 24132-
1.
,
AUTHORIZE reduction in Faithful Performance security to the warranty amount, and initiation
of the one-year warranty period.
3. DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
BACKGROUND: On December 4, 1990, the City Coundl approved Tract Map No. 24132-
1, and entered into subdivision agreements with:
Bedford Development Co. (c/o Mesa Homes)
for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and subdivision
monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds posted by Lumbermens
Mutual Casualty Co. as follows:
Bond No. 3S 743 586 00 in the amount of $788,000 to cover faithful performance for streets and
drainage
Bond No. 3S 743 587 00 in the amount of $187,000 to cover faithful performance for water
system improvements
Bond No. 3S 743 588 00 in the amount of $199,000 to cover faithful performance for sewer
system improvements
Bonds No. 3S 743 586 00, 3S 743 587 00, and 3S 743 588 00 to cover labor and materials in
the amounts of $394,000, $93,500, and $99,500, respectively, for streets and drainage, water
system, and sewer system improvement.
r:\agdrpt\99\O323\tr241321 .acc
5. Bond No. 3S 743 593 00 in the amount of $26,000 to cover subdivision monumentation
Bedford Development Co. sold the property subsequent to recording the tract map. The new developer
for the subdivision is:
Centex Real Estate Corporation
2780 Wardlow Circle, Ste 270
Corona, CA 91720
The new developer submitted replacement agreements and securities for the contractual work which
the City Coundl accepted on September 26, 1995. The substituted securities were bonds posted by the
American Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 111 4155 1884 in the total amount of $1,174,000 ($788,000, $187,000, and $199,000,
respectively, for streets and drainage, water systems, and sewer systems) to cover faithful
performance.
Bond No. 111 4155 1884 in the total amount of $587,000 ($394,000, $93,500, and $99,500,
respectively, for streets and drainage, water systems, and sewer systems) to cover labor and
materials.
3. Bond No. 111 2727 2653 in the amount of $26,000 to cover subdivision monumentation.
Public Works Staff has inspected and reviewed the public improvements in the field. The Eastern and
Rancho California Water Districts have accepted their respective facilities. Therefore Staff recommends
acceptance of the public improvements, initiation of the one-year warranty period, and reduction in the
Faithful Performance security amount to the following ten-percent (10%) warranty amount:
Bond No. 111 4155 1884 in the amount of $117,400 ($78,800, $18,700, and $19,900 for streets
and drainage, water system, and sewer system, respectively) for Faithful Performance warranty
purposes.
The Labor and Materials security for the public improvements will be maintained for the contractual six-
month lien period which follows City Council acceptance of the public improvements.
Public Works Staff has reviewed the subdivision monumentation and finds the work satisfactory.
Therefore Public Works Staff recommends City Council authorization to release the following security:
Bond No. 111 2727 2653 in the amount of $26,000 for subdivision monumentation
The affected public streets within this development are being accepted into the City Maintained-Street
System by Resolution No. 99- at this time. The streets to be accepted are Via Alora, Via Alhama,
Camino Molnar, Calle Gerona, Corte Escobar, Calle Londe, and portions of Via Rama, Pauba Road,
Amarita Way, McCabe Drive, and Calle Marquis.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENT:
Location Map
r:\agdrpt\99\O323\tr241321 .acc
PARCEL
., L PARC:L 2.2.
P'It'O. IE~I'
VICINITY MAP
NOTTO SCALE:
TRACT NO. 24132-1
Location Map
ITEM 11
APPROVAL
CItY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24132-F ( Southwesterly corner of
intersection of Pauba Road at Meadows Parkway)
~Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
/~Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
That the City Council:
1. ACCEPT the Public Improvements, including subdivision monumentation, in Tract No.
24132-F.
AUTHORIZE reduction in Faithful Performance security to the warranty amount, and
initiation of the one-year warranty period.
DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
BACKGROUND: On December 4, 1990, the City Council approved Tract Map No.
24132-F, and entered into subdivision agreements with:
Bedford Development Co., c/o Mesa Homes
for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and
subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds posted
by Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. as follows:
Bond No. 3S 743 589 00 in the amount of $875,000 to cover streets and
drainage improvements.
Bond No. 3S 743 591 00 in the amount of $205,000 to cover water
system improvements.
Bond No. 3S 743 590 00 in the amount of $199,000 to cover sewer
system improvements.
Bonds No. 3S 743 589 00, 3S 743 592 00, and 3S 743 590 00 in the
amounts of $437,500, $102,500, and $99,500, respectively, for streets and
drainage, water system, and sewer system labor and materials.
5. Bond No. 3S 743 592 O0 in the amount of $21,700 to cover subdivision monumentation.
r:\adgrpt\99\O323\tr24132f.acc
Bedford Development Co. sold the property subsequent to recording the tract map. The
new developer for the subdivision is:
Centex Real Estate Corporation
2280 Wardlow Circle, Ste 270
Corona, CA 91720
The new developer submitted replacement agreements and securities for the contractual work,
which was accepted by the City Council on September 26, 1995. The substituted securities are
bonds posted by the American Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 111 4155 1892 in the total amount of $1,279,000 ($875,000,
$205,000, and $199,000, respectively, for streets and drainage, water system,
and sewer system) to cover faithful performance.
Bond No. 111 4155 1892 in the total amount of $639,500 ($437,500, $102,500,
and $99,500, respectively, for streets and drainage, water system, and sewer
systems) to cover labor and materials.
3. Bond No. 111 2727 2687 in the amount of $21,700 to cover subdivision monumentation.
The new developer, at a later date, requested a fifty-percent (50%) reduction in Faithful Performance
security amount in accordance with provision of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. City Staff
and the affected water districts concurred in that there was sufficient security, including ten-percent
(10%) for warranty purposes, to assure completion of the remaining work. On March 26, 1996, the
City Council authorized reduction in the Faithful Performance security to the following amount:
Bond No. 111 4155 1892 in the amount of $639,500 for Faithful Performance purposes.
Public Works Staff has inspected and reviewed the public improvements in the field. The Eastern
Municipal and Rancho California Water Districts have accepted their respective facilities. Therofore
Staff recommends acceptance of the public improvements, initiation of the one-year warranty pedod,
and reduction in the Faithful Performance security to the following ten-percent (10%) warranty
amount:
Bond No. 111 4155 1892 in the amount of $127,900 ($87,500, $20,500, and $19,900, for
streets and drainage, water system, and sewer system, respectively) for Faithful
Performance warranty purposes.
The Labor and Materials security for the public improvements will be maintained for the contractual
six-month lien period which follows City Council acceptance of the public improvements.
Public Works Staff has reviewed the subdivision monumentation and finds the work satisfactory.
Therefore Public Works Staff recommends City Council authorization to release the following
security:
Bond No. 111 2727 2687 in the amount of $21,700 for subdivision monumentation.
The affected streets within this development are being accepted in the City Maintained-Street
System by Resolution No. 99- at this time. The streets to be accepted are Camino Alagon, Via
Bonilla, Via Deanda, Code Carmona, Cala Torrente, and podions of Pauba Road, Meadows
Parkway, McCabe Drive, and Calle Marquis.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENT:
Location Map
r:\adgrpt\99\0323\tr24132f.acc
\
\
;I
f ,..,*
PRO~ECT
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
TRACT NO. 24132-F
Location Map
ITEM 12
APPROVAI'i:~~
CiTY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
Acceptance of Public Streets into the City Maintained-Street System (Within
Tracts No. 24132-1 and 24132-F) (Southwesterly corner of intersection of
Meadows Parkway at Pauba Road)
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE
CITY MAINTAINED-STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACTS NO.
24132-1 AND 24132-F)
BACKGROUND: The City Council approved Tracts No. 24132-1 and 24132-F on
December 12, 1990, and entered into Subdivision Agreements for construction of street and drainage,
and water and sewer system improvements, and subdivision monumentation with Bedford
Development Company, a California Corporation.
On March 23, 1999, the City Council accepted the public improvements for these tracts.
The public streets now being accepted by this action are:
Tract No. 24132-1: Via Alora, Via Alhama, Camino Molnar, Calle Gerona, Code Escobar, Calle
Londe, and portions of Via Rami, Pauba Road, Amarita Drive, and Calle Marquis.
Tract No. 24132-F: Camino Alagon, Via Bonilla, Via Deanda, Code Carmona, Cala Torrente, and
podions of Pauba Road, Meadows Parkway, McCabe Drive, and Calle Marquis.
FISCAL IMPACT: Periodic surface and/or structural maintenance will be required every 5 to 8
years.
ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 99- with Exhibits "A-B", inclusive.
r:\agdrpt~98\1110\tr241312 .sts
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE
CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACTS NO.
24132-1 and 24132-F)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula accepted an offer of dedication of certain
lots for street and public utility purposes made by KRDC, Inc., a California Corporation, with the
recordation of Tract Maps No. 24132-1 and 24132-F; and,
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula accepted the improvements within Tracts No 24132-1 and
24132-F on March 23, 1999.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
accepts into the City-Maintained Street System those streets or portions of streets offered to and
accepted by the City of Temecula described in Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a
regular meeting held on the 23rd day of March, 1999.
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
ATrEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
2
r:~agdrp!L98\1110~1r241312 .sts
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia, do hereby certify that Resolution
No. 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Coundl of the City of Temecula at a regular
meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of March, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES: 0
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAI N: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
r:~agdrpt\98\1110\tr241312 .sts
EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 99-
Accepting the public streets offered to and accepted by the
City of Temecula as indicated on Tract Maps No. 24132-1
and 24132-F, and accepting subject public streets into the
City-Maintained Street System as described below:
1. Those lots described as Lots "B" through "K" inclusive, as
shown on Tract Map No. 24132-1, filed 12 December 1990, in
Book 227 of Maps, Pgs 86-96 Incl., further described as follows:
Lot "A"**
Lot "B"
Lot "C"
Lot "D"
Lot "E"
Lot "F"
Lots "G" & "1"
Lot "H"
Lot "J"
Lot "K"
Lots "L" & "M"
Portion of Pauba Road
Portion of Via Rami
Portion of Amarita Way
Portion of McCabe Drive
Via Alora
Via Alhama
Camino Molnar
Cala Gerona
Corte Escobar
Calle Londe
Portions of Calle Marquis
Those lots described as Lots "B" through "H" inclusive, as
shown on Tract Map No. 24132-F, field 12 December 1990, in
Book 227 of Maps, Pgs 97-110 Incl., further described as
follows:
Lot "A"**
Lot "B"
Lot "C"
Lot "D"
Lot "E"
Lot "F"
Lot "G"
Lot "H"
Portion of Pauba Road
Portion of Meadows Parkway
Portion of McCabe Drive
Camino Alagon/Via Bonilla
Portion of Calle Marquis
Cala Torrente
Corte Carmona
Via Deanda
** Pauba Road in this reach was a part of the County-Maintained
Road System prior to incorporation and became part of the City-
Maintained Road System on December 1, 1989.
4
r:%agdrpt%98\1110\tr241312 .sts
EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 99-
SUBJECT ACCEPTANCE- PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY
MAINTAINED-STREET SYSTEM AS INDICATED BELOW:
VICINITY MAP
LEGEND
NOTE: MAPS NOT TO SCALE
STREETS OR PORTIONS OF STREETS
TO BE ACCEPTED INTO CITY
MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM
ITEM 13
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
'APPROVAL~~..
CITY A'ffORNEY
DIRECTOR Of FINAN
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manage~City Council
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
Professional Services Agreement for Overland Ddve Overcrossing, Project No.
PW95-11
PREPARED BY: Steven W. Beswick, Project Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Approve a Professional Services Agreement for Materials Testing and Inspection for Ovedand
Drive Overcrossing, Project No. PW95-11 to Kleinfelder Inc. for $81,301.00 and authorize the
Mayor to execute the contract.
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of
$8,130.10, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
BACKGROUND: The City Coundl awarded the construction contract for Overland Drive
Overcrossing, Project No. PW95-11, to C.C. Myers Inc. on December 15, 1999. The general items of
work to be completed consist of the following, construct Overland Drive between Jefferson Avenue and
Ynez Road including a bridge over Interstate Route 15, new traffic signals at Jefferson Avenue,
relocation and reconstruction of existing utilities, landscape and irrigation improvements. This project
will reduce traffic at Winchester Road and Rancho California Road Interchanges.
Kleinfelder Inc. has been selected from the City's list of geotechnical consultants that are assigned
projects on a rotational basis to perform geotechnical and materials testing services. They will perform
geotechnical and concrete field testing services, inspection and testing of paving, field/laboratory testing,
storm water pollution prevention field inspection, batch plant inspections, and preparation of a
supplemental report as described in the Scope of Work and Payment Schedule, Exhibit "A" of the
attached agreement·
Kleinfelder Inc. will work under the direction of City staff who will function as the Resident Engineer for
this project.
FISCAL IMPACT: This Project is funded with CFD 88-12, TENSTP, Capital Project Reserves,
Redevelopment Agency (RDA), and Developer Impact Fees. Adequate funds are available for this work
in Account No. 210-165-604-5801 for the following professional service agreement of $81,301.00 and
the contingency amount of $8,130.10 for a total cost of $89,431.10.
ATTACHMENT:
Professional Services Agreement:
R:\agdrpt\99\O323\pw95-11 kleinfeldersoils/ajp
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
OVERLAND DRIVE OVERCROSSING
PROJECT NO. PW95-11
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of March 23, 1999, between the City
of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kleinfelder 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 March 23, 1999, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than
March 23, 2001, 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 times 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. 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 Eighty One Thousand Three
Hundred One Dollars and No Cents ($81,301.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless
additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement.
b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection
with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such
additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall
be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City
Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the
performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten
percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed twenty five
thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by
the City Council.
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 nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give wdtten
notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the
invoice.
r:~cip~rojects~:J5~ow95-11 ~kleinfelderinspecagrmt/ajp
5. 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.
6. 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 wdtten 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 pedod of time, the City shall have the dght,
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.
7. 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 cleady 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 dght to examine and
audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall
allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement.
Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3)
years after receipt of final payment.
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 other documents prepared in the course of providing the
services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and
may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make
2
r:\cip~projects~ow95~ow95-11 ~kleinfelderinspecagrmt/ajp
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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
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 I (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.
b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
(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.
r:%cip%projects~ow95%pw95-11%kteinfelderinspecagrmUajp
(3)
Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California;
Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for
bodily injury or disease.
(4)
Professional Liability coverage: Two 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 insureds 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 pdmary 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 comply with 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.
r:~cip~projects~pw95~pw95-11 ~kleinfelderinspecagrmtJajp
f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with odginal
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.
10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. Consultant 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 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.
11. 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 by failure of
the Consultant to comply with this section.
12. 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 pdor wdtten
authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without wdtten
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
thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the dght,
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 dght to
review any such response does not imply or mean the dght by City to control, direct, or rewrite said
response.
5
r:~cip~orolects~pw95~pw95-11 ~kleinfeldednspecagrmt/ajp
13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other
party under this Agreement must be in wdting 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. 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:
To Consultant:
City of Temecula
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attention: City Manager
Kleinfelder Inc.
41743 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 101
Temecula, California 92590
Gary Goldman P.E.
14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without pdor written consent of the
City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only
Gary R. Goldman, Project Manager shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Gary
R. Goldman, may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services
under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure
of Gary R. Goldman from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant°s employ, the
City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close
of said notice period. 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.
15. 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.
16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant 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 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 Court's
judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted.
17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding
between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All pdor
or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or wdtten,
are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into
6
r:~cip~projects~pw95~ow95-11 ~kleinfelderinspecagrmtJajp
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.
18. 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.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Shawn D. Nelson, Acting City Manager
Attest:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Kleinfelder Inc.
41743 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 101
Temecula, CA 92590
(909) 506-1488
BY:~Mi(ch~'ael/:.~es;er, Area Manager
By: ~t~
Name: Er Sf
Print
Title: /~,5'h,~nc/r-AfP~ Jl{~,-:;L2ek
(Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations)
r: ~cip~orojects~pw95~pw95-11 ~kleinfeldednspecagrmt/ajp
EXHIBIT A
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
r:%cip~projects%pw95%pw<J5-11%kleinfeldednspecagrmt/ajp
Kq KLEINFELDER
February 5, 1999
Proposal No. 51 -YP9321
City Clerk's Office
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive, P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Subject:
Geoteehnical and Laboratory Materlab Testing Services
Overland Drive Overcrossing, Project No. PW95-11
Temeeuia, California
Dear City Clerk:
Kleinfelder is pleased to submit the attached Statement of Qualifications to provide gentechnical and
laboratory materials testing services for the Overland Drive Overcrossing project. Our submittal has been
prepared in response to Request for Qualifications No. 72, dated January 28, 1999.
Kleinfelder is an engineering consulting firm specializing in air, earth, and water sciences. We are a leader
in these fields, as evidenced by our ranking in the Top 100 in Engineering News Records' survey of the
· 'Top Engineering and Environmental Firms" in the nation. Since 1961, Kleinfelder has been providing
geotechnical, construction, materials testing and environmental services to both the public and private
sectors. We currently employ over 900 employees and have 40 offices located throughout the western
United States and Mexico. Services for this project would be performed by our Temecula faciliP.;, with
support from our Redlands and San Diego offices/laboratories.
Kleinfelder is currently or has recently completed design and construction services directly for Caltrans in
Distrim 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 59. Through these projects, as well as many hundreds for
cities and counties, our personnel are well versed in Caltrans procedures, doetunentation, plans and
specifications, including the latest metric standards and guidelines. Local projects requiting Calmms
oversight have been performed for the Riverside CounO, Transportation Department. San Bernardino
County Transportation and Flood Control Department, SANBAG, Transportation Corridor Agency
(TCA), Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and Orange County Public Facilities and
Resources Department, and numerous local agencies and municipalities.
Please call if you require any further-information, at (909) 506-1488. We appreciate the opportunity to
submit our qualifications and look forward to the prospect of working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
KLEINFELDER, INC.
Allen D. Evans, PE, GE
Senior Engineer/Quality Assurance
51 -Ylx)321/5819P028 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc.
KLEINFELDER 41743 EnterOrise Circle North, Suite 101, Temeculo. CA 92590 (909) 506-1488 {909) 506-1491 fax
RRKLEINFELDER
1. PROJECT L:NDERSTANDINGT~tVORK TO BE PERFOR~!ED
I
~ I. 1 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
I.
Our understanding of the proposed project is based on the information provided within the Request
for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 72, dated January 28, 1999, which included project plans and
specifications. We have also discussed the project with the bridge design team to further develop our
understanding of the proposed construction.
The Overland Drive Overcrossing Improvement Project (Project No. PW 95-11) will commence west
of Jefferson Avenue, cross Interstate 15 (I-15) and te,minate at Ynez Road. The project is to consist
of roadway and bridge constnmtion, including any retaining strucURes. Mass grading for the bridge
abutments is proposed, including utility improvements such as storm drain, sanitary sewer and
irrigation for landscaping.
We anticipate that the project may be partially funded with state and/or federal funds. Therefore, for
the purpose of this proposal, we have based our project approach on the requirements of
Chapter 16.14 of the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual and the Caltrans Quality
Assurance Program (QAP) outlined therein.
If the City of Temecula does not adopt the Caltrans QAP, we recommend that it adopt its own QAP
including ac~:eptance testing, independent assurance sampling and testing, and testing of
manufactured materials, according to the Lo~al Assistance Procedures Manual. Kleinfelder can
assist the City within development of its own QAP if requested; however this task is not included in
the following scope of work.
DET4 ILED LIST OF J[DRK TO BE PERFOR,tIED
As outlined in the RFQ, Kleinfelder is capable of providing the following services listed, if
necessary.
· Review of project plans and specifications with emphasis on geotechnical and
materials testing services
Pre-construction meeting attendance
Observation and field testing services, available 24 hours a day
Observation and field testing services during all phases of site grading
Field observation and testing during trench and backfilling operations
Field density testing during subgrade and base compaction
Field testing of cement-treated base and asphalt concrete
51-YP9321/5819P028
Copy~ght 1999 Kleinfeider, Inc.
1-1
laboratory
RRKLEINFELI) ER
· . Laboratory tests to support field services and to satisfy Calm and other regulatory agency
requirements
· Preparation of field and final compaction reports
· "R" value testing
· Pile driving observation/inspection/documentation
· Batch plant inspections
· Footing trench excavation observation and testing
· Utility trench backfill observation and testing
· Retaining wall footing, drainage, and backfill observation and testing
· Concrete flat work including pre-soaking observation and probing
· Curb, gutter and sidewalk observation and testing
· Street subgrade, base and asphalt testing
· Concrete, grout, and shotcrete inspection and compressive strength testing
· Retaining wall inspection services
· Inspection and documentation of reinforcing steel
· Consulting services requiring corrective and/or remedial recommendations
· Follow typical Caltrans Quality Assurance Manual guidelines
· Quality control review
· Prepare field and final reports for all of the above services
51 -YP9321/5819P028
Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder. Inc.
RRKLEINFELDER
6. PROPOSED A PPROA CH
6. 1 PROJECT,4PPROA CH AND SCOPE OF WORK (ACCEPTANCE TESTING}
Kleinfelder's approach to the project will generally consist of providing experience& qualified
technicians to provide acceptance testing as an extension of the City's staff. The following scope
does not include Initial Samples and Tests or Sottree Inspection. For the purpose of this proposal we
have assumed that most materials to be used in the work are being used currently or have been used
recently on Calltans administered projects and that these services will not be necessary. If materials
are identified which require Initial Tests of Source ln~z'ction, we will notify the City immediately.
Became a construction schedule was not provided within the RFQ, it is difficult at this time to
provide the corresponding man-hours for personnel assigned to each task. However, Kleinfelder will
provide this information at such time that a construction schedule is provided.
6. 1.1 Field Observation, Sampling and. Testing
We will assign a senior technician, James Westerman, to the project with overall responsibility for
coordinating acceptance sampling and testing. His responsibilities will include field observation,
field testing, and sampling of construction materials. Mr. Westerman will be assigned a portable
phone to readily coordinate laboratory testing with our Redlands laboratory and to coordinate
fielding staling requirements with the City on a daily basis. Routine laboratory soil and concrete
testing will be performed in our Redlands laboratory. Mr. Westerman is experienced with and
certified by Caltrans for most of the field testing and sampling anticipated (Certificate of Proficiency
for an Acceptance Tester, MR-0111). Additional qualified field technicians will assist
Mr. Westerman, as necessary.
Daily field reports will be completed by each of our field personnel and given to the on-site City
representative along with results of field tests performed. Prior to the project we will decide with the
City the types of field documentation to be used. Our personnel are familiar with and can utilize
Caltrans forms and filing system, if desired. Mr. Westerman can assist the Resident Engineer with
maintaining a material and testing "Stanmary Log" as required by the Caltrans QAP.
Our field personnel will observe the placement of trench bedding and backfill materials. Density
testing will be performed at selected depth intervals. Samples will be obtained for laboratory testing.
Our personnel will observe the placement of embankment fill to assess that it is placed in lifts of
appropriate thickness, suitable moisture and compaction. Nuclear density tests will be performed in
accordance with Caltrans standard test methods. Nuclear gauges will be used which have been
calibrated on Caltrans Standard density blocks. Nuclear density tests will also be performed on
prepared subgrade and aggregate base materials.
51 -YP9321/5819P028 6.- 1
Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder. Inc. ~
RRKLEINFELDER
During placement of asphalt concrete we will check the temperature of the material upon arrival,
check the lilt thickness and observe the rolling pattern. Samples will be obtained periodically for
laboratory testing. Density testing of the asphalt concrete will be performed using a nuclear density
gauge. Batch plant inspection will be performed concurrently with the field laydown inspection.
Core samples of the asphalt concrete will be obtained, if requested.
Portland cement concrete will be sampled in accordance with the project requirements. 6" x 12"
compressive strength cylinders will be cast. 6" x 6" beams will be cast during concrete paving.
i
~ 6. 1.2. Laboratory Testing
k
Other laboratory testing, including asphalt concrete and aggregate quality testing will be performed
in our Redlands laboratory under the direction of Mr. Ruben Roque, and in our San Diego laboratory
by Mr. Phil Harris. Our laboratories routinely perform all of the testing required for this project and
meets all laboratory requirements outlined in Chapter 16.14 of the Local Assistance Procedures
Manual. Our laboratory personnel are experienced with and certified by Caltrans to perform the
required testing. A mobile laboratory can be set up at the project site, if desired.
The following laboratory tests are anticipated based on our experience, Chapter 8 of the Caltrans
Construction Manual and Exhibit 16-R of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual.
Soil (includes bedding material)
· Sieve Analysis (CAL 202)
· Maximum Density (CAL 216)
· Sand Equivalent (CAL 217)
· R-Value (CAL 301)
Asphalt Concrete
· Asphalt Content (CAL 382)
· Sieve Analysis (CAL 202)
· Sand Equivalent (CAL 217)
· Swell (CAL 305)
· Moisture Vapor Susceptibility (CAL 307)
· Stabilometer (CAL 366)
I i12 technical Management
Aggregate Base
· Sieve Analysis (CAL 202)
· Percent Crushed Particles (CAL 205)
· Maximum Density (CAL 216)
· Durability Index (CAL 229)
· R-Value (CAL 301)
Portland Cement Concrete
· Sieve Analysis (CAL 202)
· Sand Equivalent (CAL 217)
· Moisture Content (CAL 226)
· Cleanness Value (CAL 227)
· Flexural Strength (CAL 523)
· Compression (CAL 521)
Technical management for this contract will be the responsibility of our project manager, 34r. Gary
Goldman, who is located in our Temecula facility. He is a California registered Professional
Engineer and all testing services will be performed under his responsible charge. 34r. Rick Bell,
Kleinfelder's Redlands supervisory technician, will assist Mr. Goldman.
This task will include routine periodic review of test procedures and test results. Construction
procedures and the progress of the contractor with respect to achieving the project requirements will
be reviewed on an as-needed basis. On-call consulting will be provided during construction as issues
51 -YP9321/5819P028 6.2
Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc. ~
w KLEINFELDER
arise that deal with testing and performance of construction materials. Portland cement concrete and
asphalt concrete mix designs may also be reviewed for conformance to project requirements as pan
of this task.
This task also includes attendance at construction meetings and the preparation of miscellaneous
correspondence required during the course of the project.
['6. L4 repOrtPrepatltion " '
Formal typewritten test formats are not typically required for Quality Assurance Programs
administered by CalWans. Rather, all test records are usually incorporated into the Resident
En~neer's project file, organized as described in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual and the
Construction Manual.
Formal typewritten reports, if desired by the City, will contain the following information:
· Description of the consU'uction work observed and tested
· Summary of the field sampling and testing procedures used.
· Tabulated summary of field test data.
· Tabulated summary of laboratory test dam.
· Our opinion regarding the contractor's compliance with the project plans and specifications
from a geotechnical and materials standpoint.
A single, comprehensive report can be prepared at the completion of the project or intermittent
reports can be prepared as the work progresses. All reports will be prepared under the direction of
the project manager or other registered engineer and senior member of our firm.
6.2
PROJECT (2U4LITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ([NDEPENDENT.dSSURANCE SA3,IPLING & TESTI,%G}
An additional advantage to selecting Kleinfelder is that the City may not need to make additional
arrangements to provide Independent Assurance Sampling and Testing as required by the Caltrans
Local Assistance Procedures Manual and Quality Assurance Manual. Because of the testing we are
ct~rently performing on other projects under Caltrans oversight our laboratory is certified to perform
virtually all of the testing that will be required for the subject project. We can provide
documentation that all equipment to be used on the project meets Caltrans Quality Assurance
Program requirements. Also, nearly all of our technicians possess a current "Certificate of
Proficiency for an Acceptance Tester", for most every type of test that will be required. Our certified
technicians are routinely recertified in accordance with the minimum frequencies outlined in Table 1
of the Caltrans Quality Assurance Program Manual. Certificates for a number of our technicians are
included in Appendix A.
Lastly, because several of our technicians will be working on other Calm-related projects during
the same time period as the subject project, split-sample testing using the equipment to be assigned to
this project will very likely be current and no project-specific split-sample testing will be necessary.
We will be able to provide documentation that can be incorporated into the project file to show that
each sampler and/or tester has been performing the job correctly, and that the testing equipment is in
proper working order.
51 -YP9321/5819P028 6-.3
Copyright 1999 Kleinfeider, inc.
m KLEINFELDER
BILLI/VG RATE SCtfEDULE
Professional Starf Rates
Principal EnSineer ...................................................................................................................$
ProjeCt Manager ......................................................................................................................$
Project Engin~-r ......................................................................................................................$
Sup~sory Technician ...........................................................................................................$
DraRspt~son ............................................................................................................................$
Administrative ........................................................................................................................$
Technician ..............................................................................................................................$
4- and 8-hour minimum charges will be incited for all field services requested.
140.00/hour
115.00/hour
105.00/hour
79.00/hour
58.00/hour
52.00Paour
49.00/hour
Laboratory Testin9
Soil
Sieve Analysis (CAL 202) ......................................................................................................$
Maximum Density (CAL 216) ................................................................................................$
Sand Equivalent (CAL 217) ....................................................................................................$
R-Value (CAL 301) ................................................................................................................$
Sieve Analysis (CAL 202) ......................................................................................................$
Percent Crushed Particles (CAL 205) ......................................................................................$
Maximum Density (CAL 216) ................................................................................................$
Durability Index (CAL 229) ....................................................................................................$
R-Value (CAL 301) ................................................................................................................$
Asphaltic Concrete
Asphalt Content (CAL 382) ....................................................................................................$
Sieve Analysis (CAL 202) ......................................................................................................$
Sand Cylinders (CAL 217) ......................................................................................................$
Swell (CAL 305) .....................................................................................................................$
Moisture Vapor Susceptibility (CAL 307) ...............................................................................$
Stabilometer (CAL 306) ..........................................................................................................$
Portland Cement Concrete
Sieve Analysis (CAL 202) ......................................................................................................$
Sand Equivalent (CAL 217) ....................................................................................................$
Moisture Content (CAL 226) ..................................................................................................$
Cleanness Value (CAL 227) ....................................................................................................$
F|exural Strength (CAL 523) ...................................................................................................$
Compression (CAL 521 ) .........................................................................................................$
116.00
147.00
89.00
220.00
116.00
131.00
147.00
105.00
220.00
132.00
116.00
89.00
I05.00
210.00
195.00
116.00
89.00
21.00
131.00
90.00
23.00
7-1
51-YP9321/5819P028
CopyfiSht 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc.
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE
r:~cip~projects~pw95~pw95-11 ~kleinfelderinspecagrmtJajp
TESTING & INSPECTIONS
ESTIMATED BUDGET
Overland Drive Overcrossing at Intentate Route 15
Temecula, California
Project No. 51-5160-01
March 10, 1999
GEOTECHNICAL FIELD SERVICES
Soils Technician
150 hours @ $50/hour
CONCRETE FIELD SERVICES
Inspector/Technician
250 hours @ $50/hour
LABORATORY SERVICES
Maximum Density (CAL 216)
Sieve Analysis (CAL 202)
Sand Equivalem (CAL 217)
Durability (CAL 229)
R-Value (CAL 301)
Cleanness (CAL 227)
Soundness (CAL 214)
Specific Gravity (CAL 206 & 207)
Stabilometer (CAL 306)
LA Rattler (CAL 211)
Asphalt Content (CAL 382)
Compression Strength of Concrete Cylinders
8 each @ $147 each
120 each @ $116 each
120 each @ $89 each
3 each @ $105 each
8 each @ $220 each
10 each @ $131 each
5 each @ $89 each
5 each @ $74 each
5 each @ $195 each
5 each @ $142 each
18 each @ $132 each
210 each @ $16 each
RECE!VED
MAR 1_. 0 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
$ 7,500
$12,500
Subtotal:
$ 1,176
13,920
10,680
315
1,760
1,310
445
370
975
710
2,376
$ 3.360
$ 37,397
PROJECT SUPERVISION & COORDINATION
Supervisory Technician
Project Engineer
35 hours ~ $80/hour
35 hours @ $106/hour
Subtotal:
$ 2,800
3,710
$6,510
TOTAL:
$63,907
Propoul No. 51-YP9321
Cop)~ght 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc. - All Rights Reserved
OPTIONAL SERVICES
ESTIMATED BUDGET
Overland Drive Overcrossing at Interstate Route 15
Temecula, California
Project No. 51-5160
March 10, 1999
RECEIVE5
MAR 10 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEFARTMENT
BATCH PLANT INSPECTIONS
Inspector/Technician
250 hours @ $50/hour
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
Environmemal Engineer (SWPPP Review) 8 hours @ $106/hour
Technician (water sample at beginning of storm) 8 hours @ $50/hour
Technician (water sample at end of storm) 8 hours ~ $50/hour
Laboratory Analysis 6 water samples @ $200each
PROJECT SUPERVISION & COORDINATION
Supervisory Technician
Project Engineer
11 hours @ $80/hour
11 hours @ $106/hour
Subtotal:
Subtotal:
$12,500
$ 848
$ 400
$ 400
$1.200
$2,848
$ 880
$ 1.166
$ 2,046
TOTAL:
GRAND TOTAL:
$17.394
$81,301
Proposal No. 51-YP9321
Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder, Inc. - All RighLs Reserved
ITEM 14
CITY MANAGER
TO,'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
Shawn D. Nelson, Acting City Manager
March 23, 1999
Acceptance of Easement for Access and Maintenance of Irrigation
Facilities for Landscaped Median within Margarita Road - Lucky's
Shopping Center at Highway 79 South.
PREPARED BY:
Beryl Yasinosky, Development Services Analyst
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT FOR
PURPOSES OF ACCESSING AND MAINTAINING CERTAIN
IRRIGATION FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN PARCELS 4 AND 5
OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28384
2. Authorize the City Clerk to record the easement document.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the conditions of approval for Parcel Map No. 28384,
the developer of the Lucky's Center has completed the construction of a landscaped center
median within Margarita Road, located northwesterly of Highway 79 South. The improvements
have been installed to the satisfaction of the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and
acceptance of the median into the citywide maintenance program is anticipated within the next
30 days.
However, the physical constraints of the median design have necessitated that the water meter,
back flow device, flow sensor and master valve are located within the adjacent landscaped
parkway, currently owned and maintained by the commercial developer. In order for the City
to legally access this irrigation equipment for maintenance purposes, the property owner has
granted the City an easement within their landscaped parkway. The acceptance of said
easement offer does not include or imply any City or TCSD responsibility for landscape
maintenance within the easement area.
r.\yainobk~lv~ky~99 3123199
FISCAL IMPACT: No additional costs are associated with the acceptance of the easement
document. Landscape maintenance and utility costs for the center median were included within
the Service Level A operating budget for Fiscal Year 1998-99.
ATTACHMENTS: 1.
2.
Resolution to Accept Access and Maintenance Easement.
Copy of easement deed from Pacific/Costanzo-Temecula.
3123199
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT FOR
PURPOSES OF ACCESSING AND MAINTAINING CERTAIN
IRRIGATION FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN PARCELS 4 AND 5 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 28384.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council does hereby find and determine as follows:
A. The TCSD Maintenance Supervisor has accepted the landscaped
median improvements within Margarita Road at Highway 79 South as complete, pursuant to
the conditions of approval for Parcel Map No. 28384; and,
B. Pacific/Costanzo - Temecula, a California General Partnership, has
provided the City of Temecula with an easement document for access and maintenance of
irrigation facilities servicing said landscaped median within parcels 4 and 5 of Parcel Map No.
28384; and,
C. The City Council is the authorized legislative body to accept the
easement dedication for access and maintenance of said irrigation facilities within the City of
Temecula.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby accepts the easement
from Pacific/Costanzo - Temecula,as follows:
A. The City Council accepts the offer of said easement from
Pacific/Costanzo - Temecula, over that area more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and "B"
and attached hereto and incorporated into this resolution by reference.
B. That the acceptance of this easement is not intended to create or
vest any fee simple interest in favor of the City of Temecula or the Temecula Community
Services District as to the commercial parkway and maintenance of the landscaped areas, but
solely for the express purpose of accepting a perpetual easement and right-of-way for
accessing, maintaining, operating, repairing, and replacing irrigation equipment within the
boundaries of that certain real property as identified in Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a
regular meeting held on the 23rd of March, 1999.
r.\yaeiaobi.~luclcyeee~at.99 3123199
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23d day of March, 1999, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
r:.\ymim~lcXlu~kTmmemmt.99 3f23/99
Escrow No.
Loan No.
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO:
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ .................................................
...... Computed on the consideration or value of ~operty convey~l: OR
...... Computed on the consideration or value less liens or enc~mb~nme~s
remaining at time of sale.
Signature of DeeInfant or Agent determining tax - Firm Name
EASEMENT DEED
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
PAC1FIC/COSTANZO - TEMECULA, a California General Partnership
hereby GRANT(S) to the CITYOF TEMECULA. an easement for irrigation purposes over
the real property in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside State of California, described as
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto for description.
See Exhibit "B" attached hereto for plat.
Dated
PACIFIC/COSTANZ0 - TEMECULA,
a California general partnership
By: ~a~o~l~e~lG~n~;hip
By: ~ ~ ~ '
} Dennis M. Berryma Tr
STATEOFCALIFORNIA }~. of the Be Trust
COUNTY OF Orange } By:
On aanuar~ 4 1999 before me, ~ K
, of the Arn ~. Youngman Trust
~Tulie Ann ~..dmj .~i-nn
rsonal.lyap. ared D nn' M. Berryman, ~tan~o~
~7~mes R. ~o~l~anzo By:
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s)
is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s)
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
an an o cia ..
(This area for official notarial seal.)
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400
Temecula, CA 92591
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
Easement for Access and Maintenance of
Irrigation Facilities in the Lucky's Shopping Center
June 4, 1998
J.N. 401120-M3
Page 1 of 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of
California, being those portions of Parcels 4 and 5 of Parcel Map No. 28384 filed in Book 190,
Pages 43 through 45 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside
County, described as follows:
BEGINNING at a the southwest corner of said Parcel 4, said point also being on the easterly
right of way line of Margarita Road as shown on said Parcel Map;
thence along the southerly line of said Parcel 4 North 73023'20" East 20.81 feet;
thence North 16°36'40" West 24.50 feet;
thence South 73023'20" West 37.19 feet to the easterly right of way line of said Margarita
Road;
thence along said right of way line through the following courses: South 16 °56'06" East 5.06
feet;
thence South 61 °46'2Y East 5.59 feet;
thence South 16036'40" East 5.50 feet;
thence North 73023'20" East 12.38 feet;
Exhibit "A"
Easement for Access and Maintenance of
Irrigation Facilities in the Lucky's Shopping Center
June 4, 1998
J.N. 401120-M3
Page 2 of 2
thence South 16 °36'40" East 10.00 feet to POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0,017 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all covenants, fights, fights-of-way and easements of record.
EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
This description was prepared by
me or under my direction.
R~he, P.L.S. 6185
My license expires 3/31/02.
R/W
EXHIBIT "B"
EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND
MAINTENANCE OF IRRIGATION
FACILITIES IN THE LUCKY'S
SHOPPING CENTER
JUNE 4, 1998 1"=30'
SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
FIELD BOOK ] JOB NO.
401120-M3
X
W
/
(..D
/
,~-
/
t3
/
LO
/
3O
6O
9O
GRAPHIC SCALE
(C/L
J~,
O
\
DARTOLO
ROAD
z
o
O
EXHIBIT "B"
EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND
MAINTENANCE OF ]RRIGATION
FACILITIES IN THE LUCKY'S
SHOPPING CENTER
I SCALE
JUNE 4, 1998 1"=30'
55.00'
55.00'
DATA TABLE
~) BRNG/DELTA RADIUS LENGTH
1 N73"23'20"E -- 20.81'
2 N16"36'40"W -- 24.50'
3 S73"23"20"W -- 37.19'
4 S16"56'06"E -- 5.06'
5 S61"46"23"E -- 5.59'
6 S16°36'40"E -- 5.50'
7 N73"23'20"E -- 12.38"
8 S16"36'40"E -- 10.00'
R/W
R/W
SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET
0
0
X
W
0
O_
x
W
r~
0
Robert Be~n, ifill~am Frost & Associates
n,,
FIELD BOOK I JOI] NO.
401120-U3
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
ITEM I
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
FEBRUARY 18, 1999
An adjourned regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order
at 7:41 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
President Comerchero presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 5
DIRECTORS:
Ford, Lindemans, Roberrs,
Stone, and Comerchero.
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None.
Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No input.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of February 9, 1999.
MOTION: Director Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was
seconded by Director Ford and voice vote reflected Unanimous approval.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
No comments.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
No comments.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
Director Lindemans advised that he and Director Stone had visited Cathedral City to view the
Sports Park. He presented to staff copies of a videotape and slides with regard to this Sports Park
and requested that this material be reviewed by staff.
President Comerchero noted that once staff has reviewed this information, the matter should be
agendized for a future meeting at which time a subcommittee could be formed.
Minutes CSD\020999 1
In response to Director Lindemans, President Comerchero requested that the Development Impact
Fee Study be agendized for the February 23, 1999, City Council meeting.
Director Stone requested that a resolution with regard to the abolishment of booking fees be
agendized for the March 2, 1999, City Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:47 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday,
February 23, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California.
Jeff Comerchero, President
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
Minutes CSD\020999 2
ITEM
2
APPROVAL ~/~
CItY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN
GENERAL MANAGER
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
General Manager/Board of Directors
Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
March 23, 1999
SUBJECT:
Award of Construction Contract for the Tennis Court Lighting at Temecula
Valley High School, Project PW98-10CSD
PREPARED BY: AJ~'/';~c'Ftt Harvey,
S Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors:
Award a construction contract for the Tennis Court Lighting at Temecula Valley High School,
Project PW98-10CSD to Mega Electric Company in amount of $122,038.75 and authorize
the Mayor to execute the contract.
o
Authorize the City Manger to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount
of $12,203.88, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
BACKGROUND: On July 14, 1998 the Board of Directors approved an agreement
between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Unified School Distdct (TVUSD) for joint use
of the tennis courts and the Temecula Valley High School. Also, the Board authorized staff to
proceed with construction documents and publicly bid the project.
This project will provide a lighting system for both the upper and lower tennis courts at the Temecula
Valley High School along with some repairs to the existing drain in-let, irrigation system, and planter.
This project will install a rolling gate and restripe a small portion of the parking lot, install concrete
curb and a remove and replace the existing windscreen, which is on the outside fencing.
Seven (7) bids were publicly opened on February 25, 1999, and the results for the bid are as follows:
1. Mega Electric Company $122,038.75
2. Big O. Enterprises, Inc. $138,230.00
3. Ken Curran Electric, Inc. $152,839.96
4. High Light Electric, Inc. $159,619.00
5. Mel Smith Electric, Inc. $159,860.00
6. Stronghold Electric $167,100.00
7. D & J Foothill Electrical Contractor, Inc. $170,483.40
Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found Mega Electric Company to be the lowest responsible
bidder for this project. Mega Electric Company has satisfactory completed other project for other
public agencies and/or school districts in the past.
r:\agdrp~O32399\pw98-10csd.awd
The specifications allow Twenty (20) working days for the completion of this project. Work could
begin on May 25, if contractor elects to work at night, otherwise the contractor is expected to begin
the week of June 25.
A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT: This project is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Development
Impact Fees - Parks & Recreation funds. These funds have been appropriated in Account No. 210-
190-155-5804 for the construction contract of $122,038.75 and the contingency amount of 12,203.88
for a total contract amount of $134,242.63.
ATTACHMENT:
Contract
r:\agdrptO32399\pw98-10csd.awd
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
CITY OF TEMECULA,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
PROJECT NO. PW98-10
TENNIS COURT LIGHTING AT TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 23rd day of March, 1999,by and between the
Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation,
hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT", and Mega Electrical Company, hereinafter refen'ed to
as "CONTRACTOR."
WITNESSETH:
That DISTRICT and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually
agree as follows:
1.a.
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract
Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance
Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO.
PW98-10, TENNIS COURT LIGHTING AT TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL,
Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State
of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where
specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version
of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements
as wdtten and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern
California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of Califomia
(hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications,
Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW98-10, TENNIS
COURT LIGHTING AT TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL. Copies of these
Standard Specifications are available from the publisher:
Building New, Incorporated
3055 Overland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90034
(213) 202-7775
The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials,
and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General
Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO.
PW98-10, TENNIS COURT LIGHTING AT TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL.
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. Unless otherwise
specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and
incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract.
CONTRACT CA-1 contractCSD
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.
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. PW98-10, TENNIS COURT LIGHTING AT TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH
SCHOOL
All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in stdct
accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract
Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by DISTRICT.
DISTRICT 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 DISTRICT or its authorized representatives.
CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHDULE. The DISTRICT agrees to pay, and
CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the
sum of: ONE HUNDRED TWENTY TWO THOUSAND and THIRTY EIGHT DOLLARS
and SEVENTY FIVE CENTS ($122,038.75), the total amount of the base bid.
CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed TWENTY (20)
working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by DISTRICT.
Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by DISTRICT.
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 wdtten order,
changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as
established by the City Council.
PAYMENTS
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 DISTRICT, the CONTRACTOR
shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work
completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be
submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the
work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof
unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment
and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final
Release with the DISTRICT on forms provided by the DISTRICT.
Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law,
accompanied by a certificate signed by the General 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
CONTRACT CA-2 contractCSD
the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be
considered as an acceptance of any part of the work.
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.
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.
WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is
recorded, the DISTRICT shall retain a portion of the Contract award pdce, to assure
warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the
following schedule:
CONTRACT AMOUNT
$25,000 0 $75,000
RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE
180 days 3%
$75,00- $500,000
180 days
$2,250 + 2% ofamountin
excess of $75,000
Over$500,000
One Year
$10,750 + 1% of amount
in excess of $500,000
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government
Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to DISTRICT 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 DISTRICT.
CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify DISTRICT of any such delay.
WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph
6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to DISTRICT, 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 DISTRICT related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be
required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for
payment.
10.
PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of
the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per
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 on file with the City
Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula.
C ON T RA C f CA-3 contractCS D
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
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.
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.
TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract.
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 DISTRICT,
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 DISTRICT.
The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the DISTRICT
for any and all costs incurred by the DISTRICT as a result of Stop Notices filed against
the project. The DISTRICT shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final
payments due to the DISTRICT.
GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents,
or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to DISTRICT's
employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or
securing favorable treatment with respect thereto.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or mardage
relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any District 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 DISTRICT within one year of the date of the Notice
Inviting Bids.
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this
Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the General 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.
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.
~ :jl,~ T RAC T CA-4 contractCSD
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22
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.
INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its
authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and
places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers.
CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and
convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner
as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and
acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final
inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work.
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.
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 distdct
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.
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.
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:
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590-3606
C ON T RAC T CA-5 contractCSD
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the
date first above written.
DATED:
CONTRACTOR
Mega Electric Company
Pierre Sand
4'17 W. Foothill Blvd., B-265
Glendora, CA 9'174'1
(626) 335-5118
By:
Print or type NAME
DATED:
Print or type TITLE
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
CONTRACT CA-6 contraclCSD
ITEM
3
APPRO~~-
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANC
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
FROM:
DATE:
Board of Directors
~Herman D. Parker, Director
March 23, 1999
of Community Services
SUBJECT:
Authorization to bid and determination of Categorical Exemption
for the Construction of a half-court basketball court and related
appurtenances at Butterfield Stage Park
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
)Todd Holmes, Development Services Administrator
That the Board of Directors:
Determine that the construction of a half-court basketball court and related
appurtenances at Butterfield Stage Park is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section
15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines·
Authorize the filing of a Notice of Exemption, with the appropriate filing fee, for the
project with the County Clerk of Records Office.
e
Authorize the preparation of construction documents and release of a formal public bid
for the construction of a half-court basketball court and related appurtenances at
Butterfield Stage Park·
DISCUSSION: The Community Services Department received a petition in 1997
requesting that a half court basketball court be installed at Butterfield Stage Park. Staff
evaluated the request and determined that this improvement would be an appropriate addition
to the park.
Due to continued demand for the improvements, staff is recommending that the construction
of the court proceed during the current Fiscal Year· The proposed improvements will consist
of one concrete half court basketball court, a small amount of adjacent concrete paving, minor
grading, modifications to the irrigation system and landscape repair. The court will not be lit
for night use and it is intended for informal rather than organized play· The estimated cost of
construction will be approximately $24,000.
The project qualifies for a categorical exemption from CEQA as a minor alteration to an existing
land use according to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. As a result, staff recommends
that the Board of Directors make a finding that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA
pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Engineer's estimate of probable cost for this project is 824,000.
Sufficient funds have been appropriated and budgeted in the current TCSD Operations Budget
to complete the project.
ATTACHMENT: None
ITEM
APPRO~
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN~
CITY MANAGER
TO-'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
.~erman Parker, Director of Community Services
March 23, 1999
Naming of the Temecula Valley Museum Rotunda
PREPARED BY:
.~Phyllis L. Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve a recommendation from the
Community Services Commission to name the Temecula Valley Museum rotunda in honor of Tony
and Mildred Tobin.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to City policy it is the responsibility of the Community
Services Commission to forward recommendations to the Board of Directors concerning the naming
of each park, recreation or community facility, operated by the Community Services Department.
At the Community Services Commission meeting of February 8, 1999, the Commission considered
and recommended to the Board of Directors that the Museum fadlity be named the Temecula Valley
Museum. At that same meeting, representatives from the volunteer museum group addressed the
Commission, requesting that a room, exhibit space or the entry rotunda be named for Tony and
Mildred Tobin.
Mr. Tobin originally opened and operated the museum which was formedy located on Sixth Street
in Old Town. Many of the artifacts to be used in the new museum exhibit are from Mr. Tobin's
pdvate collection accumulated over many years. Mr. Tobin has given countless hours of his time
and historical knowledge of this area to the creation of a historical museum to serve the community
and surrounding valley.
The museum representatives stated that their first choice would be to name the entry rotunda area
for the Tobins, however, they indicated that they would support the designation of some other area
if the Commission so chose. They believe that naming a portion of the new museum facility would
be an appropriate means of thanking and honodng the Tobins for their contribution to the community.
The Commission was unable to take any action on the request that night as the item was not on the
agenda. They requested that staff bring the item back for their consideration at their next meeting.
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA~)EPTS\CSD~RUSEP~,GENDAS~naming of museum rotunda.cc.doc
At their March 8, 1999, the Community Services Commission considered naming a portion of the
museum in honor of the Tobins. Their recommendation is that the rotunda area of the Temecula
Valley Museum be named for Tony and Mildred Tobin in honor of their contribution to the community.
With a unanimous vote, the Commission directed staff to submit their recommendation to the Board
of Directors for consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact relate to naming the rotunda in honor of the Tobins.
It is envisioned that the exhibit design currently underway will include an appropriate display to
recognize the Tobins. The cost of the display would be included as pad of the overall exhibit design
contract.
Attachment: Resolution No. CSD 92-08: Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities
\\TEMEC_FS201%DATA%DEPTS\CSD%RUSEP~GENDAS%naming of museum rotunda.cc.doc
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE TEMECt~A COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
WItVJIEAS, on April 23, 1991, the Board of Directors (the "Board") adopted a policy
for naming parks and recreation facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Community Services District and the Parks and Recreation Commission
requests that the aforementioned policy be adopted by resolution;
NOW, TI~REFORE, ~ BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
CO~ SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the policy for naming parks and recreation facilities as set forth on
Exhibit "A" is adopted establishing a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for
the naming of parks and recreation facilities.
PASSED, APPROVFJ} AND ADOFrED this 8th day of September, 1992.
Ronald J. Parks, President
ATTEST:
Gr ~--/J
' k
Ruos CSD 92-08
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TE.MECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HERF~nY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. CSD 92-08 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of September 1992 by the following roll call vote.
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Mufioz
Parks,
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
R~sos C.,qD 92-08
EXhibit "A"
TENfECULA CONI1VIUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities
PURPOSE
To establish a uniform policy and procedure that identifies
criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities.
POLICY
The Park and Recreation Commission will be responsible for the
selection of names for parks and recreation facilities. Once a
name is selected, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors
for ratification. Staff will be responsible for encouraging
citizens and community organizations to suggest possible names that
will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration.
At a minimum, each park and community building will be designated
a name. Naming of specific areas within a park (garden, swimming
pool, lake, ballfield, etc.) is acceptable but should be kept to a
minimum to avoid confusion. No park shall be given a name which
might be perceived as controversial by the community. All names
selected shall be acceptable and meaningful to a majority of the
neighborhood/community where the park or recreation facility is
located.
Priority in naming sites shall be given to geographical locations,
historic significance or geologic features. No park shall,'be named
for a person, except where an individual has made a significant
financial contribution toward the acquisition and/or development of
the park or facility, or has been an outstanding long-time
community leader who has supported open space and recreational
activities.
All park and recreation facilities will be designated a formal name
within six months of acquisition or construction. All parks shall
have an entrance sign. Buildings will have an entrance sign and a
plaque inside the facility for name identification.
The name of a park or recreation facility may be changed only after
a hearing is held by the Commission to receive community input and.
direction. No name shall be changed unless there is significant
justification and support by the community.
RESPONSIBILITY
Department
Parks and
Recreation
Commission
Department
ACTION
Acquires a new
facility·
park or recreation
Solicits possible names from community.
Forwards suggested names to the Parks and
Recreation Commission for consideration·
Receives any additional community input.
Selects a name for the new park or
recreation facility·
Forwards name
ratification.
to City Council for
Installs the appropriate naming sign or
plaque.
TCSD
DEPARTMENTAL
REPORT
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
March 23, 1999
Departmental Report
Gail L. Zigler, Administrative Secretaryo~
On February 10, 1998, the City Council awarded a contract to Edge Construction for $1.35
million, for the construction of Margarita Community Park. The park is currently in the 90-day
maintenance period. The Master Plan includes parking, lighting, tot lots, picnic facilities,
landscaping, irrigation, pedestrian walkways, a roller hockey rink, tennis courts, and ballfield
lighting. The dedication of this park is planned for April 22, 1999.
On March 17, 1998, the Board of Directors approved a Professional Services Agreement and
Scope of Services, in the amount of $55,000, with AMS Planning and Research, for the
preparation of a ten (10) year Cultural Arts Master Plan for the City of Temecula. The draft
plan has been approved and accepted by the Community Services Commission and the TCSD
Board of Directors. Staff has begun implementation plans which includes developing an after-
school program that incorporates art education programs and activities.
On May 12, 1998, Council awarded a design contract in the amount of $58,000 to LPA, Inc.,
to cover site selection, programming and site master planning for the Temecula Library. The
committee is currently meeting on a regular basis. Through a site selection process, the
consultant has identified a potential site for a central library. A community workshop was held
to gather input into the design and layout of the proposed site. The Community Services
Commission reviewed and approved the proposal at the March 8, 1999 Commission meeting.
Staff will be bringing forward this item to the Board of Directors in April 1999.
\\TEMEC FS201x, DATA~)EPTS\CSD\ZIGLERG~DEPTRPT\9903.doc
March 17,
On January 25, 1999, the Community Services Department released a Request For
Qualifications for architectural design services for the expansion of the Mary Phillips Senior
Center. The proposed expansion will include kitchen upgrades and a 2,500 to 3,000 square
foot enlargement of the building to include additional space for meetings and classes. At the
March meeting, the Community Services Commission appointed a Commissioner to work with
staff on the design for the expansion for this facility.
The Margarita Sidewalk Project bid opening was held on October 29, 1998 and the City Council
awarded a construction contract to E.A. Mendoza on November 17, 1998. This project is
currently under construction. The improvements will include the installation of concrete curb
and gutter, and sidewalk along the west side of Margarita Road between Rancho Vista Road
and Pauba Road. Additionally, an ADA access ramp from Margarita Road to the adjacent
ballfields, and slope landscaping are included as part of the project.
The City of Temecula Community Services Department brought forward to the TCSD Board of
Directors a Joint Use Agreement with the Temecula Valley Unified School District for use of the
Temecula Valley High School Tennis Courts. The agreement was approved by the Board of
Education on August 18, 1998. The agreement provides for the lighting and maintenance of
eight tennis courts at Temecula Valley High School, by the City of Temecula, in exchange for
the use of the tennis courts in the City's overall parks and recreation program. This project is
to be awarded at tonight's meeting. Because of the School District's schedule for their tennis
program and physical education tennis classes, construction is scheduled to begin in May 1999.
The City Council awarded a construction contract to Terra Cal Construction for the Phase II
improvements to the Temecula Duck Pond. This project is currently under construction. The
restroom facility exterior is near completion and the contractor is currently working on
stabilizing the banks of the pond edge. Staff anticipates the project will be complete in late fall
1999. Improvements will include stabilization of the pond edge, walkways, landscape,
irrigation, bandstand, restroom, parking facilities, and road improvements to Ynez Road.
The recreation division is currently preparing for the Annual Spring Egg Hunt to be held on April
3, 1999, and the annual Volunteer Recognition Event to be held on April 22, 1999.
Additionally, staff will begin designing the Summer/Fall issue of the Guide To Leisure Activities,
to be mailed to the residents in early July.
The maintenance division continues to oversee the maintenance of parks and recreation
facilities. The maintenance division paid special attention to renovating and preparing the fields
for opening day for Little League. In addition, the maintenance division is working closely with
the contractor to open Margarita Community Park on April 22, 1999.
\\TEMEC FS201XDATA\DEPTS\CSD\ZIGLERGXXDEPTRFI'X9903.doc
Mar~h 17,
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
ITEM I
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED JOINT TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WORKSHOP MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 1999
An adjourned joint meeting of the City of Temecula City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 5:00 P.M. It was duly moved and
seconded to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section:
1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 28721 Front
Street, Temecula (APN 922-073-017 and 922-046-022 and 922-073-024). The
negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and First
and Front, LLP, and Cleveland Investment Company. Under negotiation is the price
and terms of payment to the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The
Agency/City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilmembers:
Comerchero, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone,
and Ford.
Absent: Councilmember: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. John Telesio, 31760 Via Telesio, Commissioner of the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission, relayed the Commission's desire to function in a more expanded role and
its willingness to serve on a potential Traffic Congestion Committee.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone thanked Mr. Telesio for his attendance and requested that the
Chair or Vice Chair of each Commission attend monthly City Council meetings in order
to brief the Council on specific issues.
Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the Acting Public Works Director will be
attending all Public/Traffic Safety Commission meetings.
By way of a petition, Ms. Laura Minden, 267740 Jefferson Avenue, of Rancon Realty
and representing several concerned business owners, relayed objection to the proposed
Winchester Road median because of the additional traffic congestion it would create as
well as the financial impact it would have on the businesses.
Ms. Angle, Marchese, 41790 Winchester Road, representing C&A Sandwiches, voiced
no objection to the proposed traffic signal but relayed opposition to the Winchester Road
median because of the impact it will have on her business.
Mr. Richard Feck, 310 Via Vera Cruz, San Marcos, owner of a business located at the
corner of Enterprise Circle South and Winchester Road, suggested that only a portion of
the approved improvements be implemented; supported the proposed traffic signal; and
noted that the Winchester Road median will detrimentally impact the value of the
surrounding properties and that the median will not address the traffic problem.
Both Acting Public Works Director Hughes and Senior Engineer Moghadam provided
further clarification of this project, which has been awarded to the contractor, advising
that the City's public notification process was followed and that the traffic signal will be
placed in operation prior-to the construction of the median; It was noted that the median
was awarded in an effort to address accident problems and to address the flow of traffic
on Winchester Road.
Mr. Bill Foley, 41625 Enterprise Circle South, echoed previously noted concerns as they
relate to public notification, loss of access to the businesses, and impact on property
value.
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved that this item be properly noticed and that the
matter be agendized for the February 23, 1999, City Council meeting. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORTS
No reports given.
COUNCIL AND AGENCY BUSINESS
Workshop Discussion on Traffic Improvement Proiects
RECOM MEN DATI ON:
1,1
Approve a plan for study and implementation of various traffic
improvement projects.
Reviewing the purpose of this workshop, Acting City Manager Nelson commented on the
Category I improvements; referenced action taken at the January 21, 1999, Workshop;
and advised that a status update of the Capital Traffic projects would be provided.
STATUS REPORT
As per overheads, Acting Public Works Director Hughes, in detail, presented a status
report of current traffic projects (as per agenda material), advising that with regard to the
Overland Drive Overcrossing, staff is continuing to explore the possibility of a 24-hour
work schedule.
To ensure that this Overcrossing is completed prior to Mall completion, Mayor Pro Tem
Stone reiterated his desire to pursue a 24-hour work schedule.
Although monetary incentives could be discussed with the developer of the
Overcrossing, Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the developer has indicated no
interest in a 24-hour work schedule and noted that the current contract incentives should
ensure completion of this project as close to the opening of the Mall as possible
Councilman Roberts commented on the length of the left-turn phase for westbound
Winchester Road to northbound Ynez Road and the traffic congestion created in this
area. Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that Caltrans controls the timing
2
sequence for these intersections and noted that staff will further investigate the matter
and report back at the March 23 or April 13, 1999, City Council meeting.
At a recent meeting with Caltrans, Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that it-
was suggested to Caltrans, by the City, that the City fund a Caltrans employee who
would then be solely dedicated to the City in making adjustments and corrections to the
signal timing, advising that currently Caltrans will not permit City staff to make
adjustments to the controllers. Mr. Hughes noted that Caltrans stated that the City's
suggestions would be explored but that it was requested that this suggestion not be
considered until the completion of the Winchester Road ramp and Rancho California
Road at which time the modems will be in operation and City staff will be able to monitor
in-house.
Viewing City staffs suggestion to Caltrans as innovative, both Mayor Pro Tem Stone and
Councilman Comerchero encouraged staff to pursue that route.
In light of the contract the City has with the County for signal maintenance, Councilman
Roberts suggested that if the City were to fund a Caltrans employee, that this individual
as well maintain the County's signals to ensure total synchronization.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested that the City's consultant pursue this concept of
funding a Caltrans employee with Caltrans.
PRIORITY DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL
Urban Designation for 1-15 Freeway
Acting City Manager Nelson informed the Council/Redevelopment Agency Members that
a letter has been sent to Caltrans requesting the change in freeway designation from
rural to urban to which Acting Public Works Director Hughes advised that Caltrans will
focus on providing assistance to the City to resolve the traffic congestion problems in
exploring ways to get needed intersection accesses possibly without any change in
speed designation and, thereby, retaining the current speed limit.
Riverside County Transl3ortation Committee Funding Results
Acting City Manager Nelson reported that at the February 10, 1999, Riverside County
Transportation Committee meeting, the City received approval for a $816,000 grant and
commended Councilman Roberts as well as the Public Works Department for their
efforts associated with obtaining this grant which will be utilized to improve the pavement
and rehabilitation of Jefferson Avenue. By receiving this grant, Mr. Nelson advised that
previously allocated Measure A funds may now be utilized for another project such as
the realignment of Diaz Road.
Councilman Roberts noted that additional RCTC funding will be available in April through
the Congestion Management Air Pollution Reduction and encouraged staff to pursue
additional funding through this measure.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone commended Councilman Roberts on his efforts.
3
Meadows Parkway Extension
Having reviewed the minutes and the audio tape with regard to this issue, Acting City
Manager Nelson advised that it reflected that the Council was desirous of exploring with
the developers the feasibility of completing construction of Meadows Parkway as soon
as possible but that no direction or commitment was made by the Council to provide any
type of financial assistance for expediting this extension.
Being of the opinion that the City Council should work with the developers on some type
of financing mechanism such as the one utilized for La Serena Way in widening
Margarita Road with a reimbursement agreement tied to building permits.
Mayor Ford suggested that the matter be readdressed during the mid-year budget
review.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that the improvement plans for the full
length of the road have been completed and that the grading of the road system could
begin within 30 days.
If a development reimbursement agreement were approved for Meadows Parkway,
Councilman Comerchero questioned how such an approval could financially impact
other projects and requested that staff further explore his concern.
It was noted that this issue would be reviewed and agendized to a further City Council
meeting.
Immediate Traffic Intersection Modifications - Category I Improvements
By way of the Traffic Circulation Improvement Plan (of record), Deputy Director of Public
Works Parks reviewed the previously approved $250,000 Category I projects which are
to be completed prior to the Mall opening. He noted that the City Council's
recommendations and public comments will be forwarded to the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission for review and that monthly updates on these projects will be provided to
the Council.
Advising that any changes will have consequences on other projects, Senior Engineer
Moghadam, in detail, reviewed the Circulation Improvement Plan in addition to various
options including signal phasing.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone stated that the City should proactively engage a mass commuter
traffic plan for the City of Temecula for those business with more than 50 employees.
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved that the Category I improvements be reviewed
by engineering and the Public/Traffic Safety Commission to determine their
effectiveness after which the matter would be readdressed by the City Council and that
an emphasis be placed on expediting as many Category I projects as possible to ensure
completion prior to Mall opening. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone
and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Acting City Manager Nelson advised that the Category 2 and 3 projects will be reviewed
during the upcoming Capital Improvement Project process.
4
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:41 P.M., the joint City Council and Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally
adjourned to Tuesday,-February 23, 1999;' at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
{SEAL}
5
ITEM 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTO
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
John Meyer, Housing and Redevelopment Manager ~
March 23, 1999
Granting of an Easement for the Rancho California Water District
RECOMMENDATION: That the Redevelopment Agency adopts a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99---
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA GRANTING AN EASEMENT FOR WATER PIPELINES
AND RELATED APPURTENANCES FACILITATING INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS RELATING TO THE MISSION VILLAGE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECT.
BACKGROUND: The Redevelopment Agency has partnered with the Affirmed Housing Group to
rehabilitate 38 existing apartment units and develop 38 new units. All 76 units will remain affordable
for 30 years.
The attached documents are for water pipelines and related appurtenances for the Mission Village
project along the westerly side of Pujol, south of Sixth Street.
This easement needs to be granted by the Agency and recorded to facilitate construction activities
for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 99-
2. Exhibit"A"
3. Exhibit"B"
4. Grant of Easement
R:\PROJECTS\GRANTEASEMENT.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. g9-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA GRANTING AN EASEMENT FOR WATER PIPELINES AND
RELATED APPURTENANCES FACILITATING INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS RELATING TO THE MISSION VILLAGE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECT
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, The legal description for the easement is set forth and
depicted in Exhibit "A" attached hereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Temecula grants an Easement for water pipelines and appurtenances purposes,
substantially the for attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", for the purposes stated
therein.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting on the 23'" day of March 1999.
Karel F. Lindemans, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSDIE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
R:XPROJECTS\RESOLUTIONGRANTEASEMENT.doc
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Agency Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 99- was duly and
regularly adopted by the Agency Members of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23'd day of March 1999, by the
following vote:
AYES: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
R:XPROJECTS\RESOLUTIONGRANTEASEMENT.do¢
ATTACHMENT 4
R~ording R~luested by
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
After Recordation Return to:
Rancho California Water District
42135 Winchester Road
Post Office Box 90 17
Temecula, CA 92589-9017
Space Above This Line for Recorder's Use
GRANT OF EASEMENT ]
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
hereby GRANT(S) to the RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT, a public corporation, a perpetual non-exchisive easement
and right of way for pipeline or pipefines, together with incidental appurtenances, connections and structures in, over, under, upon,
along, through and across the real property situated in THE CJ.'r~ OF ~ in the County of Riverside, State of California,
hereinafier described.
EXHIBITS A & B HEREBY ATTACHED AND MADE A PART HERE OF.
Together with the right to grade and improve said right of way and to enter upon and to pass and repass over and along said strip
of land for the construction, operation and maintenance of the facilities to be constructed in said easements by the RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT.
It is understood and agreed thai the easements and rights of way acquired heroin are subject to the right of the owner, his
successors and assigns, to use the surface of the land within the beundm3' lines of said easements and rights of way to the ex'~ent that
such use is compatible with the full and free exercise of said easements and rights of way by the RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
DISTRICT; provided; however, that no fences, block walls, or other structures or other improvements shall be cog upon,
over, and along said easements and rights of way without first obtaining the written consent of the RANCHO CALIFORNIA
WATER DISTRICT.
No fill or paving of any nature shall be placed or maintained over the surface of the ground, nor shall any earth be removed from
the cover of said pipeline after construction, without first obtaining the written approval of the RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
DISTRICT.
}N WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed this __ day of
· 19
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
The nndersigned, being the duly appointed agent of
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT, a
public corporation, Riverside County, California,
pursuant to its Resolution No. 22, as mended by
Resolution No. 196, des hereby accept on behalf of
said District the grant of all interests in real estate
for public purposes as described in the attached
Grant of Easement dated ,19 , by and
between the RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
DISTRICT, and
_and does hereby certify flint the Grantee consents
to the recordation of said Grant.
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
DATED: .19 By:
98/SB:CH:mc246a/F276
Geueral Manager "Digtier"
ATTACHMENT 2
EXHIBIT "A"
BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED
RECORDED MAY 8, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 185720 RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF SIXTH STREET AND
PUJOL STREET AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 74 PAGE 86 OF
RECORDS OF SURVEY IN THE RECORDER'S OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA;
THENCE, ON THE CENTERLINE OF SIXTH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP,
SOUTH 45°31'15' EAST, 490.00 FEET;
THENCE, LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE, SOUTH 44°28'45, WEST, 30.00 FEET
TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID PUJOL STREET, SAID
POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE, ON SAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH 45°31'15, EAST, 20.00 FEET;
THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, SOUTH 44°28'45' WEST, 8.00
FEET;
THENCE, PARALLEL WITH SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, NORTH 45°31'15'
WEST, 20.00 FEET;
JAMES A. DRENON, JR. ,
P.L.S. 6153
EXPIRES 3/31/02
THENCE, NORTH 44°28'45, EAST, 8.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
ATTACHMENT 3
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
PUJOL
N 45'31 '15"
490.00'
0 10 20 40
mira
1 Inch = 20 Feet
RANCH0
W
N
CENTERLINE OF R.O.W,
N 45'31'15" W
X 20.00'
~ WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
· ~, -- __
· "-N 44'28'45" E
"/ 8.00'
"~N 45'31'15" W
20.00'
JNST, NO, 186720
CALIFORNIA WATER
DISTRICT
iHIS PLAT IS SOLELY AN AID IN LOCAHNG IHE PARCEL(S) DE:Sut,~IBi:.U IN IHE AI ~At.,HFD
DOCJJ--[NT. IT IS NOT A PART ~ THE ~RIT~N DES~IP~ THFR[IN.
~ P~P~ BY: S~: WAER EASEMENT FOR
~ ' MAP BOOK ~ PAGES ~0
~ e (--} __ ~- e (--~ ~ CI~ ~ ~ECULA P.A. 98-0209
~All: 1"= 20.0' D~ BY: FCR/CAD DA~: 09/04/9~ ~~D BY: JAD
SHEET
1
OF 1 SHEET(S'
_l..O.# 329-1
ITEM 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
~UBJFCT:
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency
Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager
March 23, 1999
Approval or funds for employees of Toybox Creations, Inc. to participate
in the Employee Relocation Loan Program
RECO M MEN DATIO N:
That the Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING UP TO $30,000 OF
EMPLOYEE RELOCATION PROGRAM FUNDS FOR LOANS
TO EMPLOYEES OF TOYBOX CREATIONS, INC.
BACKGROUND: At your January 26, 1999 meeting, the Redevelopment Agency approved
a corporate housing relocation assistance program. This program would provide down payment
assistance loans up to $15,000 for employees of pre-approved companies that meet certain
income criteria. This program was intended to provide an incentive for certain companies that
were either relocating to, or expanding within Temecula. The Agency approved this program on
a conceptual basis, with the understanding that companies requesting such approval would be
brought to the Agency on a case-by-case basis. A copy of the program guidelines is attached.
The FY 1998-99 Redevelopment Budget contains $200,000 for this program. This budget
amount would allow up to 13 loans at the maximum amount.
DISCUSSION: For the past several months Agency staff has been in contact with the
firm of Toybox Creations, Inc. This firm specializes in educational toys that revolve around a
theme of fruits and vegetables and is currently in the process of relocating its business from
Poway to Temecula. Toybox employs 15 full-time people in a variety of sales, design,
marketing, and warehouse positions. The firm is expanding and expects to employ 25 full-time
people within a one-year period plus additional part-time employees. Attached are materials
that provide additional information about this firm.
Toybox Creations Agency Report March 23, 1999 1
This firm represents a type of company that is not represented in Temecula, and appears to be
a desirable addition to our corporate base. This company has expressed an interest in
participating in the corporate relocation program, and has several employees that may qualify
and would be interested in this program. Staff is recommending that the Agency set aside
$30,000 for employees that wish to participate in this program. This would allow funding of two
loans at the maximum amount. This figure also corresponds to approximately 10% of the
number of new full-time jobs that the relocation of Toybox Creations will represent, which staff
recommends as a useful guideline for this program. This authorization would remain in effect
for one year after Agency approval. If all funds were not used within this period, any remaining
funds within this amount would be returned to the program. Any funds repaid from the
employees would also be returned to this loan program.
The Economic Development Subcommittee (consisting of Councilmembers Roberts and
Comerchero) has reviewed this proposal and concurs with this recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Agency's Housing budget (account number
165-199-999-5448) for these allocations.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. RDA 99-
2. Employee Relocation Program Guidelines
2. Company information - Toybox Creations, Inc.
Toybox Creations Agency Report March 23, 1999 2
ATTACHMENT # I
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING UP TO $30,000 OF
EMPLOYEE RELOCATION PROGRAM FUNDS FOR LOANS
TO EMPLOYEES OF TOYBOX CREATIONS, INC.
WHEREAS, The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula (Agency) has
established a program to provide assistance to employees of qualified companies that are
relocating or expanding their operations in the City of Temecula; and
WHEREAS, the firm of Toybox Creations, Inc. is relocating its business to the City of
Temecula, and
WHEREAS, this firm will employ an estimated twenty five (25) full-time employees within
a one-year pedod; and
WHEREAS, this firm has employees that meet income and other criteria of the Agency's
Employee Relocation program; and
WHEREAS, this firm wishes to offer this program to its employees; and
WHEREAS, the Agency hereby approves this firm for participation in this program.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Agency hereby designates up to $30,000 in funds for the Employee
Relocation Program for employees of Toybox Creations, subject to the policies of this program
as adopted by the Agency at its meeting of January 26, 1999.
Section 2. These funds shall remain available to the employees of Toybox Creations for
this purpose for a pedod of one year from the date of adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Redevelopment Agency this 23'd day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Karel F. Lindemans, Chairperson
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
Toybox Creations Agency Report March 23, 1999 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, Susan W. Jones, Secretary of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution No. RDA 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of
Directors of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23'"
day of March, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
Toybox Creations Agency Report March 23, 1999 4
ATTACHMENT # 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
EMPLOYEE RELOCATION PROGRAM
The Employee Relocation Program is designed to assist families, with their home purchase, who are
moving to the City of Temecula due to relocation of their Employer. The City of Temecula offers a
second trust deed loan of up to 10% of the purchase price, but not to exceed $15,000. The City's
assistance loan benefits families by providing them with a downpayment for which they do not have to
make monthly payments during the first five years.
To be eligible, the Applicant must be employed with a company that has been approved by the City of
Temecula to participate in the Program. The companies include those that have recently expanded or
relocated to the City. In addition, the Applicant's gross annual household income must be below the
following limits according to their family size:
Household Members Income Limit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
$39,050
$44650
$50 200
$55 800
$60 250
$64750
$69 200
8 or more $73 650
*The #ncome limits are 120% of the area median income and are subject to change annually.
Loan Terms: This is a 30-year second mortgage loan. Repayment terms are as follows:
· For the first 5 years, there are no payments required on the downpayment assistance.
· For the remaining 25 years, repayment of the assistance loan, at the Prime Rate of simple
interest, is fully amortized and collected in 300 equal monthly payments. The Pdme Rate will be
that which is place at the time the loan is approved or the rate which is in effect on the date
payments commence in year 6, whichever is lower.
Purchase Price: The purchase price of the home is limited only by the applicanrs ability to qualify for
financing.
Buyer's Investment: The buyer must contribute a minimum of 3% of the purchase price toward the
acquisition of their home.
Allowable Assets: The buyers family assets (excluding personal property and funds in restricted
retirement accounts) remaining after close of escrow may not exceed a 12 month housing expense
(PITI) reserve.
Closing Costs: Closing costs may be paid by the downpayment assistance loan as long as total
assistance does not exceed $15,000.
EliGible ProOerties: The Program is available for new and resale properties city-wide. Single family
homes, cendominiums, and townhouses, which are either vacant or owner-occupied, are eligible. The
home must be in sound condition and meet Housing Quality Standards as determined by the RDA.
Although the homebuyer need not be a first time buyer, the home purchased under this program must
be the Recipienrs primary residence.
Availability of Downpayment Assistance: Program assistance is available to eligible applicants for up
to one year after the date of the approved employers relocation or expansion, as long as program
funds are available.
First Mort.Qacle Lender: Any lender previously approved by the City may participate in the Program.
The participating lender must accept the City's loan application concurrently with their application and
is responsible for all loan processing.
Future Refinancincl: The City will subordinate the assistance loan, second to a new first mortgage,
only if no cash is taken out during the refinance transaction.
ATTACHMENT # 3
History and Growth Forecast/Overview
Daisy Marketing and Toy Box Creations, are privately owned companies. They were established in 1994
as divisions of the parent company, Rainbow Companies, to pursue the retail side of the business. At that
time, Toy Box Creations was selling licensed and theme plush products to supermarkets across North
America. Daisy Marketing was established to market and sell products and services for other vendors who
desired to have us represent their products to supermarkets. Daisy Marketing was very selective in this
process and worked with only a few companies. ~
Our f~rst year of business found us marketing plush toys to supermarket chains throughout the entire
country. Our product line consisted mainly of licensed products, such as Coca Cola Polar Bears, 10 1
Dalmatians, and Looney Tunes characters, Wgether with non-licensed items. Toy Box Creations arranged
sub-license agreements on a exclusive basis to supermarkets. Sales the fn'st year were approximately $1
million with a staff of 3 full-time and 2 part time employees. From 1994-1997, Toy Box Creations sales
and staff expanded. During this same period of time, a independent broker and rep network was built up
for the company. Representation of our products in 1999 will expand from North America to Latin
America and Europe.
In the beginning of 1996 with a strategic marketing plan in place, we developed our own product line
known as Vegetable Friends. Instantly, this product line was accepted by the marketplace and by the
educational community. Sales nearly doubled in 1997 and will just about double in 1998, with the number
of product lines expanding to five by the end of the year. Our product line is riding on the coattails of one
of the greatest marketing phenomenon of all times, beanie babies. The design of our product line is
uniquely different and contains nutritional and educational information for our customers. The Toy Box
Creations web-site (toyboxc.com) has been recognized by Microsoft for its content. They did a case study
of our web-site and produced a four page brochure that is used as a sales tool for Microsoft technology.
On October 13, 1998, the Toy Box Creations web-site won a major award from Massachuset Interactive
Media Council (MIMC) in the category Entertainment and Edutainment for Children and Young Adults.
This award is especially noteworthy because Toy Box Creations was the only nominee competing in the
category with a web-site. The other nominees, Hasbro, Disney, and SIG software, all had CD-Rom
products. Our web-site was unveiled in late January and is experiencing 12,000 to 15,000 hits per week.
In 1999, our product lines will expand to 12 lines. We will also expand our staff, warehouse capacity and
markets for our product lines. Sales to date have almost exclusively come from the supermarket industry.
The mass market represents nearly 70% of the toy industry sales. We are quite confident that our new
product lines and marketing programs will position our company for tremendous sales growth in the future.
Our staff continues to grow and hiring the key people will fuel that growth. Our needs for skilled and
general labor will continue over the next five years with our aggressive growth plan.
It is our intention, with our creative team, to keep our product lines new and fresh and to make them
irresistible to our customer base. By increasing our distribution channels for our products, increasing our
customer base and increasing the frequency of orders from our customers, the future for our company is
very bright. It is based upon this strategic plan that our company will become a significant player in the
toy industry.
The chart below outlines our planned progress and controlled growth for the next five (5) years.
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Sales Volume $5,200,000 $8,500,000 $13,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000
Personnel 15 25 40 55 80
Warehouse square footage 20,000 36,000 45,000 60,000 80,000
Move Over Bean es
I'll trade my Ripe Tomato for your Charles
Broccoli. How about a Moy Mushroom
Veggie for a Crunchy Celery?" Consumer swap
talk like that is music to the ears of pro-
Friends moters of a new line of collectible stuffed
toys with powerful personalities.
poised for
action as
col[ectib[es
Br MARtLrN YUNG
Produce directors who offer the creations in
their departments are gaining new profits and a
chance to teach kids about the nutritive value of
fruits and vegetables.
CREATIVE CHARACTERS
The first crop of six characters from Toy Box
Creations, Poway, Calif., is called Vegetable
Friends. The veggies tout their particular history,
cultivation, nutritional values, uses and preparation.
A second crop introduced early this year includes
six Nutra Fruit Heroes characters.
Coloring books, an in-store coloring expo, story
books, stickers, T-shirts and a tote bag comprise the
basic tools of two eight-week promotions offered to
produce retailers.
"We provide everything," says Jim Olson, vice
president of Toy Box Creations. That includes a
point-of-purchase display, coloring sheets, materials
for preschool and elementary schbols and prizes to
be awarded during the eight-week promotion.
While coloring books and stickers push the struc-
tured educational programs along, the colorful plush
and bean bag toys, which also are available for open
stock sales, clearly steal the show. Enter characters
such as Skeeter Squash, Beta Carrot, Blalnmo
Banana and Shakes Pear.
Toy Box offers so many characters the company
describes them in generations. The six original
Vegetable Friends led to the creation of twelve
Vegetable Friend Seedies, bean bag toys that quickly
captured the limelight. The line expanded with Nutra
Fruit Heroes, six fruit plush characters, in January of
this year. Nutra Fruit Heroes Seedies were released
last month.
Toy Box Creations, like Beanie Babies, assigns
each Seedies character its own serial number.
Collectors vie for lower numbers because Seedies
production is limited.
The collection will grow again this fall with the
introduction of Veggie Friends Seedies from Around
the World, six intemationally thereed characters that
will poise the line for global distribution. Characters
in this group include a beret-topped Frenchy Onion
and a kimono-wearing Ming-Tom Mushrooln.
"Well more than 10,000 stores across Canada and
the United States carry or have carried our prod-
ucts," Olson says. They include chains like Superalu,
Genuardi's Family Markets and Grand Union Co.
STIMULATE SALES
The Seedies toys sold well this past summer in a
30-day promotion at Pawhuska IGA, Pawhuska,
CHARACTERS FOR KIDS
7i'lll[)t Voltr tiny .vhol)l)er.v u'ilh ,vlu//i'd lj*ttil tllR[
etahie 'charact~,rs. This di,WIt(r at' ~t Giant P~mdv
Carlisle, Pa., promotes the tt~w. us well as
attd coloring hookv, in one local/on.
98 PRODUCE Merchandising · October 1998
Okla. "We only have a few Ic~," says owner Charlie
Wadsworth. "The toys sold through real fine.*'
Wadsworth placed the display at the front of the
store and retailed the dolls for $4.99 each.
An Acme Supennarket in Vineland, N.J., also
reported strong sales. "Those things were gone with-
in a week," reports Nancy House, general manager.
House placed her display of 72 vegetable toys in the
Veggtebl¢ Friendsl I! Nutro Fruit Heroest ! Veggie Friends Sgediesl
I~ds' Zo~,I CoJJectm"s Corne~ i Learning Ccnte~
ApptEI Banana! Orange| Pear! Pr~me~ 5tn~wb~rryl
ONLINE ACTIVITIES
Encourage lads to research the adventures of Nutra Fruit Heros at To.v Box
Creations Web site at www. toyboxc. com.
produce depamnent.
"The produce department seems to be a natural
fit. That's the crux of it," says Clark Wood, corpo-
rate produce specialist for Associated Food Stores,
Salt Lake City. "Because produce is so impacted by
impulse sales and because it is shopped so often,
the visibility and merchandising opportunities of
products like these definitely lend themselves to the
produce department.
"We bought them on an open-sale basis," he
says. "Some of the larger stores used one display
and filled it with two cases of 144 toys each. The
smaller stores sold just the one case." Weekly ads in
local newspapers featured the toys to spur interest.
The toys retailed for $2.99 each when purchased
as a complete set; otherwise they sold for $3.99
each. The stores earned a 37 percent profit on sales
of the complete sets and about a 48 percent margin
on sales of individual toys, Wood notes.
Wood plans to feature the Veggie Friends Seedies
From Around the World with a back-to-school pro-
motion in September. In October, he'll start selling
the new Nutra Fruit Heroes Seedies.
Web suffers can learn about Vegetable Friends,
Nutra Fruit Heroes and Seedies on Toy Box
Creations' Web site at www. toyboxc.com. []
Audubon Park The
Best Name In
The Business.
When it comes to choosing a Wild Bird Food marketing
partner our name stands out.
100% satisfaction guaranteed.
Category management.
A complete line of top quality products.
State of the art packaging.
Account specific marketing programs.
For more information or a free
evaluation of your category call.
1-800-826-4179
Drawer W, Akron, Colorado 80720-0540
970-345-2063 FAX 970-345-2067
100 PRODUCE Merchandising · October 1998
L
11=15 FROM=DATABASE TECH. INC.
PRESS RELEASE
For Further Information Contact:
Ed BarD,
Database Technologies, Inc.
781-431-2300, x I06
E-Mail : ebarry @ dbtinc. corn
ID:
PAGE
DRAFT 2.0
For Immediate Release:
October 14, 1998
Robert Collins
Sterling Hager, Inc.
617-926-6665, x 234
E-Mail: bob@ sterlinghag er. corn
Database Technologies Honored for Outstanding Website Design and Development
Expertise by Massachusetts Interactive Media Council (MIMC)
-- Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of PKS Systems Integration LLC, Database Technologies'
"ToyBox Creations" Website Wins 1998 MIMC Award for Best Children' s/Young Adult
Online Website, Entertainment & Edutainment Category --
WELLESLEY, Mass. - October 14, 1998 - Database Technologies today announced its
receipt of the 1998 MIMC award for outstanding website design and development for the
Best ChiMren ' s Young Adult Online Website, entertainment and edutainment category..
Database Technologies' custom-designed website for ToyBox Creations was honored by
the 1998 MIMC Awards judges at an awards ceremony yesterday evening for its technical
innovation, creative excellence, interface design, overall aesthetics and effectiveness for
its intended audience. Database Technologies' award-winning Web development
services are just one component of the first-class 1T services that have distinguished
Database Technologies as the premier prorider of 1T management, systems integration,
and consulting services on the East Coast.
This prestigious honor was awarded to Database Technologies amongst strong
competition in the Best ChiMren's Young Adult Online Website, entertainment and
exlutainment category_ Database Technologies' ToyBox Creations Website was selected
over Hasboro Interactive's Vortex Media Arts CD-ROM and Strategic Interactive
Gxoup's Disney Interactive program.
0CT'-22-98
1 I = 1B PROM=DATABASE TECH. INC. ID: PAGE
Page 2
Database Technolo~es Honored for Outstanding Website Design and Development by M1MC
3/S
"Database Technologies is honored to be recognized for our fn'st-cIass Web design and
development expertise by the Massachusetts Interactive Media Council," said Dave
Teplow, co-founder and CEO, Database Technologies. "We are proud to be able to offer
this same level of expertise to every organization we partner with to solve their systems
integration and 1T management needs," added Michael Corey, co-founder and CO0,
Database Technologies. 'This award is a tribute not only to our nationally-recognized
Web development staff, but also to our creative team that captured the true spirit of what
ToyBox Creations was trying to express with its Veg~e Friends program."
ToyBox Creations designs educational produce marketing programs designed to teach
children about the nutritive value of produce through its fruit and vegetable characters, as
well as provide information about money-saving promotional programs at parreefing
produce retail outlets. In order to create greater awareness of the program,. attract new
partners and new business, and cream an aftermarket for trading their fruit and vegetable
character dolls, ToyBox Creations partnered with Database Technologies to develop a
highly interactive, content-rich, dynamic Website to complement their in-store programs_
The resulting Website has attracted a flood of attention and praise from children, parents
and teachers, as well as supermarkets and produce retail organizations from all over the
United States, making it ToyBox Creations most successful program to date. This award-
winning Website is located at www.toyboxe.com.
"People absolutely love the new ToyBox Creations Website that Database Technologies
designed and developed for us," said Jim Olsen, president, ToyBox Creations. 'The
design and technical expertise that Database Technologies has brought to this project has
made them an invaluable IT resource. Database Technologies has done an outstanding
job translating our vision for an online education and marketing resource into the true
success that it is today."
David Teplow, CEO, and Michael Corey, CO0 of Database Technologies, were formally
honored at a gala awards ceremony yesterday evening at the Boston Copley Place
0C'~-22-98
1 I = 1 ES FROM: DATABASE TECH · I NC · I D = PAGE
Page 3
Database Technologies Honored for Outstanding W'ebsite Design and Development by MIMC
Marriot. Winners for all categories of the 1998 MIMC Awards were announced at that
time.
About the Massachusetts Interactive Media Council
The Massachusetts Interactire Media Council (MIMC) was rounded in 1996 as a non-profit
organization established to support the interactive industry, in New England, The MIMC hosts
nearly 70 networking and educational events a year and is involved with numerous legislative
and regulatory issues. Members of the MIMC include the region's foremost technical talent and
leading business minds, from developers to academies. Contact MIMC at (617) 227-2822 or
visit their Website at w~w. mirrtc. org,
About Database Technologies and PKS Systems Integration LLC
Database Technologies, a subsidiary of PKS Systems Integration LLC, is one of the East Coast's
first full-service systems integrators specializing in the implementation of relational database
management systems, enterprise data warehouses and manage! data marts, and Internet
solutions. Since its rounding in 1986, Database Technologies has gamered proven expertise with
Oracle, SQL Server, Sybase and Informix RDBMS, as well as a long list of application
development, da~a access, system monitoring tools, and Oracle applications. Information on
Database Technologies is available on the Word Wide Web at www.dbtinc.eom or call (781 )
431-2300.
PKS Systems Integration LLC is a service leader with a record of providing high<luality,
custom-tailored solutions. PKS puttnets with customers through its centers of excellence
worldwide to bridge the gap between business strategy and information technology with full
service consulting sohtions. Services are provid~cl in the areas of: Legacy Modernization,
Application Maintenance Outsourcing, Network Integration, Conversions, Package
Implementation and Data Warehousing.
PKS Systems Integration is a subsidiary of Level 3 Comicalions, Inc.
About Levd 3 Communications, Inc.
Level 3 is a communications and information services company building an advanced Interact
Protocol (IP) technology based network in phases across the U.S. that is expected to be
completed in the year 2001. To provide service in the interim, Level 3 has signed an agr~nt
to lease capacity on a national network over which it will be able to offer advanced IP-based
services in selected cities beginning in the third quarter of 1998. Level 3 will be the first
company to combine both local and long distance IP technology based networks connecting
customers end-to-end across the U.S. The company wiI! focus primarily on the business market
using its network to provide a full range of communications services - including local, long
distance and data transmission as well as other enhanced services and Internet access services.
Plans also call for the company to expand internationally. Level 3's common stock is traded on
the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol LVLT. Its World Wide Web address is
www. L3.com,
RDA
DEPARTMENTAL
REPORT
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTOR
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
TEMECULAREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
John Meyer, Housing & Redevelopment Manager.,r_..~~
March 23, 1999
Monthly Departmental Report
Attached for your information is the monthly report as of March 23, 1999 for the Redevelopment
Department.
This report covers Housing and Redevelopment.
HOUSING
First Time Homebuyers Pro_aram
Funding in the amount of $400,000 is available for FY 98-99. 13 Loans have been dosed for $267,860
with 3 loans pending.
Residential Improvement Pro~irams
As of January 1998 to date, 29 projects have been completed and 10 are in process. The majodty of
these projects are roof repairs, repainting and fence replacement.
Loan Mana.aement
The Department is evaluating responses to a Request for Proposals for long-term collection and
management of the Agency's portfolio of Residential Improvement and First Time Homebuyer loans.
Affordable Rental Housin,a Projects
Agency staff has the responsibility for monitoring all projects obtaining Agency assistance to rehabilitate
existing affordable rental housing as well as new construction. After completion, annual reporting is
required to ensure all tenants continue to meet income criteria outlined in the Project Regulatory
Agreement and that all rents charged are within established affordable limits. Review of a 30-unit
project, Rancho Creek Apartments, has been completed and the project is in compliance with
affordability covenants.
North Pujol Redevelopment Project
Rehabilitation of 38 distressed affordable housing units is underway, and grading has begun for the
construction of 38 new units. All units will be occupied by very low and low-income families.
OLD TOWN
Old Town Streetscape Improvement Projects
Completion of the Streetscape improvement project is heady complete. All major improvements
have been installed and only minor "tie backs" and some detail work remains to be completed. The
sound system is operational and the gateway arches have been installed. The flag poles located
near the Gateway Arches will be completed shortly. Staff is working on the Gateway plaques and
the time capsule.
Facade Improvement/Non-Conforminc~ Sign Proliram
The following facade improvement/sign projects are completed:
· Express Bodicare (new business on Front Street)
- New signs only
The following facade improvements are underway:
· Second Street Automotive (Second and Metcedes)
Complete Facade Renovation
· Rancon Building (Front Street)
- Repaint Tdm
· Musidans Workshop (Mercedes)
- New handicap parking and restroom fadlities, new front windows and front entry door
· Kreigers General Store (Mercedes)
- New exterior facade and handicap restroom facilities
PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS
The City dosed escrow on the Mercantile Building on December 31, 1998. Staff is pursuing designation
as a Point of Historical Interest through the State Office of Histodc Preservation.
R:\syersk\monthly\report.Jan
2
ITEM 15
APPROV
CITY ATTORNEFYi~
DIRECTOR OF
CITYMANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager
March 23, 1999
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Approval of Planning Application No. PA98-
0219 (Conditional Use Permit) - Cox Communications wireless Personal
Communications System (PCS), with antennas mounted atop a 60-foot high
monopole disguised as an evergreen pine tree ("monopine") at the Rancho
California Water District water tank site at 3100 Rancho California Road
Prepared by: Carole K. Donahoe, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that this case be continued to the April 13, 1999
City Council meeting.
This case was heard by the City Council on February 9, 1999 at which time the Council continued
the matter to March 23, 1999. The Council asked the applicant to review alternative sites
previously considered and to explore other possible alternative sites. Staff has had several
discussions with the applicant and continues to offer assistance.
R:\STAFFRP'I'~.I 9pa98.CC STAFFRPT-Appeal 3-23-99.doc
1
ITEM 16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manage~'~/'
March 23, 1999
Proposed Annexation of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Communities and Related
Imposition of Taxes, Rates and Charges (Planning Application No. PA98-0205)
PREPARED BY: John De Gange, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public headng on
the annexation of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch communities and the imposition of taxes, rates and
charges within those communities. At the conclusion of the public headng, it is recommended that
the City Council carry out one or the other of the following actions, depending on whether or not a
significant number of written protests are received:
1. ADOPT a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ORDERING THE REORGANIZATION DESIGNATED AS
LAFCO NO. 98-14-1 INCLUDING THE ANNEXATION OF THE
REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS TO THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE DETACHMENT OF THOSE AREAS
FROM THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, COUNTY SERVICE AREA 143, AND
COUNTY SERVICE AREA 152 SUBJECT TO VOTER APPROVAL
OF APPLICABLE TAXES, ASSESSMENTS AND CHARGES
and direct staff to prepare materials for an election on the annexation and the imposition of
taxes, rates and charges within the annexed area.
Direct staff to determine the value of written protests received from the property owners
and/or registered voters in the annexation area and report its findings at a subsequent City
Council meeting within 30 days of this hearing.
BACKGROUND: This item comes before the City Council as the next step in the annexation
process. On July 28, 1998 the Council carried out the first step with the adoption of a Resolution
initiating the Commencement of Proceedings (Resolution 98-74), and an Ordinance pre-zoning the
territory (Ordinance 98-13).
R:~STAFFRPTL-~:)SPA98.Conducting Authority.doc
1
Following the actions taken at the hearing for Commencement of Proceedings at the July 28th City
Council meeting, the project went before the Local A ency Formation Commission (LAFCO) at a
headng held on October 22, 1998. At the October 22~ meeting LAFCO continued the project to its
December 10, 1998 meeting. This continuance was the result of concems raised by the Riverside
County Administrative Office regarding Assessment Distdct No. 159 and agreements with the owner
of the historic buildings in Vail Ranch. Another issue, which factored into the continuance was a
concern raised by some of the residents in the Redhawk area regarding the structure of the vote that
will be required in compliance with Pro osition 218 for the imposition of rates and charges. Between
the October 22"d and December 10t~ meeting, staff met with representatives from the County
Administrative office and the owner of the historic buildings at Vail Ranch to address their concerns.
In addition, the concem of certain residents within Redhawk has been addressed since the City has
agreed to structure the election for the imposition of rates and charges so that successful passage
of the election will require a two-thirds vote from each community separately. With the resolution
of these issues, LAFCO went forward with the project and approved the annexation (LAFCO
Resolution No. 38-98) on December 10, 1998. Final approval of the annexation is conditioned on
voter approval of the imposition of taxes, rates and charges in accordance with the requirements of
Proposition 218.
At this time, the City Council, acting as the Conducting Authority, is required to determine the value
of any written protests from residents or property owners in the annexation area. Any landowner or
registered voter may file a written protest against the annexation or the imposition of taxes, rates or
charges at any time prior to the conclusion of the public hearing. The City Council has as many as
30 days in which to determine the value of the protests. Once the value of the protests has been
determined, the City Coundl may take the appropriate action. If 50% or more of the registered voters
protest the annexation, the annexation will be terminated. If 50% or more of the property owners
protest the rates and charges, the annexation will be terminated. If less than 50% of the voters or
property owners protest the annexation or rates and charges, the City must adopt a resolution
ordering the annexation contingent on voter approval of the annexation, taxes, rates and charges
at the November 2, 1999 general municipal election. (If less than 25% of the voters or property
owners protest the annexation, voter approval would only be required for the taxes, rates and
charges.)
FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact associated with the annexation of the Redhawk/Vail Ranch
areas is fully addressed in the fiscal impact analysis conducted by the City and was submitted with
the City's application to LAFCO.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Negative Declaration which addresses the impacts
associated with this project (PA 98-0205) was adopted on by the City Council on July 28, 1998.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS: This project is the next step in the process of the annexation
of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan Areas. If the annexation is successful it will result in
the transfer approximately 1,995 acres of unincorporated portions of Riverside County into the
incorporated limits of the City of Temecula.
This annexation is entirely contained within the City's Sphere of Influence. It will not create any
islands or pockets of unincorporated territory and it has been determined that it is a logical extension
of the existing City limits.
The actions outlined in this report are required as part of the City's responsibility as the Conducting
Authority. The City shall evaluate any written protests submitted prior to or at this headng and carry
out the appropriate action which is required pursuant to Section 57075 of the Government Code.
R:~STAFFRPT~05PA98.Conducting Authority.doc
2
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution No. 99- - Page 4
Exhibit "A" - Map and Legal Description - Page 5
2. City Council Staff Report from July 28, 1998 - Page 6
R:\STAFFRPT~05PA98,Conducting Authority.doc
3
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'L-~:~PA98.Conducting Authodty.doc
4
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ORDERING THE REORGANIZATION DESIGNATED AS
LAFCO NO. 98-14-1 INCLUDING THE ANNEXATION OF THE
REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS TO THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT AND THE DETACHMENT OF THOSE AREAS FROM THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT, COUNTY SERVICE AREA 143, AND COUNTY SERVICE
AREA 152 SUBJECT TO VOTER APPROVAL OF APPLICABLE
TAXES, ASSESSMENTS AND CHARGES
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of
Riverside (LAFCO) adopted its Resolution No. 38-98 on December 10, 1998, making
determinations and approving the proposed reorganization designated as LAFCO No. 98-14-1,
including concurrent annexations to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community
Services District and concurrent detachments from the Riverside County Waste Resources
Management District, County Service Area 143 and County Service Area 152 of territory
described in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, LAFCO designated the City of Temecula as the conducting
authority for the reorganization; and
WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of the reorganization as approved by
LAFCO are that (1) prior to recordation of the Certificate of Completion, all applicable taxes,
assessments and charges for services to be provided by the Temecula Community Services
District shall be approved in accordance with the requirements of Proposition 218; (2) the City
of Temecula shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless LAFCO, its agents, officers, and
employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO, its agents, officers, and
employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal;
and (3) the effective date of the reorganization shall be July 1, 2000 or upon recordation of the
Certificate of Completion, whichever is later; and
WHEREAS, the reorganization was proposed by the City of Temecula on behalf
of certain residents within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch communities in order that the City of
Temecula and the Temecula Community Services Distdct may provide community services to
the residents of those communities in a more responsive and efficient manner; and
WHEREAS, the regular county assessment roll is utilized by the City of
Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District; and
WHEREAS, ad valorem taxes will not be levied on the affected territory for
existing general obligation bonded indebtedness of the City of Temecula or the Temecula
Community Services District; and
ResosL~J- 1
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby certifies that a Negative Declaration was
approved for the proposed reorganization on July 28, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held two workshops on March 8, 1999 and March
15, 1999 to explain the reorganization to residents of the affected territory; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed reorganization was called for and
held by the City Council at the place and time noticed therefor on March 23, 1999; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, LAFCO Resolution No. 98-38 was
summarized and the City Council heard and received any oral or written protests, objections,
or evidence which was made, presented or filed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered LAFCO Resolution No. 98-38 and
has considered whether the proposed reorganization will be for the interest of landowners or
present or future inhabitants within the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community
Services District and within the affected territory;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the value of
written protests filed and not withdrawn against the proposed reorganization is less than 25
percent of the registered voters residing within the affected territory and less than 25 percent
of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land
within the affected territory.
Section 2. Pursuant to Division 3 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the
State of California, the City Council hereby orders the reorganization designated as LAFCO
No. 98-14-1, including concurrent annexations to the City of Temecula and the Temecula
Community Services District and concurrent detachments from the Riverside County Waste
Resources Management District, County Service Area 143 and County Service Area 152 of
territory described in Exhibit A, subject to voter approval of all applicable taxes, assessments
and charges for services to be provided by the Temecula Community Services District in
accordance with the requirements of Proposition 218. Such voter approval shall include all of
the following: (1) two-thirds voter approval by the residents of the affected territory of a special
tax against parcels within that territory for the maintenance, operation and servicing of public
parks, recreational facilities, recreational and community services programs, median
landscaping, arterial street lights and traffic signals; (2) two-thirds voter approval by the
residents of the Redhawk specific plan area of rates and charges against parcels within that
area for street lighting, slope maintenance, refuse collection, and road maintenance services
provided to those parcels; and (3) two-thirds voter approval by the residents of the Vail Ranch
specific plan area of rates and charges against parcels within that area for street lighting, slope
maintenance, refuse collection, and road maintenance services provided to those parcels.
Section 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this
resolution to the executive officer of LAFCO.
Resos~99- 2
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 23~d day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Pro Tem
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, Califomia, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of March, 1999, by the following
vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
ResosLqg- 3
EXHIBIT A
MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT'3:)5PA98.Conducting Authority.doc
5
& Sw wA w
Page I of 9
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VAIL RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98-
That certain parcel of land situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside,
State of California, described as follows:
BEGINNING at an angle point on the existing City of Temecula boundary as
described in a document recorded December 9, 1994 as Instrument No. 461244,
Official Records of said County hereinafter referred to as LAFCO No. 88-70-I,
said point being the intersection of the southeasterly right-of-way of State
Highway 79 (142.00 feet wide) and the centedine of Butterfield Stage Road as
shown by Parcel Map 17782 filed in Book 109 of Parcel Maps at Pages 94 and
95 thereof, records of Riverside County, California;
Thence hereafter along said City of Temecula boundary and the cente~ine of said
Butterfield Stage Road, South 22°56'22" East a distance of 1,017.68 feet more or
less, to the southwest comer of said Parcel Map 17782 (recorded in LAFCO No.
88-70-1 as North 22°56'22" West 1,016.04 feet) also being the northwest comer
of Parcel Map 24387 as shown by map on file in Book 164 of Parcel Maps at
Pages 5 through 20 thereof, records of Riverside County and the beginning of a
non-tangent curve, concave southerly and having a radius of 3,000.00 feet, a
radial line to said beginning bears North 9°46'23" West;
Thence easterly along said curve and northerly boundary of said Parcel Map
24387, through a central angle of 1°24'19", an arc distance of 73.58 feet
(recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as a central angle of 1°24'38", and an arc
distance of 73.86 feet);
Thence continuing along the northerly line of said Parcel Map 24387 North
81°37'56'' East a distance of 738.45 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as
South 81°39'22" West a distance of 737.32 feet);
Thence leaving said City of Temecula boundary and continuing along the
northerly boundary of Parcel Map 24387 North 81°37'56" East a distance of
1,758.87 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and
having a radius of 4,200.00 feet;
Thence continuing along the northerly boundary of said Parcel Map 24387,
northeasterly along said curve, through a central angle of 10°54'38", an arc
distance of 799.79 feet;
& Sw wA w
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 2 of 9
Thence continuing along the northerly boundary of said Parcel Map 24387, North
70°43'I 8" East a distance of 3,539.21 feet to the centerline of Anza Road and the
beginning of a non-tangent curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of
1,200.00 feet, a radial line to said beginning bears South 82035'43'' West;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387, southeasterly
along said curve, also being the centerline of Anza Road, through a central angle
of 16°29'04", an arc distance of 345.25 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387, also being the
centerline of Anza Road, South 23°5Y21'' East, a distance of 140.16 feet to the
most easterly comer of Parcel 18 of said Parcel Map 24387;
Thence leaving the centerline of Anza Road, along the southerly line of said
Parcel 18 South 71 ° 11 '03" West, a distance o f 3,092.94 feet;
Thence along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South 11°07'17" East a
distance of 1,273.78 feet to the most easterly comer of Parcel 14 of said Parcel
Map 24387;
Thence along the southeasterly boundary of said Parcel 14 South 71 °58'24" West
a distance of 1,051.49 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Pamel Map 24387 South
50032'59'' West a distance of 582.84 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South
39052'38" West a distance of 2,189.71 feet:
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South
29°37'22" East a distance of 1,305.54 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South
73010'23'' West a distance of 449.26 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South
43°57'13'' West a distance of 773.17 feet to the intersection of the southwesterly
line of Pauba Rancho;
Thence along said Pauba Rancho line North 46046'24" West a distance of 210.00
feet to the intersection of the southerly line of Little Temecula Rancho;
Thence along said southerly line of Little Temecula Rancho South 53°06'24"
West a distance of 68.13 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South 0°53'12"
West a distance of 1,143.59 feet to the southeast comer of Parcel 11 of said
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 3 of 9
Parcel Map, said southeast comer also being the intersection of the centerline of
Woolpert Lane said Parcel 11;
Thence along the southerly line of said Parcel 11 North 88020'45" West a
distance of 1,450.44 feet to the intersection of the southerly line of Little
Temecula Rancho;
Thence along said southerly line of Little Temecula Rancho South 53°06'24"
West a distance of 1,510.57 feet;
Thence leaving said Rancho line and continuing along the boundary of said
Parcel Map 24387 South 00° 14'33" East a distance of 1,684.12 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South
88°21'3 I" East a distance of 393.97 feet to the a point on the centerline of Anza
Road;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Pamel Map 24387 and said
centerline of Anza Road South 88°21'31" East a distance of 530.73 feet;
Thence leaving the centerline of said Anza Road and continuing along the
boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South 88°21'31'' East a distance of 372.65
feet to the northeast comer of Parcel 24 of said Parcel Map 24387;
Thence along the easterly line of said Parcel 24 South l°l Y00'' East a distance of
1,278.36 feet to the southeast comer thereof;
Thence along the southerly line of said Parcel 24 North 89°35'41" West a
distance of 1,315.76 feet;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 South 0°20'15"
East a distance of 1,306.96 feet to the southeast comer of Parcel 23 of said Parcel
Map 24387;
Thence along the southerly line of said Parcel 23 North 89°24'49" West a
distance of 1,319.25 feet;
Thence along the easterly line of Parcel 25 of said Parcel Map South 0o39'20"
West a distance of 1,335.55 feet to the southeast comer thereof;
Thence along the most southerly line of said Parcel 25 and the prolongation
thereof North 89048'50" West a distance of 1,993.66 feet to the comer of said
Parcel Map;
Thence leaving the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 and continuing North
89°48'50" West a distance of 41.16 feet to the intersection of the centerline of
Pala Road;
Kmm , & Sw .wA w
KXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 4 of 9
Thence along the centerline of said Pala Road North 43001'34'' West a distance
of 520.55 feet;
Thence continuing along the centerline of Pala Road North 44°49'36" West a
distance 372.50 feet to a point on the centerline of Deer Hollow Way, said point
also described by document referred to herein as LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as the
southwesterly end of Course No. 82;
Hereafter, the following courses are described to follow the boundary of the City
of Temecula described by said document referred to herein as LAFCO No. 88-
70-1:
Thence along the centerline of Deer Hollow Way also being the
boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 North 42°2Y18" East a distance of
2,254.53 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South 42°23'59" West
a distance of 2,254.57 feet) to the most soulhefty comer of Parcel 27 of
said Parcel Map;
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 North
24°50'41" West a distance of 832.36 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 24049'53'' East a distance of 832.36 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 North
30°48'15'' West a distance of 1,705.39 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 30°47'27" East a distance of 1,705.39 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Parcel Map 24387 North
61 °02'24" West a distance of 448.25 feet to the most westerly comer of
said Parcel Map 24387;
Thence continuing North 61002'24" West along the boundary line of
Tract No. 23063-5 as shown by map on file in Book 221 of Maps at
Pages 21 through 29, records of said Riverside County, a distance of
169.00 feet (the sum of the previous 2 courses was recorded in LAFCO
No. 88-70-1 as South 61°01'36'' East a distance of 617.25 feet)
Thence continuing along the boundary line of said Tract No. 23063-5
North 45°33'18'' West a distance of 711.38 feet to the most westerly
comer of said Tract (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South
45032'22'' East a distance of711.56 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary line of said Tract No. 23063-5
North 45°48'11'' East a distance of 415.51 feet to the southwesterly
boundary line of Tract No. 23063-4 as shown by map on file in Book
221 of Maps at Pages 12 through 20 thereof, records of said Riverside
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 5 of 9
County (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South 45°48'16'' West a
distance of 415.45 feet);
Thence North 41°21'23'' West along the boundary of said Tract No.
23063-4 a distance of 442.13 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as
South 41°19'56" East a distance of 442.14 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-4 South
45°58'28" West a distance of 416.34 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70
as North 45°58'31" East a distance of 416.34 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-4 North
35°27'12" West a distance of 710.25 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 35°26'16" East a distance of 709.90 feet) to a point on the
centerline of Wolf Valley Road, said point also being the most southerly
comer of Tract 23063-3 on file in Book 220 of Maps at Pages 40 through
56 thereof, records of said Riverside County;
Thence along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North 35027'12''
West a distance of 88.47 feet (this course was not described in LAFCO
No. 88-70-1 );
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
53°34'28" West a distance of 726.59 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 53°3Y32" East a distance of 726.59 feet);
Thence continuing along boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
65016'26.. West a distance of 955.73 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 65°15'30" East a distance of 634.63 feet and South
65°15'30" East 321.10 feet) to the west line of said Tract No. 23063-3;
Thence continuing along boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
4°18'10 East a distance of 173.65 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1
as South 4°18'36" West a distance of 173.52 feet) to the beginning of a
non-tangent curve, concave northerly, and having a radius of 1,200.00
feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as 1,200.00 feet), a radial line to
said curve bears North 4°18'I 0" East;
Thence easterly along said curve through a central angle of 7058'45'' an
are distance of 167.12 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-I as westerly
along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 7°57'3Y' a distance
of 166.70 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
86°19'25" East a distance of 119.99 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as South 86°20'45" West a distance of 120.05 feet);
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 6 of 9
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
37°24'25'' East a distance of 300.15 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 37°27'00'' West a distance of 300.09 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-3 North
40°04'56" West a distance of 28.05 feet to the comer of Tract No. 23063-
2 as shown by map on file in Book 220 of Maps at Pages 30 through 39
thereof, records of Riverside County;
Thence along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 North 40°04'56''
West a distance of 411.25 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as the
sum of the previous 2 courses being South 40003'40" East a distance of
439.27 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract
21°13'17" East a distance of 171.28 feet (recorded in
1 as South 21017'35.. West a distance of 171.27 feet);
No. 23063-2 North
LAFCO No. 88-70-
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract
20°2Y0Y' East a distance of 286.33 feet (recorded in
I as South 20°22'30'' West a distance of 286.32 feet);
No. 23063-2 North
LAFCO No. 88-70-
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract
61 °43'07" East a distance of 216.05 feet (recorded in
1 as South 61044'20.. West a distance of 216.03 feet)
No. 23063-2 North
LAFCO No. 88-70-
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 North
81 °33'01" East a distance of 315.81 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as South 81 °33'05" West a distance of 315.83 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 South
84°39'28" East a distance of 208.85 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
1 as North 84037'55" West a distance of 208.85 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 South
48°39'10'' East a distance of 247.87 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as North 48037'40'' West a distance of 247.90 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract
69°39'18" East a distance of 336.15 feet (recorded in
I as North 69°38'35" West a distance of 336.25 feet);
No. 23063-2 South
LAFCO No. 88-70-
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract
70°44'12.. East a distance of 452.93 feet (recorded in
I as South 70°45'05" West a distance of 452.95 feet);
No. 23063-2 North
LAFCO No. 88-70-
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 7 of 9
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 South
67°57'32" East a distance of 532.15 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
1 as North 67°56'54" West a distance of 532.09 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No 23063-2 South
63029'28" East a distance of 282.47 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as North 63°29'11" West a distance of 282.48 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-2 North
83°15'57" East a distance of 724.10 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
1 as South 83016'35" West a distance of 724.11 feet) to the comer of
Tract No. 23063-6 as shown by map on file in Book 222 of Maps at
Pages 84 through 98 thereof, records of said Riverside County;
Thence along the boundary of said Tract No. 23063-6 North 16040'07"
West a distance of 885.05 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as
South 16°38'12" East a distance of 885.01 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-6 North
56°41'35" East a distance of 654.72 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as North 56°42'21'' East a distance of 654.77 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-6 North
74059'09'' West a distance of 578.70 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 74°58'19'' East a distance of 578.70 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-6 North
53°08'15" West a distance of 36.74 feet to the most southerly comer of
Tract No. 23063-1 as shown by map on file in Book 212 of Maps at
Pages 49 through 58 thereof, records of said Riverside County;
Thence along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North 53°08'15" West
a distance of 110.10 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as the sum of
the preceding 2 courses, South 53°07'41" East a distance of 146.84 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North
80°54'34" West a distance of 250.04 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 80053'58" East a distance of 250.08 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North
88°20'52" East a distance of 193.02 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as South 88°21'44" East a distance of 192.98 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North
70°01'39.. West a distance of 199.56 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 70°01'17" East a distance of 199.56 feet);
Kn cnn &
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 8 of 9
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North
86059'58'' West a distance of 141.49 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-
70-1 as South 86059'50'' East a distance of 141.46 feet);
Thence continuing along the boundary of said Tract 23063-1 North
0°31'07" West a distance of 305.00 feet to the southwest comer of Parcel
I of Parcel Map 24332 as shown by map on file in Book 156 of Parcel
Maps at Pages 98 through 103 thereof, records of said Riverside County;
Thence continuing along the westerly line of said Parcel 1 North
0°31'07" West a distance of 263.08 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
I as the sum of the preceding 2 course, South 0o30'33'' East a distance of
568.12 feet);
Thence continuing along the westerly line of said Parcel I North
21°16'25" West a distance of 858.96 feet (recorded in LAFCO 88-70-1
as South 21 o 15'55" East a distance of 859.04 feet);
Thence continuing along the westerly line of said Parcel I South
88° 17'35" East a distance of 523.72 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-
1 as North 88° 17'14" West a distance of 523.70 feet);
Thence continuing North 63°50'16'' East along the westerly line of said
Parcel I a distance of 285.06 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as
South 63°51'00" West a distance of 285.07 feet);
Thence continuing North 46°30'39" West along the westerly line of said
Parcel 1 a distance of 215.14 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as
South 46030'00'' East a distance of 215.19 feet);
Thence continuing North 4°04'38" West along the westerly line of said
Parcel I a distance of 148.52 (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South
4°03'15'' East a distance of 148.41 feet);
Thence continuing North 50°01 '58" East along the westerly line of said
Parcel I a distance of 360.94 feet to a non-tangent curve, concave
northeasterly and having a radius of 1,200.00 feet (recorded in LAFCO
No. 88-70-I as having a radius of 1,200.00 feet), a radial line to said
beginning bears South 40025'23'' West, said curve being the centerline of
Redhawk Parkway (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South 50°02'41"
West a distance of 361.13 feet);
Thence northeasterly along said curve and the centerline of Redhawk
Parkway as shown on Parcel Map 27987-1 on file in Book 181 of Parcel
Maps at Pages 93 through .98 thereof, records of said Riverside County,
through a central angle of 32°38'19'' an arc distance of 683.58 feet
& Sw wA w
EXHIBIT "A"
(continued)
Page 9 of 9
Ar~a Contains:
RAN/kat
836-6A
7/27198
(recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as southeasterly along the arc of said
curve through a central angle of 32°37'30", a distance of 683.30 feet);
Thence continuing along the centerline of said Redhawk Parkway North
16°56'18'' West a distance of 34.97 feet to the southeasterly fight-of-way
of State Highway 79 (142.00 feet wide) as shown by Tract No. 23172 on
file in Book 251 of Maps at Pages 94 through 99 thereof, records of said
Riverside County (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South 16056'30''
East a distance of 35.00 feet);
Thence North 73°22'11" East along said southeasterly right-of-way of
State Highway 79 and the northerly line of said Tract No. 23172 a
distance of 7,354.49 feet (recorded in LAFCO No. 88-70-1 as South
73°23'17'' West a distance of 7,355.05 feet) to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
1,978 acres, more or less
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 2
~. ANZA -----..~/
ROAD
C TY OF '~
TEMECULA ',~
BOUNDARY .
Z'
R%AD "\ \ L. .....
RGURE 4 \ \
¢ DEER
P.O.B.
, '- (~ BU'R'ERFIELD
SOUTHEASTERLY~ STAGE ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY:
HWY. 79 :
REDHAWK ~
' !""I, ........
L__
1 I
~ ( WOOLPERT
, LANE
ANZA
ROAD
HOLLOW WAY
FIGURE 3
Kmmm
3602 Univer.~ly Ave.. R,ves~e. CA 92501 · 909-684-6980
SCALE: N.T.S. DATE: 7/~-7/98
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VML RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98-
DRAWN By:SFM CHECKED By:RAN W.O.: 836-6
EXHIBIT
R~'Rt I OF 6
/
~ ANZA
ROAD
EXISTING
BOUNDARY
PARCEL MAP
17782
¢. BU'I'rERFIELD
P,OR, S :AGE ROAD
· G HWY.T 79
V, ,e SOUTHEASTERLY
HT-OF-WAY
K~ECED,
3602 Unives, ty Ave- Rive's~de, CA. 92501 · 909-{~4-69~0
~- SCALg: 1"=1000' DATE: 7/27/98
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VAIL RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98-
DRAWN BY: SFM CHECKED BY: RAN W.O.: 836-6
EXHIBIT
!qGURE201;'6
PARCEL MAP
24387
L17 ·
I
i
_~- ~ WOOLPERT
LANE
I
I
L20
· ·
L26
~TEWAI~T
3602 UnNersdy Ave · N,vefs~de, CA lJ~01 ·
~ SCALE:I"=tO00' DATE: 7/27/98
/---~ ANZA
ROAD
L21/ L22
· ·
PARCEL
24
L24
·
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VAIL RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
[,A~CO 98-
DRAWN BY: ;SFM CHECKED BY: RAN W.O.: 836-6
EXHIBIT
11GtrR~ 3 OF 6
L46
TRACT
23063-3
TRACT "\
23063-4
<
TRACT
23065-5
PARCEL MAP
24-387
, [xp. 12-31-.01
¢_ PALA
ROAD
EXISTING
CiTY OF
TEMECULA
BOUNDARY
PARCEL
27 /
/
PARCEL MAP
24-387
{ DEER
HOLLOW WAY
PARCEL
25
L28
L26
K~r. CED,
~ A T
I#QORPORATtO
5602 Unrvers~tV Ave · RiversM:~e, CA 92501 · 909-684-6900
SCAJ. J~: f'=lO00' DATE: 7/27/98
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VAIL RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98--
DHAWN By:SFM CH~CIa~D By:PAN W.O.: 836-6
EXHIBIT
FIGURE 4 OF6
¢_ BUTTERFIELD
STAGE ROAD
SOUTHEASTERLY
RIGHT-OF-WAY
HWY. 79
EXISTING
CITY OF
TEMECULA
BOUNDARY
TRACT
23172
Kulr. cm
3602 UnwerMy Ave.- Rivefs,,de. CA 92501 · 909-684-bgOO
SCALE: 1"=1000' DATE: 7/27/98
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNEXATION OF REDHA]RrK/VML RANCH
TO
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98-
DRAWN By:SFM CHECKED By:RAN W.O.: 836-6
EXHIBIT
RGt~ 5 OF 6
COURSE SHEET
LINE
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
LIO
L11
L12
L13
L14
L15
L16
L17
L18
L19
L20
L21
L22
L24
L25
L26
L27
L28
L29
L30
L31
L32
L33
L34
L35
L36
L37
L38
L39
DIRECTION
S22°56'22"E
N81'37'S6"E
N81 '37'56"E
N70'43' 18"E
S23'53'21 "E
S71'11 '03"W
S11'07'17"E
S71'58'24"W
S50'32'59"W
S39'52'38"W
S29'37'22"E
S73' 10'23"W
S43'57' 13"W
N46'46'24"W
S53'06'24"W
S00'53' 12"W
N88°20'45"W
S53'06'24"W
SO0' 14'33"E
S88'21 '31 "E
S88'21 '31 "E
S88'21 '31 "E
S01'13'O0"E
N89'35'41 "W
S00'20' 15"E
N89'24'49"W
S00'39'20"W
N89'48'50"W
N89*48'50"W
N43'01 '34"W
N44*49'36"W
N42'23' 18"E
N24"50'41 "W
N30'48' 15"W
N61'O2'24"W
N61'O2'24"W
N45'33' 18"W
N45'48' 11 "E
N41'21 '23"W
DISTANCE UNE
1017,68' L40
738,45' L41
1758.87' L42
3539.21' L43
140, 16' L44
3092.94' L45
1273,78' L46
1051,49' L47
582.84' L48
2189,71' L49
1305.54' 1,50
449.26' L51
773.17' L52
210.00' L53
68.13' 1,54
1143.59' L55
1450.44' L56
1510.57' L57
1684.12' L58
393.97' L59
530.73' L60
372.65' L61
1278.36' L62
1315.76' L63
1306.96' L64
1319.25' L65
1335.55' L66
1993.66' L67
41.1 6' L68
520.55' L69
372.50' L70
2254.53' L71
832.36' L72
1705.39' L73
448.25' L74
169.00' L75
711.38' L76
415.51' L77
442.13' L78
L79
CURVE
DIRECTION
S45'58'28"W
N35°27' 12"W
N35'27' 12"W
N53'34'28"W
N65' 16'26'W
NO4° 18' 10"E
N86'19'25"E
N37'24'25"E
N40'O4'56"W
N40'O4'56"W
N21°13'17"E
N20'23'O3"E
N61*43'O7"E
N81'33'01 'E
S84°39'28"E
S48'39' 10"E
S69'39' 18"E
N70'44' 12"E
S67'57'32"E
S63'29'28"E
N83'15'57"E
N16'40'07"W
N56'41 '35"E
N74°59'Og'W
N53'08' 15"W
N53'08' 15"W
N80'54'34"W
N88°20'S2"E
N70'01 '39"W
N86'59'58"W
N00'31 '07"W
N00°31 '07"W
N21°16'25"W
S88° 17'35"E
N63°50' 16"E
N46'30'39"W
NO4'O4'38"W
N50'01 '58"E
N16'56'18"W
N73'22' 11 "E
KD, IECCfi
~t TAfiT
TE
RADIUS LENGTH
CI 3000.00' 73.58'
C2 4200.00' 799.79'
C3 1200.00' 345.25'
C4 1200.00' 167,12'
C5 1200.00' 683.58'
tNOORIBORATeO
3602 UnNerSdV Ave. H,vefs,de. (.A. 92501 · 90'j-b84-6900
SCALE;: N/A DAT~: 7/2'//98
DISTANCE
416,34'
710.25'
88.47'
726.59'
955.73'
173.65'
119,99'
300.15'
28.05'
411,25'
171,28'
286,33'
21 6,05'
315,81'
208.85'
247.87'
336,15'
452,93'
532.15'
282.47'
724, 10'
885.05°
654.72'
S78.70'
36.74'
110.10'
250.04'
193.02'
199.56'
1 41.49'
305.00'
263.08'
858.96'
523.72'
285.06'
215.14'
148.52'
360.94'
34.97'
7354.49'
CITY 0F
ANNEXATION OF REDHAWK/VAIL RANCH
TO
DELTA "~~~
01'24'19" 'A' *
16'29 '04'
07'58'45"
32'38' 19"
TEMECU znZ?
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
LAFCO 98-
DRAWN' By:SFM CH~CKED By:RAN W.O.:
836-6 ~ 6 0F 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT JULY 28, 1998
(COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS HEARING)
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DE PTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~05PA98.Conducting Authority.doc
6
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
'AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Community Development Director
July 28, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-Zoning
Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan Areas)
and Annexation of the
PREPARED BY:
John De Gange, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration with a Finding of DeMinimus Impact for Planning
Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-Zoning and Annexation);
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-
Zoning and Annexation); and
3. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY, PRE-
ZONING THE AREAS KNOWN AS THE REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN AREAS ESTABLISHING ZONING FOR THESE AREAS AS "SPECIFIC PLAN"
AS PART OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0205 AND SUBSTANTIALLY
IN THE FORM ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT "B"
4. ADOPT a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REQUESTING THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS
REORGANIZING THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN INHABITED
TERRITORY DESCRIBED HEREIN AS THE REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN AREAS TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AND SAID AREAS TO INCLUDE SAID TERRITORY WITHIN
THE TEMECULA COMMLINITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND TO DETACH SAID
TERRITORY FROM CSA 143, CSA 152 AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT; DESIGNATED AS PART OF PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA98-0205
R:\.S'I'AI:I:RIrI~.20-SI~A91~.CC ?/21/98jd
BACKGROUND
This item comes before the City Council after 121 residents within the Redhawk area submitted
a petition to the City in January of 1997 requesting that the City annex them. To determine
the feasibility of the annexation staff conducted a survey of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch
residents to determine if they would be in favor of annexation. In addition, staff conducted a
comprehensive study of the fiscal impacts associated with the annexation. After considering
all these items, the City Council, at its April 28, 1998 meeting instructed staff to proceed with
the annexation.
At this time, staff is coming forward with the first formal step in the annexation process. The
actions being requested in this application include the approval of a Negative Declaration for
the project, the adoption of a Resolution initiating the Commencement of Proceedings, and an
Ordinance pre-zoning the territory. Following these actions, an application will be made to, and
a hearing will be held by, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). It is the City's
hope that this item will be heard at LAFCO at its October 22, 1998 meeting. If approved by
LAFCO, the City Council is then required to act as the Conducting Authority and hold a public
hearing to evaluate any protests from the residents or property owners in the annexation area.
The annexation will become final only with the successful election of special rates and charges
for park, slope and median maintenance and refuse collection by two thirds of the registered
voters within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch area who vote in the election.
The Planning Commission considered this proposal on July 1, 1998. The Commission
unanimously recommended by a 5-0 vote that the City Council adopt a Resolution initiating
annexation proceedings and an Ordinance pre-zoning the territory with "Specific Plan" zoning.
Discussion at Planning Commission
At the July 1, Planning Commission meeting, though there was unanimous support for the
annexation, there were two issues which generated some discussion. The first of these issues
was a concern that, because Redhawk and Vail Ranch are two distinct areas, one or the other
area could defeat the annexation for the other area by the residents of that area voting down
the special tax and rates and charges component of the annexation. The Commission asked
staff if the areas could be separately considered so that the vote for one area would not defeat
annexation for the entire area. Staff informed the Commission that all the fiscal impact studies
which had been conducted considered both areas as one unit and in order to consider the areas
separately, the fiscal impacts of each area would have to be evaluated separately. In addition,
staff informed the Commission that LAFCO would likely not look favorably on an annexation
which involved the Redhawk area only, given that annexation of Redhawk by itself would
create an island of unincorporated territory. Annexation of Vail Ranch by itself could potentially
be considered; however, at this time, a new application would be required. A new application
would involve the preparation of a new fiscal impact analysis and plan for services, a new map
and legal description, and the adoption of a new resolution of application initiating annexation
proceedings and, the pre-zoning ordinance.
The second issue raised by the Planning Commission had to do with the provision of fire
services. It was suggested by Commissioner Slaven that additional fire personnel may be
required after annexation, given the fact that the City provides one additional staff person per
piece of fire fighting equipment (truck or engine) than the County provides. The concern was
that when Redhawk/Vail Ranch annexes; the City, pursuant to its contract with the County,
R:~'TAFFRPT~205PA98 .CC 7/20/98 jd 2
would be required to provide an additional person to meet the City's staffing requirement.
Currently the Redhawk/Vail Ranch area is serviced by Station 84 which is located at 30650
Pauba Road. Upon annexation into the City this station will continue service the area. Since
Station 84 is already within the City limits and is staffed by the extra person per vehicle
required per the City contract, no addit:,onal personnel would be required. At this time, if a fire
occurs in the area within the Station 84 service area, regardless of whether it is in the City or
in an unincorporated area in the County, the equipment responding to the fire will be staffed
with the number of personnel required by the City's contract. Consequently, if the area is
annexed, there will virtually be no change in the fire protection services provided to the
Redhawk/Vail Ranch area. The Commission also questioned whether the Redhawk/Vail Ranch
area falls within the threshold for adequate response time for Station 84. Areas within the City
limits and the surrounding developed areas of the County fall within Urban Category 2. The
established standard for response time is within five minutes. Currently the Redhawk/Vail
Ranch area falls within the zone of five minute response time. This will remain unchanged if
the area is annexed. As building continues in the area and the density increases the response
time will increase. As a consequence, construction of a new fire station within close proximity
of the annexation area either to located at Butterfield Stage Road, south of Highway 79 or near
the vicinity of Wolf Valley Road and Pala Road is proposed, pursuant to the conditions of
approval for the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans. Ultimately. this station will service
the area. It is anticipated that this station will be constructed in fiscal year 2000/2001.
Corresl~ondence (Letters Received)
Just prior to their July 1, 1998 meeting, the Planning Commission received a letter from the
attorney representing the owners of the commercial property in Vail Ranch along the south side
of Highway 79 (S) [MDC Vail], dated June 25, 1998 (see Attachment 6). This letter expressed
a series of concerns and generally indicated that this property owner would be opposed to
annexation to the City. Since the July 1 st Planning Commission meeting, staff has met with
the representatives of this property (Jerry Swanger and Sam Alhadeff) to discuss their
concerns. At this time, it is staff's feeling that many of their concerns have been addressed.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact associated with the annexation of the Redhawk/Vail Ranch areas is fully
addressed in the fiscal impact analysis conducted by the City and included herein as
Attachment 5.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to less than
significant level. In addition this project by itself will not impact endangered, threatened or rare
species, or the site will not serve as a migration corridor. Therefore, staff is recommending that
the Negative Declaration for PA 9,q-0205 be adopted for this project and a Finding of
DeMiminimus impact be made,
R:~qTAFFRPT~205PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 3
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
This project consists of the pre-zoning and annexation of approximately 1,995 acres which is
comprised of the Redhawk (Specific.Plan No. 217) and Vail Ranch (Specific Plan No. 223)
Specific Plan Areas from unincorporated portions of Riverside County into the incorporated City
of Temecula.
The proposed annexation is a logical extension of the existing City limits and is entirely
contained within the City's Sphere of Influence. This annexation will not create any islands or
pockets of unincorporated territory.
The proposed actions to be taken fulfill the City's requirement for application to LAFCO which
include adopting a resolution of application initiating annexation proceedings and pre-zoning the
site. The proposed zoning, "Specific Plan", is consistent with the zoning which currently exists
in the County and what has been designated by the City's General Plan. Zoning on the property
would take effect once the annexation is finaled.
FINDINGS
Annex Ation
1. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan.
m
An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are
not considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. Specifically, police services is an area which has been identified
as an area which will be affected by annexation. After Mitigation Measures are
incorporated, impacts to Police Services will be e considered less than significant.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on
site. There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest
that there are wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A
DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of
Influence and is contiguous the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially
surrounded by the City's existing corporate boundary.
The territory within the proposed annexation area is within a substantially developed
area which is continuing to develop. The proposed annexation area is not prime
agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is
designated for urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan.
o
The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City budget.
The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs
contained in the General Plan.
R: L~TAFFRPT~205PA98 .CC 7/20/98 jd 4
Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits, attachments
and environmental documents associated with this application and her.in incorporated
by reference.
Pre-7oning
The proposed Pre-Zoning will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment,
as determined in the Initial Study for this project. No immediate impacts to the
environment will result from the establishment of zoning for this property. Impacts from
future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant·
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on
site. There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest
that there are wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A
DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
The proposed Pre-Zoning is consistent with the goals, policies and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan. The designations established by the General
Plan reflect the zoning designations within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans.
The site of the proposed Pre-Zoning is suitable to accommodate all the land uses
currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the site is of
adequate size and shape for any proposed use.
Adequate access exists to the proposed site of the Pre-Zoning. Access to the project
is currently being provided at Highway 79 (S) from Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield
Stage Road, and Pala Road at Wolf Valley Road.
Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
R:~q"l'AFFRPT~205PA98 ,CC 7/20/98 jd 5
Attachments:
City Council Ordinance No. 98-' (Planning Application No. PA98-0205, An Ordinance
Pre-Zoning the Proposed Annexation Area With the Zoning Designation "Specific Plan" -
Page 7
Exhibit "A" - Zoning Map
City Council Resolution No. 98- A Resolution of Application Initiating Annexation
Proceedings - Page 12
Exhibit "B" - Map and Legal Description - Distributed under separate cover
July 1, 1998 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 18
Plan for Provision of Municipal Services for Planning Application No. PA98-0205 -
Annexation of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan Areas - Page 19.
Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Annexation of the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan
Areas - Page 20
Correspondence from Lorenz Alhadeff Cannon & Rose, LLP dated June 25, 1998 -
Page 21
R:XSTAFFRPTX205PA98 .CC 7/20/98 jd 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
PFIE-ZONIN6 ORDINANCE
R:XSTAFFRPTX20~PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY, PRE-ZONING
THE AREAS KNOWN AS THE I~F-r}HAWK AND VAIL
RANCH SPECIFIC PLANS AS PART OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA98-0205 ESTABLISHING ZONING
FOR THIS AREA AS "SPECIFIC PLAN" THAT IS
SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED TO THIS
RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT B.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of
the State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The zoning classification
shown on the attached exhibit (Exhibit B) is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official
Land Use map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as may be amended hereafter
from time to time by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of Temecula Official
Zoning Map is amended by placing in affect the zoning designation "Specific Plan" as described
in this Ordinance and Planning Application 98-0205 and in the above title, and as shown on
zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Section 2. Findings.
A. The City Council in adopting said ordinance, makes the following findings:
1. The proposed Pre-Zoning will not have a significant adverse effect on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study for this project. No immediate impacts to the
environment will result from the establishment of zoning for this property. Impacts from future
development can be mitigated to a level less than significant.
2. The project will not result in an impact to endangered. threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on site.
There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest that there are
wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding
can be made for this project.
R:XS'I'AFFRItI'X20SPA98.CC 7121198 jd ~B
3. The proposed Pre-Zoning is consistent with the goals, policies and
implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The designations established by the
General Plan reflect the zoning designations within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans.
4. The site of the proposed Pre-Zoning is suitable to accommodate all the land
uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the site is of adequate
size and shape for any proposed use.
5. Adequate access exists to the proposed site of the Pre-Zoning. Access to
the project is currently being provided at Highway 79 (S) from Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield
Stage Road, and Pala Road at Wolf Valley Road.
6. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental
documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Section 3. The City Council in approving the certification of the Negative Declaration of
environmental impact under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
specifically finds that the approval of this Pre-Zoning will have a DeMinimis impact on fish and
wildlife resources. The City Council specifically finds that in considering the record as a whole,
the project involves no potential adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife
as the same is defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. This is based on the fact that
this action will not change any of the development activities that have previously been constructed
or are currently under construction. Furthermore, the City Council finds that an initial study has
been prepared by the City Staff and considered by the Planning Commission which has been the
basis to evaluate the potential for adverse impact on the environment and forms the basis for the
City Council's determination, including the information contained in the public hearing records,
on which a Negative Declaration of environmental impact was issued and this Di minimis finding
is made. In addition, the City Council finds that there is no evidence before the City that the
proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources, or the habitat
on which the wildlife depends. Finally, the City Council finds that the City has, on the basis of
substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in 14 California Code
of Regulations 753.5(d).
Section 4. The areas identified in Exhibit "B" are hereby pre-zoned Specific Plan (SP) [the
Redhawk Specific Plan Area will be designated "SP 9" and the Vail Ranch Specific Plan area will
be designated "SP 10"] to become effective upon annexation to the City of Temecula.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance,
and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
R:XSTAFFRPTX205PA98.CC 7/21/98 jd 9
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOFrED this
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 98- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of ,1998, and that thereafter,
said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Temecula on the day of , by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:X~TAFFRPT~0~PAg8 .CC 7/20/98 jd 'l C}
EXHIBIT A
ZONING MAP
R:~qTAFFRPT~205PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
Plan' Zonin9 - SP
'Specific Plan' Zoning . SP
CASE NO. - PA98-0205
EXHIBIT- B
ZONING MAP
R: ~TAFFRFI'~05PA98 .CC 7120/98 jd
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0205
RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS
R:~STAFFRFr~205PAg$.CC 7/20/98 jd 12
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING
THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS
REORGANIZING THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDAliBiS OF
CERTAIN INHABITF~F} TERRITORY DESCRIBED HEREIN
AS THE RFxlHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
AREAS TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE CORPORATE
BOUNDARIFS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND SAID
AREAS TO INCLUDE SAm TERRITORY WITHIN THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND TO
DETACH SAID TERRITORY FROM CSA 143, CSA 152 AND
THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT; DESIGNATED AS PART OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA98-0205
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to request the commencement of
proceedings reorganizing the jurisdictional boundaries of certain inhabited territory described
herein and known as the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan areas to include said territory
within the corporate boundaries of the City of Temeeula and within the Temecula Community
Services District and to detach said territory from County Service Area 143 and County Service
Area 152 and the Riverside County Waste Management District pursuant to Part 3 of Division 3
of Title 5 of the California Government Cede;
WttF-REAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted a
General Plan for the City of Temecula and whereas the analysis within the General Plan includes
said areas;
WI-W.~S, said areas axe entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and
are contiguous to the existing City boundary;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0205 which proposed the reorganization was
processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed adoption of this Resolution was posted at City Hall,
the County Library - Rancho California Branch, the United States Post Office - Temecula Branch,
and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, was published in the Californian, and was
mailed to the Local Agency Formation Commission and to each interested and each subject
agency;
WI-W-REAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0205,
on July 1, 1998, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
R:XSTAFFRPTX20.SPA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 13
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 approval of Planning
Application No. PA98-0205;
WHI~REAS, the City Council considered Planning Application No. PA98-0205, on July
28, 1998, at a duly noticed public heating 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;
WIIEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved Planning Application No. PA98-0205;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
by reference.
That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
Section 2. That the City Council hereby requests the commencement of proceedings
be taken pursuant to Part 3 of Division 3 of Title 5 of the California Government Code to
reorganize the jurisdictional boundaries of certain inhabited territory described in Exhibit "A",
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and known as the Redhawk and Vail
Ranch Specific Plan areas, to include said territory within the corporate boundaries of the City of
Temecula and within the Temecula Community Services District and to detach said territory from
County Service Area 143 and County Service Area 152 and from the Riverside County Waste
Management District.
Section 3. That the City Council requests that the proposed reorganization be subject
to the condition that the residents of said territory approve a special tax and rates and charges to
finance the cost of providing services to the territory.
Section 4. Findings. That the City Council, in adopting a Resolution requesting the
commencement of proceedings to reorganize the jurisdictional boundaries of the territory herein
referred to as the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan Areas to include said territory within the
corporate boundaries of the City of Temecula and within the Temecula Community Services
District; and the detachment of said territory from County Service Areas (CSA) 143 and 152, and
the Riverside County Waste Management District (approving Planning Application No. PA98-
0205), hereby makes the following findings:
I. The project is consistent w~th the City's General Plan.
R:~STAFFRFTX20,~PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 14
2. An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Specifically, police services is an area which has been identified as an area which will
be affected by annexation. After mitigation measures are incorporated, impacts to police services
will be considered less than significant.
3. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species
or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on site.
There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest that there are
weftands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding
can be made for this project.
4. The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of
Influence and is contiguous to the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially surrounded
by the City's existing corporate boundary.
5. The territory within the proposed annexation area is within a substantially
developed area which is continuing to develop. The proposed annexation area is not prime
agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is designated for
urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan.
6. The project is being proposed on behalf of certain residents within the subject
territory in order that the City may provide community services to the residents of said territory
in a more responsive and efficient manner.
7. The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City budget.
8. The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs
contained in the General Plan.
9. Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits,
attachments and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated
by reference.
Section 5. F. nvironment~l Corrtpliance. The City Council in approving the certification
of the Negative Declaration of environmental impact under the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act, specifically finds that the approval of this Pre-Zoning will have a
DeMinimis impact on fish and wildlife resources. The City Council specifically finds that in
considering the record as a whole, the project involves no potential adverse effect, either
individually or cumulatively, on wildlife as the same is defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and
Game Code. This is based on the fact that this action will not change any of the development
activities that have previously been constructed or are currently under construction. Furthermore,
the City Council finds that an initial study has been prepared by the City Staff and considered by
R:~STAFFRPT%20,SPA98.CC 7/21/98 jd 15
the Planning Commission which has been the basis to evaluate the potential for adverse impact on
the environment and forms the basis for the City Council's determination, including the
information contained in the public hearing records, on which a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact was issued and this Di minimis finding is made. In addition, the City
Council finds that there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have any
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources, or the habitat on which the wildlife depends.
Finally, the City Council finds that the City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the
presumption of adverse effect contained in 14 California Code of Regulations 753.5(d).
this
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
__ day of ,1998.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Ternecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the __ day of , 1998, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:X~TAFFRP'B205PA98.CC 7/21/98 jd '16
EXHIBIT B
MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
R:~TAFFRPT~05PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 'l 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
JULY 1, 1998
R:XSTAFFRPTX205PA98.CC 7/20/98 jd 18
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 1, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-Zoning and Annexation)
Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner
John De Gange, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
RFCOMMFND the City Council Adopt the Negative
Declaration with a Finding of DeMinimus Impact for
Planning Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-Zoning and
Annexation);
RFP-OMMFNn the City Council Adopt the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA98-
0205 (Pre-Zoning and Annexation); and
o
ArtOPT Resolution No. 98- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA98-0205 (Pre-Zoning) based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Repor~
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
City of Temecula
REPRESENTATIVE:
N/A
PROPOSAL:
The pre-zoning and annexation of approximately 1,995
acres which is comprised of the Redhawk (Specific Plan
No. 217) and Vail Ranch (Specific Plan No. 223) Specific
Plan Areas from unincorporated portions of Riverside
County into the incorporated City of Temecula.
LOCATION:
Generally located within the City's southern Sphere of
Influence (known as Vail Ranch Specific Plan and Redhawk
Specific Plan), south of SR79 South, east of Murdy Ranch
(east of Pala Road), north and west of Anza Road.
EXISTING ZONING:
Specific Plan No. 217 (Redhawk) and Specific Plan No.
223 (Vail Ranch).
R:~TAFFRFr~0~PAgg.PCI 6/24/9g IrJb 1
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
City - Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Area
County- Pechanga Indian Reservation
City - Murdy Ranch Specific Plan Area
County - Pechanga Indian Reservation, A-1-
10, A-1-20; City NC (Neighborhood
Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Specific Plan No. SP-9 (Redhawk) and Specific Plan No.
SP-10 (Vail Ranch).
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Multiple: (HTC - Highway Tourist Commercial). (BP -
Business Park), (OS- Open Space/Recreation), (NC
Neighborhood Commercial), (L - Low Density Residential),
(LM Low-Medium Density Residential), (M Medium
Density Residential), (H - High Density.
EXISTING LAND USE:
Single-family residential, commercial, golf-course, parks
and vacant.
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS
North:
South:
East:
West:
Lucky's commercial center, vacant/under
construction single-family residential homes
(Paloma del Sol Specific Plan)
Vacant
Vacant. dispersed low density single-family
residential housing
Vail Ranch Commercial Center, single-family
residential housing, vacant
The land use break downs for the Redhawk and Vail' Ranch Specific Plans are in the following
table:
Acres
Total Dwelling Units
Single-Family Residential
[Detached| (acre/units)
Single-Family Residential
|Attached| (acres/units)
Redhawk Vail Ranch TOTAL
Specific Plan Specific Plan
1275 720 1995
4188 2431 6619
533 (2222 units) 245 (1234 units) 778 (3456 units)
120 (667 units)
127 (673 units)
247 ( 1340 units)
Multi-Family Residential 121 ( 1299 units) 32 (524 units)
(acres/units)
Parks (acres) 46 102.1
Schools (acresl 32 (3 Schools) 30 (2 Schools)
153 ( 1823 units)
148.1
62 (5 Schools)
R:~'FA~05PA98.PC16/24/98 kib 2
Redhawk Veal 'Ranch TOTAL
Specific Plan Specific Plan
Commercial (acres)
28 126 154
Major Streets (acres)
63 48 111
Open Space (acres)
149 11.5 161
Golf Course (acres)
183
183
DENSITY 3.3 3.4
Source: Redhawk Sl~ecific Plan, Vail Ranch Specific Plan
BACKGROUND
In January of 1997, 121 residents within the Redhawk area submitted a petition to the City
requesting that the City consider annexing their area. On June 10, 1997 the City Council
instructed staff to study the feasibility of annexing the Redhawk and Vail Ranch areas by
conducting a fiscal impact analysis and a survey of the residents in the Redhawk and Vail Ranch
Specific Plan areas to determine if the residents are in favor of annexation. On October, 7,
1997 staff presented the results of the survey and informed the City Council that additional
information was required to complete the fiscal impact analysis. On April 28, 1998, following
the presentation of the results of the fiscal impact analysis to the City Council, staff was
instructed to proceed with annexation.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This proposal involves the pre-zoning and annexation of approximately 1,995 acres which is
comprised of the Redhawk (Specific Plan No. 217) and Vail Ranch (Specific Plan No. 223)
Specific Plan Areas. The City is proposing to pre-zone the territory with Sl~ecific Plan zoning,
and utilizing the zoning which has been established by each of the specific plans. The proposed
annexation will reorganize the City of Temecula's jurisdictional boundary to include
unincorporated portions of Riverside County into the City's incorporated limits.
ANALYSIS
The proposed actions to be taken by the Planning Commission and City Council are the first
step in the annexation process. Following this first step, which involves the City Council's
approval of a Negative Declaration for the project, and the adoption of the Resolution initiating
the Commencement of Proceedings and the Ordinance pre-zoning the territory; an application
will be made and a hearing will be held by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
If approved by LAFCO, the City Council as the Conducting Authority, will hold a public hearing
to evaluate any protests from the residents or property owners in the annexation area. The
annexation will become final only with the successful election of special rates and charges for
park, slope and median maintenance and refuse collection by 213's of the registered voters
within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch area who vote in the election.
R:~TAFFRPT~05PA98.1~CI 6/2488
The proposed annexation is a logical extension of the existing City limits and is entirely
contained within the City's Sphere of Influence. This annexation will not create any islands or
pockets of unincorporated territory.
The City is recluired to pre-zone the site prior to submitting an application for annexation to
LAFCO. The proposed zoning is consistent with the zoning which currently exists in the County
and what has been designated by the City's General Plan. Zoning on the property would take
effect once the annexation is finaled.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The City of Temecula has placed a number of General Plan Land Use designations on the
territory contained in the annexation area. These designations directly correspond to the zoning
designations contained within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans and include the
following: High (H), Medium (M), Low Medium (LM), Low (L), Very Low (VL) density
residential; Highway Tourist Commercial (HTC), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Business Park
(BP), Open Space (OS), and Public/Institutional (P). The zoning for the site as it currently exists
in the County, is Specific Plan. When annexed to the City, the land use for the project area will
be with the General Plan. The zoning will be established as Specific Plan with the City
Council's adoption of the Ordinance for pre-zoning which is being processed concurrently with
the annexation.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be
mitigated to less than significant level.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
This project consists of the pre-zoning and annexation of approximately 1,995 acres which is
comprised of the Redhawk (Specific Plan No. 217) and Vail Ranch (SI3ecific Plan No. 223)
Specific Plan Areas from unincorporated portions of Riverside County into the incorporated City
of Temecula.
The proposed annexation is a logical extension of the existing City limits and is entirely
contained within the City's Sphere of Influence. This annexation will not create any islands or
pockets of unincorporated territory.
The City of Temecula has placed a number of General Plan Land Use designations on the
territory contained in the annexation area. These designations directly correspond to the zoning
designations contained within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans. When annexed to
the City, the land use for the project area will be with the General Plan. The zoning will be
established as Specific Plan with the City Council's adoption of the Ordinance for pre-zoning
which is being processed concurrently with the annexation.
The areas to be annexed have existing entitlements (approved Specific Plans, Development
Agreements, Tract Maps, Parcel Maps, Tentative Tract Maps, Development Plans, Conditional
R:LqTAFFRFT~05PA98.pCI 6/24/98 klb 4
Use Permits, etc.) and portions have been either constructed or are under construction. The
validity of these approvals are not being affected by the annexation.
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be
mitigated.
FINDINGS
Annexation
The project is consistent with the City's General Plan.
An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are
not considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. Specifically, police services is an area which has been identified
as an area which will be affected by annexation. After Mitigation Measures are
incorporated, impacts to Police Services will be e considered less than significant.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on
site. There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest
that there are wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A
DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of
Influence and is contiguous the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially
surrounded by the City's existing corporate boundary.
The territory within the proposed annexation area is within a substantially developed
area and which is continuing to develop, The proposed annexation area is not prime
agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is
designated for urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan.
The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City budget.
The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs
contained in the General Plan,
Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits, attachments
and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated
by reference.
R:~STAFFRPT~OSPA98.PCl 6/24/98 IrJb 5
Pre-7oning
The proposed Pre-Zoning will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment,
as determined in the Initial. Study for this project. No immediate impacts to the
environment will result from the establishment of zoning for this property. Impacts from
future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or Their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on
site. There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest
that there are wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A
DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
The proposed Pre-Zoning is consistent with the goals, policies and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan. The designations established by the General
Ran reflect the zoning designations within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans.
The site of the proposed Pre-Zoning is suitable to accommodate all the land uses
currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the site is of
adequate size and shape for any proposed use.
Adequate access exists to the proposed site of the Pre-Zoning. Access to the project
is currently being provided at Highway 79 {S) from Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield
Stage Road, and Pala Road at Wolf Valley Road.
Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 98- - Blue Page 7
A. City Council Resolution No. 98- (Commencement Proceedings) - Blue Page 12
B, Ordinance No. 98- - Blue Page 16
Initial Study - Blue Page 20
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 36
Plan for the Provision of Municipal Services 38
Exhibits - Blue Page 45
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C Zoning Map
Correspondence Received - Blue Page 46
R:~ST/LFFIU'T~05PA98.PCI 6/24/98 klb 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 98 -
P-:~ST,~F!:v!PJ~PAgI.IN~ fd24~ klb 7
ATT'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RF-~OLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PIANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECUIA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
C1TY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO
THE COMMENCEMF~NT OF PROCF3~BINGS TO ANNEX
TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTAIN INHABITED
TERRITORY DESCRIB~'-r} HEREIN AS THE Bk'~rsHAWK
AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS AND
RECO~ING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE PRE-ZONING THE SAm TERRITORY WITH
SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING (PA98-(}205)
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
General Plan;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0205 was processed including, but not
limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, the County
Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of
Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0205,
on July 1, 1998, 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, the Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council give its
consent to the commencement of annexation proceedings
WHFREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0205;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above redrations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
R:~TAFFRP'~20~PA98.PCI 6/24/98 klb 8
Section 2. Findings.
A. The Planrang Commission in recommending approval of Planning Application No.
PA98-0205, makes the following findings for annexation:
1. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan.
2. An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has deterrninecl that
although the propo=_~:J pwject could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are
not considered to be significant due to mitigation measm'es contained in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Specifically, police services is an area which has been identified as an area which will
be affected by annexation. After mitigation measures are incorporated, impacts to police services
will be considered less than significant.
3. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street improvements installed on site.
There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest that there are
wetlands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding
can be made for this project.
4.The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere
of Influence and is contiguous the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially surrounded
by the City's existing corporate boundary.
5. The territory within the proposed annexation area 'is within a substantially
developed area and which is continuing to develop. The proposed annexation area is not prime
agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is designated for
urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan.
6. The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City budget.
7. The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan.
8. Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits,
attachments and environmental documents a.Bomted with this application and herein incorporated
by reference.
B. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of Planning Application No.
PA98-0205, makes the following findings for pre-zoning:
R:~TAFFRFI~0~PAgg.PCI 6/24/98 klb 9
1. The proposed Pre-Zoning will not have a significant adverse effect on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study for this project. No immediate impacts to the
environment will result from the establishment of zoning for this property. Impacts from future
development can be mitigated to a level less than significant.
2. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street impwvements installed on site.
There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest that there are
weftands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding
can be made for this project.
3. The proposed Pre-Zoning is consistent with the goals, policies and
implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The designations established by the
General Plan reflect the zoning designations within the Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plans.
4. The site of the proposed P~-Zoning is suitable to accommodate all the land
uses curren~y permitted in the pwposed zoning district due to the fact that the site is of adequate
size and shape for any proposed use.
5. Adequate access exists to the proposed site of the Pre-Zoning. Access to
the project is currently being pwvided at Highway 79 (S) from Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield
Stage Road, and Pala Road at Wolf Valley Road.
6. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental
documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Section 3. ~:.nvironmenr~l Corr~liance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates
that although the proposed pwject could have a significant impact on the environment, there will
not be a significant effea in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions
of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND: THAT 1) THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CONSENTING TO THE COMM'F~NC~ OF
PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTAIN INHABITED
TERRITORY DESCRIBED HEREIN AS THE REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN AREAS (PA98-0205)," SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED TO THIS
RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT A, AND THAT 2) THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ~ING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID
CITY TO PRE-ZONE THE AREAS KNOWN AS THE REDHAWK AND VAIL RANCH
SPECIYIC PLANS AS PART OF PA98-0205 ESTABLISHING THE ZONING FOR THIS
R:~qTAFFRFI~05PAgg.I~I 6/2d/98 klb '[ 0
AREA AS SPECIFIC PLAN' THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM A'I'rACHED
TO TF!I~ RF_,SOL~ON AS EXH~RIT B.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPT~-D this 1st day of July, 1998.
Marcia 51aven, Chairman
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1st day of July,
1998, by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~TAFFRPr~0~PA98.pCI 6/24198 klb '[ ]
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 98 -
R:~ST~U"r~et,,,,a.PCa fv~4m ke 12
EXI-HB~ A
RESOLUTION NO. 98.-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ~ CONSENTING TO THE COMMENCEMENT
OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CERTAIN INHAB~ TERRITORY
DESCRmRn HEREIN AS THE I~EnHAWK AND VAIL
RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS AND DESIGNATED AS
PART OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98.-020~
WHERFAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
General Plan and whereas the analysis within the General Pla~ includes said annexation;
WHEREAS, the said annexation area is entirely with the City of Temecula's Sphere of
Influence and is contiguous to the existing City boundary;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0205 was processed including, but not
limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the pwposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, the County
Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of
Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-.0205,
on July 1, 1998, at a duly noticed public heating as prescribed by hw, 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;
WIIEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission recommended appwval of Planning Application No. PA98-0205;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Planning Application No. PA98-0205, on
, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to
this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved Planning Application No. PA98-0205;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the .City Council to give its consent to the commencement
of annexation proceedings;
R:~%'TAFFRFr~05PA98.pCI 6/24/9~ klb '13
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMF. EULA CITY COUNCIL DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
by reference.
That the above rmtations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
Section 2. Findings. That the Temecula City Council, in adopting a Resolution
consenting to the commencement of proceedings to annex territory herein referred to as the
Redhawk and Vail Ranch Specific Plan Areas (approving Planning Application No. PA98-0205),
hereby makes the following findings:
1. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan.
2. An Initial Study was prepared for the pwject ahd it has determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Specifically, police services is an area which has been identified as an area which will
be affected by annexation. After mitigation measures are incorporated, impacts to police services
will be considered less than significant.
3. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species
or their habitats, or to wildlife dispenal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and rough graded in the past, and street impwvements installed on site.
There are none of the standard indicators (obligate species) that might suggest that there are
weftands on site. The site does not serve as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding
can be made for this project.
4. The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of
Influence and is contiguous to the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially surrounded
by the City's existing corporate boundary.
5. The terriwry within the proposed annexation area is within a substantially
developed area and which is continuing to develop. The proposed annexation area is not prime
agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is designated for
urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan.
6. The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City budget.
7. The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs
contained in the General Plan.
8. Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits,
attachments and environmental documents hssociated with this application and herein incorporated
by reference.
R:~.$TAFFRFr~05PAgg.pCl 6/24/98 kJb 'J 4
Section 3. ~.nvironmental Con~liance. An Initial Study prepared for this project
indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment,
thm'e will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Mitigation Monitoring Program have been added to the project, and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
this
PASSED, APPROVEn, AND ADOPTk'~, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
. day of , 199_.
ATT'EST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
Acting City Clerk
[SEAq
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
C1TY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, Acting City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
Acting City Clerk
R:X.q'I'AFFRPT~I~PAg$.PCl 6/24/98 kn, I 5
ITEM 17
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
APPROVAL:]F.,~
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR Of FINAkCE
CITY MANAGER ~
TO:
FRO M:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Acting City Manager/City Council
Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manager
March 23, 1999
Second Series of 1999 General Plan Land Use Map Amendments
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Addendure No. 4 to the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR No.
348) certified for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan (Planning Application PA99-0016).
Make a finding_for Planning Application PA99-0022 that the impacts of these General
Plan Amendments and Zone Changes constitute a reduction in overall impacts and, as a
result, fall within the environmental impacts previously discussed in the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan.
Approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration with a De Minimus Impact Finding For
Planning Application PA98-0511.
4. Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR
THE SECOND GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
FOR 1999 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS. PA99-0016, PA99-
0022, AND PA98-0511 )
5. Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 909-120-
036, 909-120-046, 909-281-016, 910-310-007, 957-291-001
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEFFS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~22pAg9 and other GPAs.doc 1
THROUGH 030, 957-292-001 THROUGH 004, 911-170-078, 911-
170-085, AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS.
PA99-0022 AND PA98-0511 )
BACKGROUND:
State law allows local govemments to amend any element of the General Plan up to four times
per year. The City Council approved the first amendment to the General Plan Land Use
Element Map on January 15, 1999. Because of this eady approval, staff became concemed
that the City might exhaust all it's allowable Land Use Element amendments eady in the year.
As a result, staff has grouped these three General Plan Land Use Map Amendments together
for Council consideration. VVhile each Planning Application is a separate project, they have
bundled together into a single agenda report to simplify the City's processing. As a result, these
separate projects, if all are approved, will constitute the City's second Land Use Map General
Plan Amendment in 1999. The following applications are part of the General Plan Amendments
and Zone Changes that are currently under consideration:
APPLICATION LOCATION
Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Jefferson Road s/o Winchester
Kahwea Road/Nob Court
Jefferson Road n/o Winchester
Winchester & Nicolas Roads
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
PA98-0016
PA99-0022
PA98-0511
ZONE CHANGE
None proposed
PA99-0022
PA98-0511
The proposed amendments to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan will be considered as a
separate item later in this meeting.
Campos Verdes Specific Plan General Plan Amendment
This General Plan Amendment was requested by City staff to ensure that the Specific Plan was
consistent with the General Plan. This process originally started because of the need to
redesign the Specific Plan which resulted from changes in the size and location of the public
school site and the realization that the proposed commercial site at the comer of Winchester
and Margadta Roads lacked sufficient depth to construct anything other than a simple strip
commercial center. The changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan include an increase in
the amount of Public Institutional and Commercial acreage, and a decrease in the amount of
Residential and Park acreage. The precise General Plan changes are shown in Attachment 9.
The environmental impacts for this Specific Plan have been analyzed with Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) No. 348 plus several Addenda. Addendum No. 4 details the impacts of the
Specific Plan to date. The comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation measures contained
in the Addendum concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are
substantially the same as, or less than, the impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. Therefore, the
Commission is recommending that Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified EIR (No. 348) be
certified.
City-Sponsored General Plan Amendments and Zone ChanQes
These city-sponsored general plan amendments and zone changes are being proposed to
address relatively minor changes to the General Plan and Zoning Map. The details of these
changes are contained in exhibits located in Attachment 10.
\\TEIVlEC_FS201\DATAXDEFFS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
2
Site 1: Former Norm Reeves location on Jefferson Road
The former Norm Reeves dealership site on Jefferson Road was purchased by the
Redevelopment Agency in 1996. Since then, the site has continued as an intedm automotive
use. The Agency Board has approved the sale of the site to Richardson's RV Sales and there
is a need to ensure that this quasi-automotive use of the site can be legally continued. As a
result, the Commission is requesting that the General Plan and Zoning designations for the site
be changed from Community Commercial to Highway Toudst Commercial. It was felt that the
change is reasonable, will not undermine the City General Plan, and that it will be compatible
with the surrounding zoning.
Site 2: Portions of Kahwea Road and Avenida del Reposo and Nob Court
The proposed amendment represents an adjustment to reflect the actual pattern of development
in this area. The majodty of the area is currently occupied by detached single family homes on
lots ranging from 6,000 to 12,000 square feet; though a couple of the cul-de-sac lots are larger
than commonly found in other areas with this same zoning designation. This area is not part of
the Meadowview area.
Site 3: Future detention basin along north Jefferson Road
The proposed amendment is intended to reflect the acquisition of approximately 155 acres by
the Riverside County Flood Control Distdct for use as a floodwater detention basin. The
proposal is for approximately 129 acres, currently designated as Business Park, to be
redesignated as Open Space under the General Plan and Open Space-Conservation
designation on the Zoning Map. In addition, the Commission is also recommending that the
small site owned by Rancho California Water District be changed from Business Park to Public
Institutional.
The Commission is also recommending that an additional 7.8 acres be added to the current
Service Commercial zoning along Jefferson Road. This redesignation is expected to enable the
City's traffic model to more accurately reflect future land use build out conditions. Using the
traffic generation factors from the General Plan EIR, the redesignation will reduce the number of
vehicle tdps to and from this area by approximately 27,000 tdps per day.
An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this project to determine if the proposed
changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study indicated that overall,
the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would not result in impacts beyond
those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three areas;
circulation, air quality, and biologic resource impacts are expected to see small reductions in the
anticipated environmental impacts.
Northwest Comer of Winchester and Nicolas Roads
The proposed General Plan Amendment is to change the property from the industrial Business
Park designation to a somewhat less intensive and more appropriate Office designation. This
redesignation would continue to permit office-oriented uses and would prohibit the
manufacturing uses that had been previously allowed. As a result, the Office designation is
expected to be more compatible with the surrounding land uses. The site is currently
surrounded by existing single family homes across the Santa Gertrudis Creek channel,
Chaparral High School, and vacant commercial land. The existing designations and the
proposed changes are shown in the exhibits contained in Attachment 11.
R:\STAFFP, PT~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
3
There is also an application for a senior housing facility on a portion of this property. Staff
believes that the proposed senior housing project is appropriately located and is more
compatible with the surrounding land uses than the previously allowed industrial uses. Senior
housing facilities are permitted uses in the Professional Office Zone. This item has been
scheduled for the Maroh 17, 1999 Planning Commission meeting and Staff will share the results
of the Commission's discussion and decision with the Council dudng the meeting.
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in, the project design and in
the Conditions of Approval for the project. Any impacts will be mitigated to levels less than
significant. In addition, because the site was previously prepared, it contains on biological
resources. As a result staff is recommending that a De Minimus Impact Finding be made.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The approval of these General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes will result in no fiscal
impacts to the City of Temecula.
ATTACHMENT:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
City Council Resolution
City Council Ordinance
Planning Commission Resolution for PA99-0016
Planning Commission Resolutions for PA99-0022
Planning Commission Resolution for PA98-0511
Addendum No 4 of EIR 348 for PA99-0016)
Initial Environmental Study for PA99-0022
Initial Environmental Study for PA98-0511
Exhibits for Planning Application PA99-0016
Exhibits for Planning Application PA99-0022
Exhibits for Planning Application PA98-0511
R:\STAFFRFI'X22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 99---
R:\ST~PA~)9 sad other GPAs.doe
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR
THE SECOND GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
FOR 1999 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS. PA99-0016, PA99-
0022, AND PA98-0511 )
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula initiated Planning Application No. PA99-0022, in
accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0022 was processed including, but not
limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula
Library, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0016
on February 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the
City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or
opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0016;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0022
on March 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0511
on March 17, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to Planning
Application Nos. PA99-0016, PA99-0022 and PA98-0511 on March 23, 1999, at which time
interested persons had opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to these
Planning Applications;
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Reports regarding these Planning Applications;
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEFFS\PLANNING~'TAFFRFF~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
6
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
by reference.
Section 2. Findin.as The City Council, in approving these Planning Applications
(General Plan Amendments) hereby makes the following findings:
community.
These amendments are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
B. These amendments are compatible with existing and surrounding uses.
C. These amendments will not have an adverse effect on the community and are
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
Section 3. Amendments To The General Plan Land Use Map for Plannin.cl Application
PA99-0016 The City Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Map for the area of the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan as shown in Exhibit A that is attached to this resolution.
Section 4. Environmental Compliance for PA99-0016. The City Council, based upon
the information contained in the odginal Campos Verdes Specific Plan Environmental Impact
Report (EIR No. 348) and environmental Addendum (No. 4), finds that the proposed land use
changes are minor and that the changes did not increase the impacts associated with the
development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in the odginal
Environmental Impact Report. The environmental addendum contained a comparative analysis
of impacts and mitigation measures. This analysis concluded that the proposed land use
changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the
impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. In addition, there is no new information that was not
known at the time the EIR was certified and completed. Therefore, no significant impacts or
additional mitigation measures are required given the existing mitigation measures contained in
the certified EIR No. 348. The mitigation measures prepared for the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) will be applied to this project. The Environmental Addendum to Environmental
Impact Report No. 348, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 5. Amendments To The General Plan Land Use Map for Plannin,q Application
PA99-0022 The City Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Map on the following
parcels in the manner specified below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 909-120-036: change the Land Use Designation
from Business Park (BP) to Public Institutional (PI);
B. For the westedy portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046: change the
Land Use Designation from Business Park (BP) to Open Space (OS);
C. For the eastedy part of the westerly portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-
120-046: change the 200 eastedy feet of this area from Business Park (BP) to Service
Commercial (SC);
D. For the parcel identified as APN 909-281-016: change the Land Use Designation
from Business Park (BP) to Open Space (OS);
R:\STAFFRPT~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
E. For the parcel identified as APN 957-291-001 though 030 and 957-292-001
through 004; change the Land Use Designation from Very Low Density Residential (VL) to Low
Medium Density Residential (LM); and,
F. For the parcel identified as APN 910-310-007, change the Land Use Designation
from Community Commercial (CC) to HighwayFroudst Commercial (HT).
Section 6. Environmental Compliance for PA99-0022. An Initial Environmental Study
was prepared for this project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any
environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact
Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study indicated that overall, the proposed General
Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result in impacts beyond those originally
anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three areas; circulation, air
quality, and biologic resource impacts are expected to see small reductions in the anticipated
environmental impacts. As a result, the City Council determines that the potential impacts of
these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 7. Amendments To The General Plan Land Use Map for Plannin.cl Application
PA98-0511 The City Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Map for the parcels
identified as APN 911-170-078, 911-170-085, and 911-170-090 from Business Park (BP)to
Office (O);
Section 8. Environmental Compliance for PA98-0511. An Initial Environmental Study
was prepared for this project and indicates that although the proposed project could have a
significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
the mitigation measures described in the General Plan will mitigate the General Plan
Amendment aspects of this project. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration with a
DeMinimus impact finding is hereby adopted.
Section 9. Severability The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Resolution are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Resolution to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this Resolution.
Section 10. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 11. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City
of Temecula this __ day of ,1999.
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
R:\STAFFRFI~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY Of TEMECULA)
of the City
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
,1999 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRPT~22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99-
R:\STAFFRPTX22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
11
ATTACHMENT NO 2
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 909-
120-O36, 909-120-046, 909-281-016, 910-310-007, 957-291-001
THROUGH 030, 957-292-001 THROUGH 004, 911-170-078, 911-
170-085, AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION NOS.
PA99-0022 AND PA98-0511 )
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public headngs have been held before the Planning Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of
the State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The changes to the land use
distdct described herein are hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Land Use map
for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as many be amended hereafter from time to
time by the City Council of the City of Temecula. The City of Temecula Official Zoning Map is
amended by placing in affect the zones as described in Planning Applications PA99-0022 and
PA98-0511 and listed below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 909-120-036: change the Zoning Designation
from Business Park (BP) to Public Institutional (PI);
B. For the westedy portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046: change the
Zoning Designation from Business Park (BP) to Open Space-Conservation (OS-C);
C. For the eastedy part of westedy portion the parcel identified as APN 909-120-
046: change the eastedy 200 feet of the area with a Zoning Designation of Business Park (BP)
to Service Commercial (SC);
D. For the parcel identified as APN 909-281-016: change the Zoning Designation
from Business Park (BP) to Open Space Conservation (OS-C);
E. For the parcels identified as APN 957-291-001 through 030, and 957-292-001
through 004: change the Zoning Designation from Very Low Density Residential (VL) to Low
Medium Density Residential (LM); and,
F. For the parcel identified as APN 910-310-007, change the Zoning Designation
from Community Commercial (CC) to Highway/Tourist Commercial (HTC); and,
G. For the parcels identified as APN 911-170-078, 911-170-085, and 911-170-090,
change the Zoning Designation from Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (PO).
Section 2. Notice of Adoption. Within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk
of the City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted
in at least three public places in the City.
Section 3. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its
adoption.
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANN1NG~STAFFRPT~22PA99 and offer GPAs.do~
Section 4. Environmental Compliance. Initial Environmental Studies were prepared
for these projects to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental
impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City
General Plan. The Initial Studies indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan
Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result in impacts beyond those originally
anticipated for the City General Plan. Possible exceptions for PA99-0022 are that small
reductions to the previously identified impacts have been identified for circulation, air quality,
and biologic resource impacts. For PA98-0511, no unmitigatable significant effects were
identified, and because the site is previously gradeded, it contains no biologic resources and a
Mitigated Negative Declaration with a DeMinimus impact finding is hereby adopted.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days pdor to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the
Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this__ day of ,1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the __ day of ,1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
R:\STAFFRPT\22PA99 and other GPAs.doe
13
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRF~22PA99 and olher GPAs.doc
14
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR PA99-0016
R:\ST~PA99 and other GPAs.doc
15
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-004
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD
AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF
WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-
090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-
061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)" AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN (NO. 1) NORTHEAST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD)
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-
059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION
PA99-0015)"
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Govemment Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Govemment Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, that 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, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce;
and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on February 3, 1999, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition.
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FINDINGS (General Plan Amendment):
A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed General
Plan Amendment, makes the following findings, to wit:
R:\STAFFRPT~323pagapc,,cloc
11
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. The project is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Ultimate
development of the site will be residential, commercial, office and open space development in
an area that is comprised of a vadety of residential and commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community
because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
FINDINGS (Specific Plan Amendment)
A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed General
Plan Amendment, makes the following findings, to wit:
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
2. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) is consistent with the land use densities, housing, circulation, open
space, public safety. and community design goals and policies of the General Plan.
3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the site and is
consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 1.
4. The amendment to Specific Plan No. I does not increase the impacts
associated with the development of the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in
Environmental Impact Report No. 348.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA'DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE A
RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP NORTHEAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH
OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-
090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)" SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM THAT IS
ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT A; AND DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND
THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC
PLAN (NO. 1 ) NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-
090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-
0015)" SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM THAT IS ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS
EXHIBIT B.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~3:23pa98pc..doc 12
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February 1999.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of
February, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 4
NOES: 1
ABSENT: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Guerdero, Naggar, Soltysiak,
Webster
Slaven
None
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\323pa98pc..doc
13
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS FOR PA99-0022
R:~ST~PA99 and other GPAs.doc
16
DRAFT
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-006
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS
THROUGHOUT THE CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NOS. 910-310-007, 957-291-001 THROUGH 030, AND 957-292-001
THROUGH 004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)" AND
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-310-007, 957-291-001 THROUGH
030, AND 957-292-001 THROUGH 004 (PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0022)"
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula initiated Planning Application No. PA99-0022, in accordance
with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0022 was processed including, but not limited to
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library, Pujol
Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0022 on
March 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings.
A. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of these General Plan
Amendments, make the following findings:
community.
I1.
The amendments are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
The amendments are compatible with existing and surrounding uses.
3. The amendments will not have an adverse effect on the community and are
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
R:~STAFFRP'~22PA99 - PC with modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doc
1
DRAFT
B. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of these Changes of Zone, make
the following findings:
community.
1. The changes are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
Land Use Map.
The changes are consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan
3. The changes will not have an adverse effect on the community and are
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impads beyond those
impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study
indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result
in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three
areas; circulation, air quality, and biologic resource impads are expected to see small reductions in the
antidpated environmental impacts. As a result, the Planning Commission determines that the potential
impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 4. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of
Planning Application No. PA99-0022 (General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone) and recommends
that the City Council do the following:
A. Approve a Resolution entitled "A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of
Temecula Amending The General Plan Land Use Map For Vadous Areas Throughout The City Known
As Assessor's Parcel Nos. 910-310-007, 957-291-001 through 030, and 957-292-001through 004
(Planning Application No. PA99-0022)" substantially in the form that is attached to this resolution as
Exhibit A; and,
B. Adopt an Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Of The City Council Of The City Of Temecula
Amending The Zoning Map Of The City Of Temecula City Known As Assessor's Parcel Nos. 910-310-
007, 957-291-001 through 030, and 957-292-001 through 004 (Planning Application No. Pa99-0022)"
substantially in the form that is attached to this resolution as Exhibit B.
R:\STAFFRPTL22PA99 - PC with modified Rosos to reflect PC actions.doc
2
DRAFT
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 1999.
Ron Guerdero, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of March, 1999
by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
GUERRIERO, WEBSTER, NAGGAR,
SOLTYSIAK
NONE
NONE
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRPT~22PA99 - PC with modified Rcsos to reflect PC actions.doe
3
DRAFT
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-007
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS
THROUGHOUT THE CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NOS. 909-120-036, 909-120-046 AND 909-281-016 PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)" AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS.
909-120-036, 909-120-046 AND 909-281-016 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)"
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula initiated Planning Application No. PA99-0022, in accordance
with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0022 was processed including, but not limited to
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library, Pujol
Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0022 on
March 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findin.cls.
A. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of these General Plan
Amendments, make the following findings:
community.
The amendments are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
The amendments are compatible with existing and surrounding uses.
3. The amendments will not have an adverse effect on the community and are
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
B. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of these Changes of Zone, make
the following findings:
R:\STAFFRPT~2PAg9 - PC with modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doe 10
DRAFT
community.
1. The changes are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
Land Use Map.
The changes are consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan
3. The changes will not have an adverse effect on the community and are
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond those
impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study
indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result
in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three
areas; circulation, air quality, and biologic resource impacts are expected to see small reductions in the
anticipated environmental impacts. As a result, the Planning Commission determines that the potential
impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 4. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of
Planning Application No. PA99-0022 (General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone) and recommends
that the City Council do the following:
A. Approve a Resolution entitled "A Resolution Of The City Coundl Of The City Of
Temecula Amending The General Plan Land Use Map For Vadous Areas Throughout The City Known
As Assessor's Parcel Nos. 909-120-036, 909-120-046 and 909-281-016 (Planning Application No.
Pa99-0022)" substantially in the form that is attached to this resolution as Exhibit A; and,
C. Adopt an Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Of The City Coundl Of The City Of Temecula
Amending The Zoning Map Of The City Of Temecula City Known As Assessor's Parcel Nos. 909-120-
036, 909-120-046 and 909-281-016 (Planning Application No. Pa99-0022)" substantially in the form that
is attached to this resolution as Exhibit B.
R:~STAFFRFFLT,2PA99 - PC with modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doc
11
DRAFT
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 1999.
Ron Guerdero, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of March, 1999
by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
GUERRIERO, NAGGAR, SOLTYSIAK
WEBSTER
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRIrI~22PA99 - PC wilh modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doc
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 99-._
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY KNOWN AS
ASSESSOWS PARCEL NOS. 909-120-036, 909-120-046 AND 909-
281-016 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula initiated Planning Application No. PA99-0022, in accordance
with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0022 was processed including, but not limited to
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library, Pujol
Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0022 on
March 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an oppodunity to, and did testify either in suppod or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to Planning Application No.
PA99-0022 on ,1999, at which time interested persons had opportunity to, and did testify
either in suppod or opposition to Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
WHEREAS, the City Coundl received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Repod
regarding Planning Application No. PA99-0022;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findin.as The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0022
(General Plan Amendment) hereby makes the following findings:
A. These amendments are compatible with the health, safety and weltare of the community.
B. These amendments are compatible with existing and surrounding uses.
C. These amendments will not have an adverse effect on the community and are consistent
with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
R:~STAFFRPT~22PA99 - PC with modified R~sos to r~cct PC actions.doc
14
Section 3. Amendments To The General Plan Land Use MaD The City Council hereby amends
the General Plan Land Use Map on the following parcels in the manner specified below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 909-120-036: change the Land Use Designation from
Business Park (BP) to Public Institutional (PI);
B. For the westedy portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046: change the Land
Use Designation from Business Park (BP) to Open Space (OS);
C. For the eastedy part of the westedy portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046:
change the 200 eastedy feet of this area from Business Park (BP) to Service Commercial (SC);
D. For the parcel identified as APN 909-281-016: change the Land Use Designation from
Business Park (BP) to Open Space (OS);
Section 4. Environmental Coml~liance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond those
impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study
indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result
in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three
areas; circulation, air quality, and biologic resource impacts are expected to see small reductions in the
anticipated environmental impacts. As a result, the City Council determines that the potential impacts
of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City
General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 5. Severability The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Resolution
are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph,
or section of this Resolution to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts
of this Resolution.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
R:\STAFFRPT~2PA99 - PC with modified Rosos to r~ect PC actions.doc
15
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Coundl of the City of
Temecula this __day of ,1999.
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
A'I'I'EST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Coundl of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of ,
1999 by the following vote of the Coundl:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
EXHIBIT B
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 99-
R:\STAFFRPT~2PA99 - PC with modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doc
17
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOWS PARCEL NOS. 909-
120-036, 909-120-046 AND 909-281-016 (PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0022)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public headngs have been held before the Planning Commission and City Coundl
of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the State of
Califomia, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The changes to the land use distdct as shown on
the attached exhibit are hereby approved and ratified as part of the Offidal Land Use map for the City
of Temecula as adopted by the City and as many be amended hereafter from time to time by the City
Council of the City of Temecula. The City of Temecula Official Zoning Map is amended by placing in
affect the zones as described in Planning Application PA99-0022 and listed below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 909-120-036: change the Zoning Designation from
Business Park (BP) to Public Institutional (PI);
B. For the westedy portion of the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046: change the Zoning
Designation from Business Park (BP) to Open Space-Conservation (OS-C);
C. For the eastedy part of westedy portion the parcel identified as APN 909-120-046:
change the eastedy 200 feet of the area with a Zoning Designation of Business Park (BP) to Service
Commercial (SC);
D. For the parcel identified as APN 909-281-016: change the Zoning Designation from
Business Park (BP) to Open Space Conservation (OS-C);
Section 2. Notice of Adoption. Within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted in at least three
public places in the City.
Section 3. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its adoption.
Section 4. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond those
impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The Initial Study
indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes would have not result
in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. The exceptions are that three
areas; circulation, air quality, and biologic resource impacts are expected to sea small reductions in the
anticipated environmental impacts. As a result, the City Council determines that the potential impacts
of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City
General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
R:\STAFFRPTY22PA99 - PC with modified Resos to reflect PC actions.doe
18
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The
City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City
Clerk at least five days pdor to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this
Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the
Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this __ day of ,1999.
A'I'rEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Coundl on the __ day of ,1999, and that theroafter, said Ordinance was
duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Coundl of the City of Temecula on the __
day of ,1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRPT\22PA99 - PC with modified Rcsos to reflect PC actions.doc
19
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR PA98-0511
R:\STAFFRFI'X22PA99 and other GPAs.doc
17
.DRAFT
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS
LOTS 166 AND 181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER
COMPANY; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-
170-078, 911-170-085 AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA98-0511)" AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CITY FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 166 AND
181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; ALSO
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-170-078, 911-170-085
AND 911-170-090. (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0511)"
WHEREAS, Curt Miller, of Pacific Gulf Properties, Inc., initiated Planning Application No.
PA98-0511, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0511 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0511 on
March 17, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findines.
A. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this General Plan
Amendments, make the following findings:
1. This amendment is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
R:\STAFFRFr~5 11-512ps98 pc .doc
8
DRAFT
as proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
The land use change remains consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development
Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient
Landscaping provisions.
2. This amendment is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. The project is
compatible with existing and surrounding uses. There is undeveloped commercial property and
existing residential in the immediate area similar and/or compatible to the proposed use.
3. This amendment will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent
with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have
an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
B. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this Change of Zone, makes
the following findings:
1. The change is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
2. The change is consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan Land Use
Map. The General Plan Land Use Designation has been changed to Professional Office and the
requested Zoning Amendment will change the zoning to Professional Office which is consistent with
the amended General Plan Land Use Map.
3. The change will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent with
the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have an
adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond
those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The
Initial Study'indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
would have not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. Two
areas, circulation, and air quality impacts, are expected to see small reductions in the anticipated
environmental impacts because there are fewer tdps generated by senior housing than that
potentially generated by professional offices. As a result, the Planning Commission determines that
the potential impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 4. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) and
recommends that the City Council do the following:
A. Approve a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Temecula Amending the General Plan Land Use Map for Property known as Lots 166 And 181 of
The Temecula Land and Water Company, also known as Assessor's Parcel No. 911-170-078, 911-
170-085 and 911-170-090 (Planning Application No. PA98-0511)" substantially in the form that is
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A; and,
R :\STAFFRPTL511-512pa98 pc .doc
9
DRAFT
B. Adopt an Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Temecula Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Temecula City for Property known as Lots 166
and 181 of the Temecula Land and Water Company, also known as Assessor's Parcel No. 911-170-
078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090 (Planning Application No. PA98-0511)" substantially in the form
that is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of March 1999.
Ron Guerriero, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 17th day of March,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRPT~ 11-512p=98 pc .doc
10
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
ADDENDUM NO. 4 FOR PA99-0016
p:standard~staffreport.shell 18
CAMPOS VERDES
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Addendum No. 4 to
EIR 348
Prepared by:
T&B'PLANNING CONSULTANTS, INC.
Planning Consultants
3242 Halladay, Suite 100
Santa Aria, California 92705
(714) 662-2774
Contact Person:
Barry Bumell
January 18, 1999
~i JAN 19 1999 ~/
· _j
ADDENDUM No. 4 TO EIR No. 348
By
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background
The Campos Verdes Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348) was circulated for
public review by the City of Temecula between July 10, 1992 and August 24, 1992 pursuant to Section
15086, et seq. of State CEQA Guidelines. Prior to City action on the Specific Plan, three addenda to EIR
348 were prepared.
Addendum No. iwas prepared in February of 1993 to: 1) address comments made by the City of
Temecula as a result of their review of the Draft EIR; 2) incorporate subsequently prepared technical
analyses pertaining to traffic/circulation and drainage/flooding and 3) integrate any additional or revised
· mitigation measures resulting from the concems raised by the City or as a result of the subsequently
prepared technical studies into the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
Addendum No. 2 was prepared in June of 1994 to identify and analyze revisions made to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan which involved a significant reduction in the number of proposed dwelling units
and changes in the amount of other proposed on-site land uses. Addendum No. 2 concluded that no
impacts were increased over those determined in EIR 348, several impacts were reduced and none of
the changes resulted in the need for new mitigation measures or unavoidable adverse environmental
impacts beyond those already identified in EIR 348.
Addendum No. 3 was prepared in September of 1994 to analyze the Planning Commission's
recommended traffic and circulation-related Conditions of Approval as compared to the mitigations
specified in the Draft EIR. It was the intent of the Planning Commission to recognize those mitigations
that were already accomplished through developer participation in Assessment District No. 161 and
Community Facilities District No. 88-12 and maximize the benefit to the City of other mitigation
requirements.
On September 13, 1994, the City Council of Temecula certified EIR 348 including Addenda 1, 2 and
3 and approved the Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1.
B. Purpose
This document constitutes Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 348, certified
on September 13, 1994 (SCH 89020139), which analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated
with implementation of the approved Carnpos Verdes Specific Plan. Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an addendum to an existing EIR is appropriate where, in order to
comply with CEQA, the EIR requires only "minor technical changes or additions" that do not raise
important new issues about the significant effects on the environment" (CEQA Guidelines § 15164).
The proposed Amendment No. 1 to Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1 includes the following changes
-1-
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
to the Specific Plan Land Use Plan analyzed in EIR 348 and Addenda I, 2, and 3.
The 1 O-acre elementary school site has been increased by 10 acres and will now accommodate
a 20-acre middle school.
The park site has been decreased by 7.6 acres to 3.1 acres. The park site will primarily serve
Campos Verdes residents and not residents from other developer projects as previously
contemplated by the adopted Specific Plan.
The residential component of the Land Use Plan has decreased in size. The residential area has
been reduced from 72.2 acres to 57.9 acres, a reduction of 14.3 acres. The number of dwelling
units has been reduced from 308 to 242, a reduction of 66 dwelling units. The density of the
residential area has been reduced slightly from 4.2 du/ac to 4. I du/ac.
The two commercial areas have been increased by a total of 8 acres. Planning Area 4 which will
consist entirely of retail commercial uses has been increased by 5.5 acres and the
commercial/office/church component of Planning Area 2 has been increased by 2.5 acres.
The residential and commercial planning areas surrounding the middle school and park sites
have been recon~gured.
C. Summary Analysis
Section II contains a brief summary of the environmental impacts resulting from the approved Campos
Verdes Specific Plan No. 1 as analyzed in EIR No. 348 and Addenda 1, 2 and 3. After each summary
is a brief statement describing the changes in project impacts resulting from Amendment No. 1 to
Carnpos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1. As shown on Table 1, Comparative Analysis of Impacts and
Mitigations, the impacts associated with Amendment No. 1 are substantially the same as or less than the
impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. Therefore, no new mitigation measures are required.
-2-
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
!
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em No. 348
Table 1
Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigations
Environmental Issue
Seismic Safety
Slopes and Erosion
Wind Erosion & Blowsand
Flooding
Noise
Climate and Air Quality
Water Quality
Toxic Substances
Agriculture
Open Space and Conservation
Wildlife/Vegetation
Energy Resources
Scenic Highways
Cultural and Scientific Resources
Circulation and Traffic
Public Facilities and Services
Light and Glare
· Disaster Preparedness
Changes in Project Impacts
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Decreased
Decreased
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Unchanged
Decreased
Unchangecl/Decreased
Unchanged
Unchanged
-3-
Additional
Mitigation Measures
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
i
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. Seismic Safety
El Previously Identified Impacts
A geotechnical investigation (Geotechnical Investigation, TT 25213, 25214, 25215 Campos
Verdes Residential Development, May 10, 1990) was conducted of the project site and concluded
that the site is expected to experience ground motion from earthquakes on regional and/or local
causative faults. The dominant seismic feature in the project vicinity is the northwest striking
Elsinore Fault Zone. Two of the three principle northwest facing faults, the Wildomar and
Murrieta Hot Springs faults are within close proximity to the project site. The Wildomar fault
which is located 1 mile southwest of the site is assumed to have a recurrence interval of 300-450
years. The Murrieta Hot Springs fault which is located I mile southwest of the project site is
currently inactive, however, recent evidence of Holocene Age activity may warrant reclassifying
this fault as active at a future date.
The project site will be impacted by seismic activity along the Widomar Fault alignment. Due
to the content of on-site soils and the depth of groundwater, secondary seismic hazards like
liquefaction, may occur in the relatively thin zones of deep saturated soils. Any liquefaction
which may occur on site is considered insignificant and is not expected to cause damage or
collapse of on site structures.
Mitigation measures contained in the EIR include: 1 ) designing on site structures in accordance
with the criteria contained in the Uniform Building Code and County ordinances, 2) due to the
potential for liquefaction, various stabilization procedures must be performed during the grading
plan review process and 3) the preparation of an evacuation plan, approved by FEMA, in the
event that Skinner Dam fails due to seismic activity and noticing requirements for prospective
purchasers.
Analysis of Changed Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan will generate fewer project residents
(626 based upon a generation factor of 2.59 persons per dwelling unit) as compared to the
approved Specific Plan (798 new residents). This decrease in 172 residents results in fewer
residents being exposed to seismic safety hazards, including ground shaking and possible
Skinner Dam failure. The extent of project impacts upon existing seismic conditions will be the
same since no increase in the overall developable area is proposed. No additional or revised
mitigation measures are proposed, however as concluded in the original EIR, the level of
impacts related to seismic safety (i.e. inundation due to the potential failure of Skinner Dam)
remains a significant adverse impact which will require a Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
ADDENDUM No. 4 TO EIR No. 348
B. Slopes and Erosion
Previously Identified Impacts
Slope conditions and soils types were identified and included in the geotechnical report
referenced above. Development of the project site will require alteration of existing landform
The grading plan for the original Land Use Plan resulted in 2,616,743 cubic yards of cut and
376, 123 cubic yards of fill. The Temecula Regional Center was identified as the recipient of the
excess cut. The extensive amount of cut was considered inconsistent with the project objective
"to create a design that generally conforms to the character of the land." Proposed mitigation
included the removal of all alluvial, topsoil, and loose compressible low strength older alluvium,
and or disturbed bedrock prior to construction Also, cut and fill slopes would be designed and
are anticipated to be stable at a ratio of2:l.
Due to the soil content, the EIR identified slope erosion as a major concern with regard to
surface stability. Mitigation measures in the ELR include proper compaction of fill slopes,
planting erosions resistant vegetation on all cut and fill slopes, the preparation and City approval
of an erosion control plan prior to grading plan approval, the monitoring of construction activity
by the project geologist, and adherence to the recommendations of the geotechnical report.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan will require the same physical alteration
of the property resulting in similar impacts to slopes and erosion. Amendment No. 1 maintains
the same amount of area (132.9 acres) being disrupted by grading. The proposed grading plan
identifies approximately the same quantities of earthwork (2,616,743 cubic yards of cut and
376,123 cubic yards of fill). Impacts to slopes on site will be similar and the potential for
erosion will remain high. These impacts, however, can be reduced to an insignificant level
through implementation of the mitigation measures contained in EIR No. 348. No additional
or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
Wind Erosion and Blowsand
Previously Identified Impacts:
Although the City of Temecula is not subject to wind erosion or blowsand impacts, on site
construction activities will generate fugitive dust. It is estimated the project will generate 109
pounds per day dust or particulate emissions during grading activity, which approaches but does
not exceed the threshold for significance of 150 pounds established by the SCAQMD. Also, the
particulate composition consist of less harmful inert silicates as opposed to combustion induced
organic particulates. In accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, watering of graded surfaces and
-5-
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em NO. 348
planting ground cover as dust palliatives will occur to reduce particulate emissions during
project grading. These mitigation measures will reduce impacts related to wind erosion and
blowsand to an insignificant level.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan does not propose any additional grading
of the property outside of the area (132.9 acres) which was previously evaluated in EIR No. 348.
The proposed land use plan merely reconfigures the land uses on site but does not increase the
overall developable area. Project compliance with the mitigation proposed in EIR No. 348 will
ensure that any impacts related to wind erosion and blowsand are reduced to a level of
insignificance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
Flooding
Previously Identified Impacts
The hydrology report prepared for the project concluded that implementation of the Campos
Verdes Land Use Plan would result in short term and long term hydrologic impacts. Project
runoff will be conveyed through the Campos Verdes site by a system of parking lots, streets,
catch basins, pipe culverts and channels. Drainage facilities from the project site ultimately
discharge downstream into Murrieta Creek. The development and construction phase of the
project would create short term downstream. impacts related to erosion and sedimentation
resulting from exposed soils during project grading. The project would result in the creation of
impermeable surfaces on site resulting in an increase to the existing 100 year storm runoff. The
project site also lies within the Dam Innundation Area for a 100 year event for Skinner dam.
Potential dam failure at Skinner Dam as a result of a catastrophic earthquake is considered a
significant adverse effect.
Mitigation measures to alleviate potential Flooding impacts include the construction of a
drainage basin and park in Phase I of the project, drainage improvements in conformante with
the requirements and standards of the Riverside Flood Control and Water conservation District
and the City of Temecula, payment of drainage fees, and interim and permanent erosion control
facilities. Despite these mitigations, impacts related to flooding remain significant due to the
potential failure of Skinner Dam.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan reconfignres the placement of land uses
on site but does not materially affect the grading concept for the project. The amended land use
plan will still result in short term downstream impacts related to erosion and sedimentation
-6-
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em NO. 348
during grading and the creation of impervious surfaces. Mitigation measures previously
identified in EIR No. 348 will be implemented to alleviate downstream impacts from project
runoff. Amendment No. 1 also includes a park site and a detention basin. Flooding from the
potential failure of Skinner Dam remains a significant adverse impact, however, due to the
decrease in 66 dwelling units, fewer Campos Verdes residents will be exposed to potential
flooding hazards. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed, however as
concluded in the original EIR, the level of impacts related to flooding (i.e. inundation due to the
potential failure of Skinner Dam) remains a significant adverse impact which will require a
Statement of Overriding Considerations.
E. Noise
Previously Identified Impacts
A noise assessment was prepared for the Campos Verdes project. The report concluded that the
project will generate short term, long term, and on-site noise impacts. Construction noise
represents a short term impact on ambient noise levels. Long term impacts include an increase
in traffic noise levels in the surrounding area due to project generated traffic and cumulative
development in the area. According to the acoustical engineer, changes in noise levels greater
than 3dBA are significant, while changes of less than 1 dBA are not discernible to local residents
Several roadways in the project vicinity will experience noise increases greater than 3dBA
considering both project and cumulative development. Only one street will exceed 3dBA solely
as a result of project traffic.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan results in approximately the same
amount of grading as previously identified, therefore, short term noise impacts related to grading
activities are expected to remain unchanged. The reduction of 66 residences from the residential
component of the plan also will shorten the duration of short term noise impacts associated with
home building activities.
A traffic analysis was conducted for the proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan which compared the proposed project traffic counts and road access configuration
with the original EIR. A total of 12,070 daily vehicle trips are associated with Amendment No.
I. This represents approximately 4,114 fewer trips than the original specific plan analyzed in
EIR 348 and 198 fewer trips than the approved Campos Verdes Specific Plan which was the
subject of traffic analysis in Addendure No. 2 to EIR 348. This reduction will result in less on-
and off-site noise impacts. However, cumulative or regional noise impacts from increased traffic
originating outside the project boundaries will remain significant and cannot be mitigated to
below a level of significance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed,
-7-
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
however as concluded in the original EIR, the level of impacts related to cumulative noise
remains a significant adverse impact which will require a Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
F
Climate and Air Quality
Previously Identified Impacts
Air quality impacts associated with Campos Verdes include both short term and long term
impacts. Short term impacts result from project grading and long term impacts are associated
with project build out. Short term air quality impacts will result from pollutant emissions from
construction equipment and the dust generated during grading and site preparation. Short term
impacts resulting from construction activities were considered insignificant because they do not
reach significant impact thresholds established by SCAQMD. The primary source of long term
impacts to air quality result from automobile emissions. Other emissions will be generated from
residential and commercial natural gas and electricity consumption. Long term air quality
impacts are considered significant with respect t° carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, particulates,
and reactire organic gas emissions. Mitigation at the grading and construction phase of the
project included watering graded surfaces and planting ground cover to reduce short term
impacts to a level of insignificance. The project will integrate design elements such as transit
facilities, energy efficient buildings, and solar access orientation of structures to reduce long
term impacts. Despite these measures, long term impacts to air quality represent a significant
adverse impact which will require a statement of overriding considerations.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific plan does not propose any additional grading
of the property outside of the area which was previously evaluated in EIR No. 348. The
proposed land use plan merely reconfigures the land uses on site but does not increase the
overall developable area. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed, and as
concluded in EIR 348, air quality impacts will remain a significant adverse impact which will
require a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Water Quality
Previously Identified Impacts
Construction of the Campos Verdes project would alter the composition of surface runoff. Build
out ofCampos Verdes will result in impervious surfaces and irrigated landscaped areas. Runoff
entering the storm drain system will contain urban pollutants such as pesticides, fertilizers, and
-8-
!
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
automobile related residues which will contribute to the incremental degradation of water
downstream in Murrieta Creek. Erosion control techniques will be implemented to reduce the
amounts of sedimentation entering Murrieta Creek. Additionally, the project will comply with
requirements of the California State Water Quality Control Board with respect to urban runoff
control. By implementing these mitigation measures, the level of impacts related to water
quality are not considered significant.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan does not propose any development
outside of the area which was previously evaluated in EIR No. 348. The proposed land use plan
merely recon~gures the land uses on site but does not increase the overall developable area.
Mitigation measures contained in EIR No. 348 would be implemented to ensure that water
quality impact remain at a level of insignificance. No additional or r. evised mitigation measures
are proposed.
Toxic Substances
Previously Identified Impacts
Potential impacts related to toxic substances are based on a Preliminary Environmental Property
Investigation. This report concluded that the presence of hazardous material within a majority
of the property is unlikely. However, there is the potential for near surface soil contamination
from past agricultural use of the site and a small fill area in the northwest portion of the site.
Additionally, the commercial area of the site may include small quantity generators in the
commercial area such as dry cleaners, photo and camera stores, and paint stores. These uses are
capable of producing approximately 13.2 tons of hazardous waste per year. Outside storage of
hazardous materials from such uses would be prohibited eliminating the potential for public
exposure to such materials. Employees of such facilities would be protected by OSHA and
Health Department regulations. Mitigation measures provided in the EIR are intended to
eliminate the potential for toxic substances to occur on site and include a surface soils analysis
prior to the issuance of grading permits, the presence of a qualified geologist during removal of
existing on site fills, and the screening of potential commercial users. Implementation of the
prescribed mitigation measures will reduce impacts related to toxic substances to a level of
insignificance.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan does not propose any development of
the property outside of the area which was previously evaluated in EIR No. 348. The proposed
land use plan merely reconfigures the land uses on site but does not increase the overall
-9-
I
I
I
!
I
i
I
i
i
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em No. 348
developable area. Implementation of the mitigation measures described in EIR No. 348 will
reduce potential impacts related to toxic substances to a level of insignificance. No additional
or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
Agriculture
Previously Identified Impacts
Implementation of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan would result in the removal of 132.9 acres
of pasture crops from the inventory of such agriculture lands in Riverside County. Two impacts
were evaluated in the EIR: 1 ) the impact associated with the loss of potential agricultural land,
and 2) the potential for this project to hasten the conversion of other agricultural lands
surrounding the property. The property is considered high value farm land by both the County
Agricultural Resources Map and the Soil Survey. Western Riverside County. According to the
California Department of Conservation, the loss of any prime agricultural land is considered a
significant environmental impact. Therefore, the loss of such land from the agricultural mix is
considered a significant adverse impact requiring a statement of overriding considerations. No
mitigation measures were proposed in the EIR.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan also results in the loss of 132.9 acres of
prime agricultural land. As concluded in EIR 348, the loss of such agricultural land would
remain an unmitigated significant adverse impact that requires a Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
Open Space and Conservation
Previously Identified Impacts
Implementation of the Campos Verdes Specific will result in urban development of the property
and will preclude future use of the site for dryland agriculture and will eliminate the open space
and rural character of the exiting site. The land use plan includes approximately 13.5 acres of
open space within the park and detention basin. The conversion of the site from rural to urban
development is consistent with the trend toward urban development in the area. The conversion
was approved as part of previous development plans approved by the County and the land use
plan generally conforms with land use designations provided in the Southwest Area Plan and the
City's General Plan Land Use Plan. The EIR identified no land use conflicts with the
surrounding land uses in the community. Mitigation measures contained in the EIR include on
site landscaping which will minimize land use conflicts with existing and planned adjacent uses.
-10-
l
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
The level of impacts related to open space and conservation are considered insignificant with
the implementation of the above mitigation measures.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. I to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan includes the same land uses which were
previously evaluated in EIR No. 348. From an open space standpoint, Amendment No. 1
increases the area devoted to park and detention uses from 13.5 acres to 14.2 acres. This is due
to the increased detention basin size resulting from more detailed design by the City.
Implementation of the land use plan would continue the trend toward urban development of this
area and will preclude open space and conservation type uses on areas of the project outside of
the park and detention basin. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
Wildlife/Vegetation
Previously Identified Impacts
A Biological Assessment for Campos Verdes was prepared to determine project impacts to
existing biological resources on site. Construction activity will result in the removal of physical
habitats, through cut, fill and other grading activity. As habitat is disturbed, the associated
wildlife will either be destroyed or displaced to adjacent habitat areas where they will crowd and
disrupt local populations. Through increased competition and predation the overcrowded
habitats will return to their original population numbers resulting in the potential loss of
displaced wildlife.
"Harassment" of wildlife populations also is expected to occur due the construction and
habitation of urban land uses. Harassment results from the introduction of various human
activities (i.e. construction related noises, background noise, light and glare, etc.) and domestic
animals into an otherwise undisturbed natural habitat area thereby increasing the costs of
survival and decreasing the probability of successful reproduction in wildlife populations.
One naturalized biotic community, introduced grassland, is represented on site. Conversion of
the on-site introduced grassland biotic community to urban development will reduce this form
of habitat. Introduced grassland is not habitat which supports endangered or threatened species
and its loss is not considered a significant adverse impact. On a cumulative or regional level,
the loss of introduced grassland does result in the loss of native biotic resources in the region and
the loss of foraging habitat for migratory birds. These are considered significant cumulative
impacts requiring a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Potential impacts to streambeds on site will be governed by the Califomia Department of Fish
and Game and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Through the permitting process, these
-11-
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ADDENDUM No. 4 TO EIR No. 348
organizations will require on or off site mitigation for impacts to streambeds. Based on this
process, impacts to streambeds are not considered significant adverse impacts.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan results in the same amount of area being
disrupted by grading activity as the approved Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Therefore, the
direct impacts associated with Amendment No. 1 to the Specific Plan will be similar to the
approved Specific Plan. The cumulative or regional wildlife impacts associated with the loss
of introduced grassland remain significant. No additional or revised mitigation measures are
proposed, however as concluded in Ell{ 348, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is
required.
Energy Resources
Previously Identified Impacts
Development within Campos Verdes will increase energy consumption for motor vehicle
movement, space and water heating, lighting, home appliance use, and construction equipment
manufacturing and operation. Natural gas demand for the approved Campos Verdes Specific
Plan was calculated at 2,781,578 cubic feet per month. On site electricity demand was estimated
to be 5,079,483 kilowatts per year. Although project development would increase the
consumption of energy resources, project usage was not considered a significant impact.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Utilizing the same energy usage factors previously identified in EIR No. 348, project related
energy impacts can be assessed. Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan is
estimated to generate approximately 2,460,607 of. per month of natural gas and 5,201,383
kilowatts (kWh) per year of electricity. The proposed project will consume approximately 3%
more electricity and about 11% less natural gas. Overall, energy consumption will decrease by
8%. Despite this decrease, the conclusion of a significant impact reached by EIR 348 would still
be valid. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed, and a Statement of
Overriding Considerations is still required.
Scenic Highways
Previously Identified Impacts
Two planning areas of the adopted Campos Vetdes Land Use Plan are adjacent to Winchester
-12-
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em No. 348
Road (Highway 79), an eligible County Scenic Highway. according to both the County of
Riverside General Plan and SWAP (Southwest Area Plan). As shown in EIR No. 348, all
applicable scenic highway requirements were integrated into the design of the project (i.e.:
setback, landscaping, slope revegetation, signage, etc.). EIR 348 determined that the design
guidelines of the adopted Specific Plan mitigate potential scenic highway impacts to Winchester
Road to below a level of significance.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Subsequent to approval of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan, the City of Temecula adopted its
General Plan. The City does not have any designated scenic highways. Amendment No. 1 to
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan does not propose any changes to the design guidelines of the
Specific Plan. Therefore, impacts to the County-designated eligible scenic highway (Winchester
Road) will continue to be mitigated to below a level of significance. No additional or revised
mitigation measures are proposed.
Cultural and Scientific Resources
Previously Identified Impacts
Cultural resources are classified as both archaeological and paleontological resources. No
archaeological resources were discovered on site. The potential for paleontological resources
to occur on site is measured by the sensitivity of geological units on site. The alluvial deposits
on site are sediments laid down by streams flowing across the region in the past 10,000 years.
These deposits are considered too young to contain any significant fossils. The Pauba
Formation, however is considered to have a moderate to high paleontological sensitivity.
Measures were identified in the EIR which would mitigate impacts to unexpected archaeological
and potential paleontological resources to below a level of significance. These measures
included retaining a qualified archaeologist and paleontologist during project grading.
Additionally, prior to the issuance of grading permits, a Paleontologist must prepare a
Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program and submit this report to the City.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan involves disturbance of the same area
as previously identified for development. As such, potential impacts to cultural and scientific
resources associated with Amendment No. 1 to the Specific Plan will remain unchanged from
the approved Specific Plan and will be mitigated to below a level of significance. No additional
or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
-13-
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
O. Circulation and Traffic
Previously Identified Impacts
Project generated traffic was calculated at approximately 16, 184 vehicle trips per day based on
the land use mix in the originally analyzed Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Morning peak hour
trip generation was estimated to be 997 trips while 1,179 trips were generated at the evening
peak hour.
Based upon project generated traffic and associated impacts to roadway segment and
intersections within the project vicinity, mitigation measures were identified consisting of
roadway and intersection improvements. Recommended long range roadway improvement
needs in the project vicinity (which resulted from the specific plan build out and cumulative area
development traffic impact analysis) included: 1) the widening of North General Kearney Road
to full secondary Roadway standards, 2) the widening of Margarita Road to full arterial
standards, 3) the widening of Winchester Road to full urban arterial standards, and 4) the
signalization of Margarita Road intersections at North General Kearney and Campos Verdes
Lane. Even with the above mitigation measures, EIR 348 concluded that a significant adverse
impact would remain and a Statement of Overriding Conditions was adopted.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Wilbur Smith Associates conducted a traffic impact analysis which compared Amendment No.
1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan with the approved Campos Verdes Specific Plan. From
a traffic impact perspective, the most telling measure of consistency relates to traffic generation.
Trip generation for the proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Vetdes Specific Plan is less
than the daily and p.m. peak hour trip generation totals included in the original Specific Plan EIR
traffic impact analysis. Daily trip generation is estimated at 12,070 vehicle trips and evening
peak hour trip generation is estimated to be 1,123 vehicle trips. During the morning peak hour,
the currently proposed land use plan is estimated to generate 1,067 vehicle trips. This is 70
vehicle trips greater than was estimated in EIR 348. The proposed middle school results in
substantially higher morning peak hour traffic than were estimated for the residential and
elementary school uses of the approved Specific Plan.
Most of the original EIR recommended roadway improvements in the vicinity are either
completed or are currently under construction. A new signal will be installed at the intersection
of Margarita Road and General Kearney by the fourth quarter of 1999, when The Promenade
Mall opens. A new signal on Margarita at Campos Verdes Lane would be timed to correspond
to either the development of the Power Center component of the regional Center property (west
of Margarita Road) or the Campos Verdes commercial center site (east of Margarita). The
widening of North General Kearney Road would likely be accomplished in two phases. First,
the intersection approach would be widened to accommodate the mall and then the reminder of
-14-
I
I
i
!
I
I
I
i
I
I
!
I
i
I
I
!
I
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO Em NO. 348
the road along the project boundary would be widened as Campos Verdes is developed. No
additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed, however as concluded by EIR 348,
significant adverse impacts will remain that require a Statement of Overriding Conditions.
P. Public Facilities and Services
Previously Identified Impacts
Development of the Approved Campos Verdes Specific Plan would incrementally increase
demand on existing public utilities and service providers. The impacts associated with the
Approved Specific Plan are shown in the second column of Table 2 below. With regard to
water, sewer, parks and recreation, solid waste and health services, ElK 348 concluded that
impacts ai~er mitigation would be reduced to below a level of significance. With regard to fire,
police, schools, natural gas, electricity and libraries, EIR 348 concluded that significant adverse
impacts would remain after mitigation requiring a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan reduces the previously approved
residential component by 66 single family dwelling units. At the same time, the proposed
development plan increases the commercial/office element by 11 acres and substitutes a 20-acre
middle school for a 1 O-acre elementary school. The generation rates used to arrive at project
generated impacts have been extrapolated from the original Campos Verdes EIR. Table 2 shows
the impacts resulting from Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Due to the
decreased residential component, impacts to water, fire, police, schools, parks/recreation, natural
gas, solid waste, libraries and health services are reduced. Project impacts on sewer and
electricity have increased slightly (3% and 2% respectively) due to the increase in commercial
and office uses which create higher demands per acre than residential uses for sewer and
electricity. In spite of the reduced demand on most of the public facilities, significance of
impacts remains the same as determined in EIR 348 since the reduction in impacts is typically
small. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed. Certain adverse impacts
remain significant as shown in Table 1 and require a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
-15-
ADDENDUM No. 4 TO EIR No. 348
Table 2
Public Utilities and Services Comparison
Public: Service Approvect Speeffie ~ Impact after i Amendmenti No; I! ~;= Impact: after
Mitigation Mitigation
Water~ Insignificant Insignificant
Sewer: Insignificant Insignificant
Fire Significant Significant
Polled Significant Significant
Plan
285,240 gallons 240,380 gallons
151,800 gallons 156,000 gallons
798 new residents 626 new residents
1.8 sworn officers 1.4 sworn officers
0.26 civilian personnel 0.20 civilian personnel
0.6 patrol cars 0.47 patrol cars
Schools4 593 students Significant 466 students Significant
Parks/Recreations 3.9 acres Insignificant 3.1 acres Insignificant
Natural Gas6 2,781,578 cubic Significant 2,460,607 cubic Significant
feet/month feet/month
Electricity7 5,079,483 kWh/yr Significant 5,201,383 kWh/year Significant
Solid Wastes 1,396 tons/year Insignificant 1,056 tons/year Insignificant
Libraries $117,348 for facilities Significant $92,202 for facilities Significant
$9,056 annual costs $7,115 annum costs
798 new residents 626 new residents
Health Services9 Insignificant Insignificant
~ 600 gallons per day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial/office, 3,800 gallons/acre/day for parks
: 300 gallons/day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial
3 1.5 officers/1,000 people (4/d.u.), 1 civilian personnel/7 officers, 1 patrol car/3 officers
4 1.9 students/du
s 5 acres/1,000 people
' Natural Gas - 6,665 cubic f~rnonth for residences, 2.0 cubic if/square ft/raonth for commercial/office (35% floor area)
7 Electricity -' 6,081 kWh/residence, 8.8 kWh/square if/year for commercial/office (35% floor area)
s 1.75 tons/person/year
9 Demands for health services are based on population, but are not quantified in EIR 348. Service providers will
increase staff and facilities to accommodate increased population growth.
Light and Glare
Previously Identified Impacts
when EIR 348 was prepared, project related impacts from light and glare stemmed primarily
from urban development of an vacant piece of property. Development of the parcel with 308
dwelling uniks and 19.8 acres of commercial and office uses would result in the placement and
installation of street lights, potential entry monumentation lighting and parking lot lighting.
Additionally, a special lighting area has been established as the area within a thirty mile radius
-16-
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR NO. 348
of the Mt. Palomar Observatory. The project lies within this special lighting area. Mitigation
to reduce light and glare impacts includes the use of low pressure sodium vapor lamps, using
shields to prevent upward illumination from other lighting sources, compliance with City light
pollution ordinances, and landscape buffers.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan results in 66 fewer dwelling units but
increases the commercial/office uses by 8 acres. Impacts to the surrounding area from project
illumination will remain the same because the total number of street lights, entry monumentation
lighting and parking lot lighting will remain substantially the same. Reductions in parking lot
and street lighting due to reductions in the area devoted to residential and park uses will be offset
by additional parking lot lighting associated with increased commercial development. With
implementation of the mitigation measures contained in E1R No. 348, the level of impacts
related to light and glare would be reduced to an insignificant level.. No additional or revised
mitigation measures are proposed.
R, Disaster Preparedness
Previously Identified Impacts
Earthquakes, floods, and wild fires are natural occurrences which cannot be prevented. The
County Office of Disaster Preparedness is responsible for coordinating the various agencies to
assure preparedness and recovery from a natural disaster. Seismic safety, slopes and erosion,
wind erosion and blowsand, flooding and fire services impacts and accompanying mitigation are
discussed in separate sections of the EIR.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan results in fewer residents (626) than
would have previously occupied the site under the approved Specific Plan (798). However, the
increase in commercial/office uses may expose more project employees to potential natural
disasters. Based on the mitigation measures proposed in each of the EIR sections described
above, potential impacts to the project from natural and manmade disaster have been mitigated
to below a level of significance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
HI. Conclusion
In all cases, impacts associated with Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are
substantially the same or are less than those analyzed in EIR No. 348. The project shall still comply with
all mitigation measures required by EIR No.348, and no additional mitigation measures are needed.
-17-
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR PA99-0022
p:standard%staffreport.shell 19
Project Title
Lead Agency Name and Address
Contact Person and Phone Number
Project Locations
Project Sponsors Name and Address
General Plan Designation (Current)
Zoning (Current)
Description of Project (Proposed
Designations)
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Planning Application No. PA99-0022 (General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change)
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
David Hogan
(909) 694-6400
Site 1 - An area located on the east side of Jefferson Road
south of Winchester Road (APN 910-310-007).
Site 2 - An area along parts of Avenida del Reposo,
Kaweah Ddve, and Nob Court east of Meadowview (APNs
957-291-001 through 030 and 957-292-001 through 004).
Site 3 - The area generally located west of Jefferson Road
and north of the Santa Gertrudis Channel (APNs 909-120-
036, -046, and 909-281-016).
City of Temecula
Site 1 - Community Commercial
Site 2 - Very Low Density Residential
Site 3 - Business Park
Site I - Community Commercial (CC)
Site 2 - Very Low Density Residential (VL)
Site 3 - Business Park (BP)
A request to amend the General Plan Land Use and City
Zoning Maps to the following:
Site 1 - Highway Toudst Commercial (HT)
Site 2 - Low Medium Density Residential (LM)
Site 3 - Open Space with Open Space/Conservation(OSC),
Service Commercial (SC) and Public Institutional (PI)
Site 1 - The site is developed as commercial property and
is located along an existing commercial corddor south.
Site 2 -- The site is currently occupied and surrounded by
single family residences.
Site 3 - Has been acquired by the Riverside County Flood
Control Distdct for use as a detention basin. The exact
location and area of the detention basin is not known at this
time. A small pertion of this area is currently in use by
Rancho California Water District. Areas to the west, north,
and south are developing as industrial while the area to the
east is developing as commercial property.
Other public agencies whose approval None.
is required
This Initial Environmental Study is being completed to compare the differences between the current
General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations evaluated using the Final EIR for the City General
Plan with the proposed changes to the Land Use and Zoning Maps. For the purpose of this analysis,
equivalent impacts and reductions in overall impacts are being treated as "No Impact" in the attached
checklist.
\\TElVIEC_FS201~DATAXDEPTSXPLANNING\CEQA\22PA99 - EIS.do~ 1
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
Land Use Planning
Population and Housing
Geologic Problems
Water
Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
Hazards
Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on
an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least
one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the eadier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
have been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that eadier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature
David Hogan
Date: February6,1999
For: The City of Temecula
\\TEMEC_FS'201XDATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQAX22PA99 - EIS.doc
2
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources
Potentially
Potenlially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impacl Mitigalion Impact Impact
Incorporated
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
1.a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) _
1.b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or X
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project?
1.c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the X
vicinity?
1.d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. ×
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)? (Source 1, Figure 5-4,
Page 5-17)
1.e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an X
established community (including low-income or
minority community)? .
Comments
1 .a,c The project is a series of general plan amendments and required zone changes that can be
charactedzed as (1) a shift within commercial designations, (2) a cleanup measure to reflect
the current development pattern, and (3) a reduction in future urban employment uses to
reflect the future use of a site for a floodwater detention basin. The environmental impacts of
these proposed general plan amendments and proposed zone changes are expected to be
less than significant for the following reasons: Site 1 is already developed for commercial
use, Site 2 is already developed as single family homes, and Site 3 will be set aside primarily
for a floodwater retention purposed. As a result, the environmental impacts associated with
this project are expected to be less than the originally anticipated in the Environmental Impact
Report for the City General Plan.
1 .b The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The impacts from the General Plan Land Use
Designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report 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. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over the
project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the project and it is anticipated
that they will make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates to their specific
environmental plans or polices. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this
project.
1 .d Two of the three sites are already developed and these proposed changes are consistent with
the current pattem of development. The third site has not been used for agricultural purposes
within recent memory and is not within an area under a Williamson Act contract. In addition,
the City General Plan anticipated that this property would ultimately be developed with uses
other than agriculture and that they would not be used for agricultural production. As a
consequence, any environmental impacts associated with this project are expected to be
equivalent to those impacts identified in the original General Plan.
1 .e The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including low-income or minority community. As a consequence no significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQA\22PA99 - EIS.doc
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Polenlially
~ign. i,l,i~ant
ImpaCt:
Polentially
Significanl
Unless
Mil!gation
:!nC0rpora!e~;I
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
2o POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.a.
2.c.
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population Projects? (Source 1, Page 2-23)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
X
X
X
Comments
The project will not result in development that would cumulatively exceed official regional or
local population projections, will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or
indirectly, and will not displace any type of housing. The project sites are either already
developed or are proposed to remain substantially undeveloped. As a result, no significant
effects are anticipated from this project.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
Expose people to potential impacts involving?
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f,
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Page 7-6 )
Seismic ground shaking?
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-8)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
Landslides or mudflows? (Source 1, Figure 7-2,
Page 7-8)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions form excavation, grading or fill?
Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Figure 7-2,
Page 7-8)
Expansive soils?
Unique geologic or physical features?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments
This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
4.a.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and mount of surface runoff?
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3,
Page 7-10; Figure 7-4, Page 7-)
X
R:\CEQA\22PA99 - EIS.doc
4
! : sst~es and SUp~ing!lnformalion Sources
!
4.c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)?
4.d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
4.e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
4.f. Change in the quantity 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?
4.g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?.
4.h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
4i Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater.
Otherwise available for public water supplies?
· ~i ~c~tentially:
Potentially:: ~Signirma~ : ~Than
SignifiCant Utiless Significant
Ih~pacl: Mitigation :!i'npact
Jqcerporatedi.
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments
This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. However, there is the potential that the operation of the detention area
will result in an incremental increase in local groundwater recharge. As a result, no additional
impacts have been identified.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.a.
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (Source 1,
Page 2-29)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or
cause any change in climate?
Create objectionable odors?
X
X
X
X
Comments
The proposed General Plan and Zoning amendments will result in fewer vehicle trips than
originally envisioned in the EIR for the General Plan. This is because motor automobiles are
a major source of air quality impacts in Southern California, the small reduction in vehicle trips
that will result from this project will cause an incremental decrease of projected air pollutant
emissions. As a result, this project represents a decrease in the impacts addressed in the
original EIR for the City General Plan.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
6.a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
6.b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections or incompatible
USES)?
R:\CEQA\22PA99 - ElS.doc
5
X
X
(~C.
6.d.
6.e.
6.f.
6.g.
· lestat and Suplx~ling Information Souross
inadeC~late emergency access or acceSS t~ nearby .......
uses?
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
"Significant. :: . :~lAtless' · .Signirmpnt No
Iml~-t Mitlgatidti:. impact Impact
X
X
X
X
X
Comments;
The proposed General Plan and Zoning amendments will result in fewer vehicle tdps from
these areas than was originally anticipated in the Final EIR for the General Plan. Using the
traffic generation factors from the General Plan EIR, the cdtical traffic areas west of Interstate
15 will see a reduction of 27,280 modeled daily vehicle trips at Build Out. (32,375 daily trips
before the change and 5,095 daily tdps after the proposed amendment.) This change is
pdmadly due to the change of over 120 acres from Business Park to detention basin/open
space area. In addition, this change is also expected to result in a small reduction in the total
number of peak hour tdps from the future industrial areas west of Jefferson Road. This will
also result in a reduction in the amount congestion at the freeway interchanges and
overcrossings. As a result, because the General Plan and Zoning amendments represent a
reduction in total daily and peak hour vehicle tdps, it will also result in an incremental
decrease to circulation system impacts within the City.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
7.8.
7.b.
7.c.
7.d.
7.e.
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals and birds)?
Locally designated species (e.g.hedtage trees)?
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, dpadan and vernal
pool)?
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
7.all
This project does not represent a change from the impam addressed in the odginal EIR for
the City General Plan. The pdmary change, of over 1 O0 acres from an urban to
predominately open space use is expected to have, on the long run, a positive impact by
providing some additional habitat areas along Murdeta Creek. As a result, the project is
expected to result in an incremental decrease in the impacts to biologic impacts.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
8.a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
8.b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?.
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATAXDEPTS\PLANNING\CEQAY22PA99 - EIS.doc 6
X
X
8.c.
: .... i: iP~lentially: :: Significant: : :Less Than
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources i : ~i :i~::l~li iMH!ga!iOn: :i ::impact
:: IncorPorated
Result in the loss Ofa~/ailability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State?
No
X
Comments:
This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
9.8.
9.b.
9.c.
9.d.
9.e.
A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation)?
Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
Increase fire hazard in areas with fiammable brush,
grass, or trees?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
10.a. Increase in existing noise levels? (Source 1, page X
8-g)
lO.b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
Comments:
10.all. This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
11.a.
11.b.
11.c.
11.d.
11.e.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
Other governmental services?
X
X
X
X
X
R:\CEQAX22PA99 - EIS.do~
7
Potentially
Signi~canl
:ls~sUes and SuppOd!ng~ Information Sources !mpac!
Potentially
Signif'~canl Less Than
Unless Signilican! No
Mitigation : : Impact Impact
:l.~i~d! ::. !:
Comments:
11 .all. The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS: Would the proposal
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
12.a. X
12.b. X
12.c. X
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
12.d. Sewer or septic tanks?
12.e. Storm water drainage?
12.f. Solid waste disposal?
12.g. Local or regional water supplies?
Comments:
12.a. ] The project will not result in a need for new utility systems or substantial alterations to existing
facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
13.a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X
13.b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affect? X
13.c. Create light or glare? X
Comments:
13.a11. This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the original EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
14.a. Disturb paleontological resources? (Source 2, X
Figure 55 )
14.b. Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 1, Page X
281)
14.c. Affect historical resources? X
14.d. Have the potential to cause a physical change X
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
14.e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the X
potential impact area?
Comments:
R:\CEQA\22PA99 - E1S.doc
8
14.a11.
Potentially
Potentially Signific, a~ Less Than
Signilicanl Unless Significant No
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources Impact Miligalion Impacl Impact
b~:orporated
This project does not represent a change from the impacts addressed in the 0dginal EIR for
the City General Plan. As a result, no additional impacts have been identified.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
15.a.
15.b.
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
X
X
Comments:
15.a11.
The project will not impact or increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities or affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or
opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. ·
16.a.
16.b.
16.c.
16.d.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-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?
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
CCumulatively 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).
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
Comments:
EARLIER ANALYSES. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General
Plan, Certified in 1993.
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan.
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
R:\CEQA\Z2PA99 - EIS.do¢
9
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR PA98-0511
p:standard%staffreport,shell 20
Project Title
Lead Agency Name and Address
Contact Person and Phone Number
Project Location
Project Sponsors Name and Address
General Plan Designation (Current)
Zoning (Current)
Description of Project PA98-0511 (General
Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
Description of Project PA98-0512
(Development Plan)
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Other public agencies whose approval is
required
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change) and Planning Application PA98-0512
(Development Plan)
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Thomas Thomsley
(909) 694-6400
Located on the northwest comer of Nicolas Road and
Winchester Road (Assessors Parcel Numbers 911-170-078,
911-170-085 and 911-170-090)
Curt Miller, Pacific Golf Properties
4220 Von Karman, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Business Park (BP)
Business Park (BP)
A request to change the General Plan Land Use designations
and Zoning Map designation of two parcels totaling 12.3 acres
from Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (O).
A proposal to develop a 244 unit senior housing complex with
two and three story apartment buildings on an 8.3 acre site. This
is a permitted use in the Professional Office zone and is a less
intensive use. Although the density for the apartments is at 30
units per acre the actual population will be less intensive than
regular apartments because each units will house only one or
two people.
The project is separated from single family homes to the north
and west by the San Gertrudis Creek (channeled), Chaparral
High School to the south, and vacant commercial land in the
Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan to the east.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside County Health
Department, Temecula Police Department, Eastern Municipal
Water District, Rancho California Water District, Southern
California Gas Company, Southern California Edison Company,
General Telephone Company, and Riverside Transit Agency
R: \STAFFRFT~511-512pa98 pc. doc
35
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.
X
X
Land Use Planning
Population and Housing
Geologic Problems
Water
Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
X
X
Hazards
Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one
effect 1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that eadier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project.
Signature
February 25, 1999
Date:
Thomas K. Thomsley
For: The City of Temecula
R: \STAFFRFr~S 11-512pa98 pc .doc
36
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
1.a.
1.c.
1.d.
1.e,
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source
1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land
uses)? (Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including low-income or minority
community)?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
1.a., c.
The General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (GPA/ZA) are a proposal, that upon approval, will
modify the City's General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Designation from Business Park to
Professional Office. The impact of GPA/ZA is expected to be less than significant because Professional
Office is compatible with Business Park and are equally intensive uses. Professional Office is also
compatible the other adjacent commercial designations in the vicinity and allows for senior housing. The
Development Plan for senior apartments is also compatible with the residential uses in the surrounding area
and this location will allow the residents convenient access to community amenities. As a consequence the
impact associated with this Development Plan is expected to be less than significant.
1.b
It is not anticipated that the GPAJZA will conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The environmental impact of the proposed GPA/ZA and the
proposed Development Plan are expected to be less than significant because Professional Office is
comparable with Business Park and they are equally intensive uses. Although, impacts from all General
Plan Land Use Designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) 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. All agencies with jurisdiction over these projects
are being given the opportunity to comment on them. It is anticipated that they will make the appropriate
comments as to how the GPA/ZA and development plan relate to their specific environmental plans or
polices. The Development Plan site has been previously graded and services have been extended into the
area. There will be limited, if any environmental effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the Development Plan. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of
this project.
1.6
The GPA/ZA will not have an effect, and the development plan will not disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of an established community (including low-income or minority community). It will provide for
a specific housing need in the community. As a consequence no significant effects are anticipated as a
result of this project.
R: \STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc .do~
37
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.8.
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? (Source 1, Page 2-23)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
2.c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable X
housing? (Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
X
X
Comments:
2.a. The GPA/ZA will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The development plan
will ultimately result in the construction of senior apartments, which will have a limited effect on population
because each apartment will house only one or two persons. Since the Development Plan is partially
intended to serve the needs of the existing residents, the proposed development will not be a significant
contributor to population growth that will cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections.
No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b.The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly.
The Development Plan will cause some people to relocate to Temecula, but will more likely accommodate
the needs of existing residents. Therefore, the Development Plan will not induce substantial growth in the
area, and no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.c. The GPNZA will not effect exiting housing. The development plan proposes senior housing which will expand
the existing housing and will likely provide more affordable housing. No significant effects are anticipated
as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc .doc
38
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving?
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f.
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Page 7-6 )
Seismic ground shaking?
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (Source
1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-8)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
Landslides or mudflows? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page
7-8)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions form excavation, grading or fill?
Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page
7-8)
Expansive soils?
Unique geologic or physical features?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
3.b.,f.,
The GPA/ZA will not have an effect but the proposed Development Plan may expose people less than
significant impacts involving seismic ground shaking and to erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill. However, the project site is located in Southern California, an
area that is seismically active, and any potential impacts am mitigated through building construction that is
consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. Furlher, preliminary soil reports have been submitted and
reviewed as pad of the application submittal and recommendations contained in this report will be used to
determine appropriate conditions of approval. The soils reports will also contain recommendations for the
compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground
shaking, erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and
expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
3.c., g.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan site is located within an area delineated as a liquefaction/
subsidence hazard zone. Potentially significant impacts associated with the development of this site will be
mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. In
addition, preliminary soil reports have been submitted and reviewed as part of the application submittal and
recommendations contained in this report will be used to determine apprcpdate conditions of approval prior
to the issuance of grading permits. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will be
utilized in the development of this site, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from
liquefaction. After mitigation measures are performed, no significant effects are anticipated as a result of
this project.
3.d.
The GPAJZA and the development plan will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard.
The project is not located in an area where any of these hazards could occur. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
3.e.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final
Environmental Impact for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or
mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3. h. This site should not be subject to expansive soils. Soils test in the general area have not indicated that the
conditions or mineral elements exist that create and/or cause there to be problems with expansive soils.
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R: \STAFFRPTL511-512pa98 pc .doc
39
3.i.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard.-
The project is not located in an area where any of these hazards could occur. No impacts am antidpated
as a result of this project.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
4.9.
4,C.
4.d.
4.e.
4.f.
4.g.
4.h.
4.i.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and mount of surface runoff?.
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Page 7-10;
Figure 7-4, Page 7-12 and Source 5)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)?
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
Change in the quantity 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?
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?.
Impacts to groundwater quality?
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater.
Otherwise available for public water supplies? (Source
2, Page 263)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
4.8.
This land GPNZA will not have an effect, however, the proposed Development Plan for this site will result
in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff. While
absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts will ultimately be mitigated through site
design. Drainage conveyances will be required at the time that a development proposal is proposed to
safely and adequately handle runoff that is created. The impact as a result of this project will be less than
significant.
4.b.
This GPNZA will not expose people to water related hazards. However, the site is located in Zone A of the
Temecula Creek floodplain (areas within the 100-year floodplain) as identified by Flood Insurance Rate Map
Panel No. 060742-0005-B (November 20, 1996). As a consequence the proposed Development Plan will
be required to comply with Riverside County Flood Control measures to mitigate the development for
potential flooding hazards. This site is also located within a dam inundation area as identified in the City of
Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. Impacts can be mitigated by utilizing existing
emergency response systems and by assudng that these systems continue to maintain adequate service
provision as the City develops. Impacts associated with this project with respect to the threat of flooding can
be mitigated to levels that will be less than significant.
4.c. The GPNZA does not effect discharge into surface waters. The Development Plan for this site may have
a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and alteration of surface water quality. Prior
to issuance of a grading permit for a development proposal on this site, the developer will be required to
comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from
R:\STAFFRPTLS 11 4 12pa98 pc.doc
40
4.d. ,e.
the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent
has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any
potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant as a result of the development of this site.
This GPAJZA will not effect the amounts of surface water in any water bodies nor changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water movements. The ultimate development of the site; however, may have a
less than significant impact in changes to the amount of surface water in any water body or impact currents,
or impact the course or direction of water movements. Consequently any impact as a result of the change
in land use designations is considered less than significant.
The GPA/ZA will not have any effects on ground water. The ultimate development of the site should have
a less than significant impact with respect to the change in the quantity and quality of ground waters.
No Imlmct
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.a.
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation(Source 3, Page
6-11, Table 6-2)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
Create objectionable odors?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
5.a
The proposed GPNZA will not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air
quality violation. The proposed Development Plan will not violate nor contribute to existing or projected air
quality violations. As a consequence no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
5.b.,d.
The GPA/ZA will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There is a sensitive receptor, Chaparral High
School, in proximity to the Development Plan site. The development of this site may create dust and
objectionable odor during the grading and construction phase of the project. These impacts will be of short
duration and are not considered significant over the long term. No other odors are anticipated once the
project is built and occupied.
5.c.
Neither the proposed GPNZA nor the proposed Development Plan will alter air movement, moisture or
temperature, or cause any change in climate. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
41
:~lsmsaml~Suppor~atnformmiem'~~ ':imp,=. '~In.as. po.-.-.d .bnisea.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
6.a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X
6.b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections or incompatible uses)?
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
6.c.
X
X
6.d.
6.e.
6.f.
6.g.
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
6.a.
The changes in land use for the GPA/ZA are of a similar nature and will not have an impact. The
development of the site will add new traffic to the area. However, the EIR has already addressed the
anticipated traffic volumes generated by the development of this property under Business Park. Based on
the tdp generation data of the General Plans Circulation Element the proposed senior housing Development
Plan has neady half the daily trip rate of the current land use designation of Business Park. Therefore, this
project will create less traffic congestion that previous anticipated in the Circulation Element and the EIR for
the General Plan. It is anticipated that this project will contribute less than a five percent (5%) increase in
existing volumes dudng the AM peak hour and PM peak hour time frames to the intersections of Winchester
Road and Nicolas Road. The applicant will be required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and public fadlity
fees as conditions of approval for the project. After mitigation measures are performed and development
impact fees paid, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.
The GPA/ZA and the Development Plan will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The
Development Plan is designed to current City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from
design features. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.c.
The GPAJZA and the Development Plan will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses. The Development Plan is senior housing (apartments) in an area with a vadety of uses which includes
residential. This project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.8.
The GPAJZA and the Development Plan will not result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists.
Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have not been included as part of the project. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
6.g.
The GPNZA and the Development Plan will not result in impacts to rail, waterborne or air traffic since none
exists currently in the immediate proximity of the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
R:\STAFFRFI~511-512pa98 pc .doc
42
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
7.8.
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 1, Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3 & Source 4)
X
7.b.
7.c.
7.d.
7.e.
Locally designated species (e.g.hedtage trees)? (Source 1
Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, dpadan and vernal pool)?
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
X
X
Comments:
7.8.
The project site for the GPA/ZA and the and senior housing Development Plan does not lie within in an area
designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as potential habitat for the Federally listed endangered
species the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. This site is with in the urbanized area of the city and has been
continuously disc for weed abatement and has little vegetation left to provide a potential habitat. As a
result, no impacts are anticipated at this time.
7.b.-e. The GPA/ZA has no effect on these biological resources and the Development Plan site is currently
disturbed and undeveloped. There are no locally designated communities, wetland habitat areas, or wildlife
corridors on or around the site. As a result, no impacts are anticipated with the proposed development of
this site.
R: \STAFFRPT~ 11-512pa98 pc .doc
43
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
8.a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X
8.b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient X
manner?.
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State?
8.c.
X
Comments:
Neither the GPA/ZA nor the Development Plan will impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans. The Development Plan will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy
conservation dudng the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be
consistent with these applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8.b.
The GPAJZA will not effect non-renewable resources and the Development Plan will result in a less than
significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner. While there
will be an increase in the rate of use of any natural resource and in the depletion of nonrenewable
resource(s) (construction materials, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent
depletion of these non-renewable natural resources. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these
impacts are not seen as significant.
8,c.
The GPA/ZA does not effect mineral resources and the Development Plan will not result in the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the
State. No known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State
are located at this project site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~ l i -512pa98 pc .doc
44
HAZARDS.
Would the proposal involve:
9.8.
9.b.
9.c.
9.d.
9.e.
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
9.8,
The GPAJZA and the development plan will not result in an impact due to risk of explosion, or the release
of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions since none are proposed in the
request. Development must receive clearance from the Department of Environmental Health prior to any
plan check submittal and must also receive clearance from the Fire Department pdor to the issuance of a
building permit. This applies to storage and use of hazardous materials. No impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
9.b.
The GPAJZA and the development plan will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency
evaluation plan. The subject site is not located in an area, which could impact an emergency response plan.
The development plan proposes to take access from maintained streets and will therefore not impede any
emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c,
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard. The Development Plan will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the
plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these
applicable laws. Reference response 9.a. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not expose people to existing sources of potential health
hazards. No health hazards are known to be within proximity of the project. No impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
9.e.
GPNZA and the development plan will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with ~ammable
brush, grass, or trees. The project site is in an area of existing uses and proposed commercial uses. The
project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
R:\STAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
45
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
10.a.
10.b.
Increase in existing noise levels? (Source 1, page 8-9)
Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (Source 1,
Figure 8-5)
X
X
Comments:
10.a.
The GPAJZA will not have an effect on noise and Development Plan will result in a less than significant
increase to existing noise levels. 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. Long-term noise generated by this Development Plan would be similar to existing and proposed
uses in the area. No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in either the short
or long-term.
10.b.
The GPAJZA will not expose people to severe noise levels. However, the project site is adjacent to State
Highway 79, Winchester Road, which is designated as an access restricted six-lane urban arterial roadway.
Ambient noise levels 100 feet from centedine are 70.2 to 75.2 CNEL for Highway 79. This Development
Plan for residential use will require an acoustical survey to determine if noise mitigation is necessary. Site
design and building methods can mitigate the ambient noise to acceptable levels. The development of this
project may expose people to severe noise levels during the development7 construction phase (short-term).
Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet which is
considered very annoying and can cause hearing damage from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of
noise will be of short duration and therefore will not be considered significant. There will be no long-term
exposure of people to noise. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRI:"'I~ 11-512pa98
46
11.
PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
11.a.
11.b.
11.c.
11.d.
11.e.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
Other governmental services?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
11.a.b.
GPAJZA and the development plan will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new
or altered fire or police protection. The Development Plan will incrementally increase the need for fire and
police protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the maintenance of service provision from these
entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.c.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan should have no impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. The Development Plan will not cause significant numbers of people requiring schools to
relocate within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in a need for new or altered school
facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.d.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public
facilities, including roads. Funding for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax, which is
distributed to the City of Temecula from the State of California. Impacts to current and future needs for
maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be incremental, however, they will not be
considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover any of the proposed expenses. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11 .e. The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R :\STAFFRFT~ 11-512pa98 pc. doc
47
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS: Would the proposal
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
12.a.
12.b.
12.c.
12.d.
12.e.
12.f.
12.g.
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 2, Pgs. 39-40)
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste disposal?
Local or regional water supplies?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
12.a.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to power or natural gas. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the site.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.b.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to communication systems (reference response No. 12.a. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
12.c.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.d.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks. While the Development Plan will have an incremental
impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan
states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their
services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not
significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." It is anticipated that the proposal to change the
designation from Office to Commercial, and the limited nature of future development under this designation,
would not significantly increase the demand for systems or supplies. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
12.e.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to storm water drainage. The Development Plan will need to provide some additional on-site drainage
systems. The drainage system will be required as a condition of approval for the project and will tie into
the existing system. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal
systems. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through
participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling Programs that are implemented by the City. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.9.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to local or regional water supplies. Reference response 12.d. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
R :\5TAFFRir!'~ 11-512pa98 pc .doc
48
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
13.a.
13.b.
13.c.
Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affect?
Create light or glare?
X
X
X
Comments:
13.a.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not
located in an area where there is a scenic vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic
highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.b.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The
Development Plan consists of multiple apartment building in an area of mixed uses and aesthetic styling.
These buildings are consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and provide greater architectural relief that
the neighboring high school. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will have a less than a significant impact from light and glare. The
Development Plan will produce and result in light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light
sources. All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. The Development
Plan will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution).
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRFrX5 11-512pa98 pc .doc
49
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
14.a.
14.b.
14.c.
14.d.
14.e.
Disturb paleontological resources? (Source 2, Fig. 15,
Pg. 70)
Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 2, Fig. 14,
Pg. 67)
Affect historical resources?
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
14.c.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not have an impact on historical resources. The site has been
previously graded and resources would have been disturbed at that time. No historic resources exist at
the site or are proximate to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not have the potential to cause a physical change that would
affect unique ethnic cultural values. Reference response 14.c. No impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
14.e.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not restdct existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area. No religious or sacred uses exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
! Poemaklly :
Signi~ctnt Midptioa 5ilni6ck. tt
bmue, ~gl Suppor~m.~ laform,tioa Source, [mpKt lacomomud lmp.ct
No impset
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
15.a.
15.b.
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
X
X
Comments:
15.a.,b.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan is a residential facility that will not cause significant numbers of
people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula. However, it will result in an incremental impact or an
increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The Development
Plan is providing some amenities for the tenants and will therefore be conditioned to pay an adjusted rate
of the park mitigation fees. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources
for opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~ I i -512pa98 pc .doc
50
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
16.a.
16.b.
16.c.
16.d.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restdct the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects).
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
16.a-d No impacts are anticipated as a result of this GPNZA and the Development Plan.
X
X
X
X
EARLIER ANALYSES. None
2.
3.
4.
SOURCES
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Habitat Map (compiled by the Riverside
County Transportation and Land Management Agency [TLMA] GIS Division - dated June 4, 1998)
Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 060742-0005-B (November 20, 1996)
R: \STAFFRPTL511-512pa98 pc .doc
51
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
EXHIBITS FOR PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016
p:standard~staffreport.shell 21
CITY OF TEMECULA
,.,j
/ .
BP'
/
/~ BP
CC
CC
BP
BP H
H
SC
. .OS J
OS
CASE NUMBER:'PA99-001S'
EXHIBIT- 9A
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
p:standard~staffreport.shell 22
CITY OF TEMECULA
' <' LM
c /
, SC
CC
CC
r'q r'
P
BP
sP ·
,~,. ·
H
SC
H
NC
L
OS
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0016
EXHIBIT - 9B
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
p:standard~staffreport,shell 23
ATTACHMENT NO. 10
EXHIBITS FOR PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0022
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
EXHIBIT - 10A
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
LOCATION MAP
p:standard~staffreport.shell 25
CITY OF TEMECULA
131'
SC
SC
CC
1
BP
OS
~P
cc
BP
E
SI
S(:
BP
EXHIBIT 10B-1 - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
DESIGNATION - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
p:standard~staffreport.shell 26
SITE 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
VL
O
VL
LM
VL
VL
LM
L
_1
EXHIBIT 10B-2 - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (VL)
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 2
p:standard~staffreport.shell 28
· CITY OF TEMECULA
L
EXHIBIT 10C-1 -ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
p:standard~staffreport.shell 27
W"q Parcetshp
Ternzone
~ cc
~H
SITE 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
, OO
EXHIBIT 10C-2 - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (VL)
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 2
p:standard~-taffreport.shell 29
CITY OF TEMECULA
SC
SC
P
BP OS
BP
EXHIBIT 10B-3 - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BUSINESS PARK (BP))
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 3
p:standard~staffreport.shell 30
CITY OF TEMECULA
~'~ ParceLshp
Tem~one
BP
--CC
~H
IM
~==~NC
~OS
~ OS-C
~PI
~PO
~PR
--SC
l SP-3
~ ..~P.-4
I s~-s
I s~-6
Ise-7
I s~-s
["'] ST
Cline. shp
EXHIBIT 10C-3 - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - BUSINESS PARK (BP)
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 3
p:standard~staffreport.shell 31
CITY OF TEMECULA
· ..GP,'..
:ial
st Commercial
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
EXHIBIT 10D-1
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 1 - PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
p:standard~staffreport.shell 32
CITY OF TEMECULA
-Y-Besidential
Residential
· Cline.shp
CASE NUMBER: PA99-0022
EXHIBIT 10D-2 SITE 2 - PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
p:standard~staffreport.shell 33
CITY OF TEMECULA
iP:
cial
·
·
·
·
~n Space
Space - Conservatior
lic/h
CASE NUMBER: PA99'0022
EXHIBIT 10D-3
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
SITE 3 - PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
p:standard%staffreport.shell 34
ATTACHMENT NO. 11
EXHIBITS FOR PA98-0511
p:standard~staffreport.shell 35
CITY OF TEMECULA
· - , .-. ,,2: :::
M
,,/'
E~P
CASE NUMBER: PA98-0511
EXHIBIT-11 B
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
M
LM
IVI . ~
NC
-.,,.j
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
p:standard~staffreport.shell 36
CITY OF TEMECULA
POSI
· .." · .." · .. ·
.. ·
....· · ·
:.:.:..'~.":.::....·
~""' · · ~ · · · !
,.,. ' · . . ,~'. : / I~
.~."' · , · ...".... ~: ·
..... .:. ; ...
· '.,.,, ...::. ;. .
.
:' N,
N ."',:, ..., .....?. ,
,~ · .,::.. .......; ......
'.~ .. · . ." ...,...... ,
.... ~.. · . '..; ..., .,,,~
,.. .
,-~ .... . . ~
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Offi e
ZONING DESIGNATION: Professio~~Ol
CASE NUMBER: PA98-0511
EXHIBIT -11B PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS
CITY COUNCIL DATE - MARCH 23, 1999
p:standard~staffreport.shell 37
ITEM 18
APPROV
CITY ATTORNE'~~-'/~~,
DIRECTOR OF F
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUB.JEGT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/Acting City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Community Development Directo'('
March 23,1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. 1 to Campos Verdes Specific
Plan) which consists of increasing the school site from 10 acres to 20 acres, a
reduction of 66 residential parcels, a reduction to the park site, and changing a
portion of the residential and park zoned property to a commercial zoning
classification.
Prepared by:
Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN
(NO. 1) LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD
(SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) ON 72.7 ACRES AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-
130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060
AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0015)."
R: \STAFFRPT\ 15pa99CC-2. doc
1
BACKGROUND: This project was approved by the Planning Commission on February 3,
1999, with a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Slaven opposed the project).
DISCUSSION: The following am the proposed land use changes to the Campos Verdes Spedfic
Plan:
Existing Proposed
Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Planning Areas Specific Plan Amendment No. 1
Acreage Acreage
1 - Park 10.8 3.1
2 - Commercial/Office/Detention Basin 13.7 21.4
3 - Residential 12 14.6
4 - Commercial 12 17.5
5 - Residential 16.5 10.3
6 - Residential 12.3 7.6
7 - School Site 10.7 20
8 - Residential 15.9 14.1
9 - Residential 16 11.3
Roads 13 13
Total 132.9 132.9
Total Residential Area 72.7 57.9
The eight (8) foot trail in Planning Area 9 has been changed from a meandering trail to a standard
trail. All applicable texts, graphs, exhibits, etc. have been modified, as necessary, to be consistent
with the proposed Specific Plan as shown in Exhibit B. In addition, the language regarding the
detention basin, maintenance and ownership has changed as illustrated on pages 111-17, 111-31, III-
35, 111-39, 111-40, 111-42, 111-46.
Planning Commission and Community Issue
There were numerous residents who submitted letters (see Attachment 3 of the Planning
Commission packet dated February 3, 1999) and attended the Planning Commission hearing and
were in opposition to Sanderling Way being kept opened as approved under the original Campos
Verdes Specific Plan. However, the Planning Commission was advised by the City Attorney that
the Commission should not discuss the road issue because it was not a part of the proposed
Specific Plan Amendment, it was not reviewed environmentally, and it was not part of the public
notice.
Attachment 2 contains two supplemental letters from the traffic consultant addressing the road
closure issue.
All proposed changes have been reflected in the documents transmitted to the City Council in the
form of redlined (shaded) items for additions to the Plan and strikeout items for deletions (Exhibit
B).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An Environmental Addendum was prepared for the
Specific Plan Amendment. The comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation measures
contained in the environmental addendum concludes that the proposed changes to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the
certified EIR. In addition, there is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was
R: \STAFFRPTX 15pa99CC-2 .doc
2
certified and completed. Therefore, Staff is recommending the City Council adopt Addendum No.
4 to the previously certified EIR (No. 348) as no significant impacts or additional mitigation
measures are required given the scope of changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Amendment No. 1.
FISCAL IMPACT: The adoption of this Specific Plan Amendment is not expected to add any
significant operating costs to the City of Temecula.
Attachments:
1.
3.
4.
5.
City Council Ordinance No. 99- Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 (PA99-0015) - Page
Exhibits:
A. Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 Conditions of Approval - Page Campos Verdes
B. Specific Plan Amendment No. 1- (Under Separate Cover)
Traffic Letters (Dated December 22, 1998 and January 28, 1999)
Planning Commission Staff Report (dated February 3, 1999).
Draft Planning Commission Minutes (dated February 3, 1999).
Referendum Ballots submitted to the Planning Commission at the February 3, 1999 public
hearing.
R:\STAFFRPT\15pa99CC-2.doc
3
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
Specific Plan Amendment No. 1
( PA99-0015)
R:\STAFFRPT\I5pa99CC-2.doc
4
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN
(NO. 1) OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, NORTHEAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL
KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-
059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-
090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-
0015).
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such general
plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the Campos Verdes Specific Plan to accurately
reflect private property and to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 3,
1999, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan as shown in Attachment 1 of Exhibit B (Amendment No. 1 to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan); and
WHEREAS, that 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,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on March 23, 1999 to
consider the proposed amendments to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FINDINGS (Specific Plan Amendment)
A. The City Council in approving the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, makes the following
findings, to wit:
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan) as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
R: \STAFFRPT\ 15pa99CC-2. doc
5
,
Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan) is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted
General Plan.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because
it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the site and
is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 1.
The amendment to Specific Plan No. 1 does not increase the impacts
associated with the development of the overall intensity of the development as
analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 348.
Section 3. AMENDMFNTS TO THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN: The City
Council hereby amends the Campos Verdes Specific Plan for the City of Temecula for as specified
below and as shown on Attachment 1 of Exhibit B (Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan):
A. The ten (10) acre elementary school site in Planning Area 7 has been increased by
ten (10) acres and will now accommodate a 20-acre middle school.
B. The park site in Planning Area 1 has been decreased by 7.6 acres to 3.1 acres. The
park site will primarily serve Campos Verdes residents and not residents from other developer
projects as previously contemplated by the adopted Specific Plan.
C. The residential component of the Land Use Plan has decreased in size. The
residential area has been reduced from 72.2 acres to 57.9 acres, a reduction of 14.3 acres. The
number of dwelling units has been reduced from 308 to 242, a reduction of 66 dwelling units.
Planning Area 3 has been reduced from 76 to 75, Planning Area 5 decreased from 86 dwelling
units to 63, Planning Area 6 decreased from 72 to 46 dwelling units, Planning Area 8 decreased
from 56 dwelling units to 42, and Planning Area 9 decreased from 18 to 16 dwelling units.
D. The commerdal areas have been increased by a total of 8 acres. Planning Area 4
which will consist entirely of retail commercial uses, has increased by 5.5 acres, and the
commercial/office/church component of Planning Area 2 has increased by 2.5 acres.
Section 4. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council, based upon the information
contained in the Initial Environmental Study, finds that the changes proposed to the Campos
Verdes Spedtic Plan were determined to be minor based on an environmental Addendum (No. 4)
to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348). The addendum
concluded that the changes did not increase the impacts associated with the development or the
overall intensity of the development as analyzed in the original Environmental Impact Report. The
environmental addendum contained a comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation measures.
This analysis concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are
substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. In addition, there
is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was certified and completed.
Therefore, no significant impacts or additional mitigation measures are required given the existing
mitigation measures contained in the certified EIR No. 348. The mitigation measures prepared for
the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project. The Environmental
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 348, therefore, is hereby adopted.
R:\STAFFRPT\15pa99CC-2.doc
6
Section 5. SEVI=RABILITY The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 6. 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 7. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in
the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days
from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together
with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same
in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 8. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 99- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of March, 1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on
the __ day of ,1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRFI'XI5pa99CC-2 .doe
7
EXHIBIT 2
Traffic Letters
(Dated December 22, 1998 and January 28, 1999)
R: \STAFFRFr\ 15pa99CC-2. doc
8
DE0-22-98 TIE 08:5I P~ ~[LSUR S~ITH ~SSOCI~TES F~X N0. 7149781109 P..02
WILBUR
, SMITH
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS · PLANNB1S
23O0 E. KALE, ;.A A'/.r-.. SQ~T~: 350 · A.'.D,HS,',.,L CA ~2~-.0~-~2,:I7 - (;, 1 -~) q,78-~1 l0 - PAX [714) ;'78-] lOg
December2 1998
~h'. Nate Pu~Iry
Project Mmuag~r
Woodside Homes of Cal-fforn. ia,, inc.
30211 Banderas, Suite 130
Kancho Sauta Margarim, CA 92688
Campos Verdes Specific Plan U'pclate - CiW Planning Department Quadons Ccnce.ming.,-
Consistency With The Specific Plan 'ElK Traffic Study Findings
Dem- Mr, PugsIcy:
in response to questions raised by City of TcmectLla Planning Department staff, Wilbm' Smith
Associates (WSA) k.-t_~ prepared the following discussion of consistency between potential traffic
impacts ~'sociated with the currently proposed Campos V~des Specific Plaa mad traffic impacts
addressed in the original Campos Verdes Specific Plat EIK Traffic Study. The i~ues ~dressed
heroin include: a comparative axtalysis of the laud use components; traffic generation impacts; and
an assessment of censismncy, 5tom a pote=tial traffic iraFact pea'spective.
Overvies.t, of Zpecific Plan EZR Traffic Impact Stud),
The Carapos Ve~ Specific Plan ErR Traffic Erapact Study prepared for Specific Plaa 1 included
ah analysis of the project imp. i~cts at full dcveIopment of the site. The analysis assumed an
approximate me-year development schcdnlg for the Campos V~des project. During this
development period, it was conservatively assumed that all of the, approved Specific Plans within
the City of Temecala and surrounding area of influence would also bm'/d out. Additionally, the
traffic study assumed build out of ai1 plmmcd (but not yet apI~'oved) projects within an approximate
~'~rnile radius of the project This inchded significant planned projcct~ such as W'mchestcr Hills
(S.P. 22~, Temecula Regional Center (S.P. 263), and Winchester Meadows. Although thes~ off=
si~ devel~t assumptions actually relxescn/.cd a forecast year which was well beyond the nine-
year time frame (year 2000) idemtified in the study, it w~ important to co~sidcr the Rltim--,xe
cumulative effects of these projects on traffic flows m the study area. it is clear at this time that
some of these projects will not likely be built-out for another tea years.
· DE¢-22-98 TUE 08:52 PH NILBUR SNIllq flSSOOIRTF. S FAX NO, 7149781108 P. 03
Mr. Nate Pugsley
December 22, 1998
Page 2
WILBUR'
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
The Specific Plan EtR traffic am'~ysjs employed the use of a refined version of the SWAP
computer-based ~affic forecasting mode] w~ch later was modified and refined as the C{~ of
T~rne~ta Gcnc~=l Phn Circulation Element Traffic Model. The traffic forecasting model allowed
tbr a rn.ore accurate assessment of long-term cum~a~ve ~vclopm~t traffic impacts in t~e ~ic'mity
&the Campos Verde~ project. The traffic analysis included an ~'ahaden of weekday daily,. a-re.
peak-hcrca', am:l p.m.' peak-hour conditions.
Land use assanal/dons and assodated trip generation csl~'nat~ for the or/ginally approvcd Campos
Vetdes Specific Plan are given/n the alt~c-hcd Tables 1 through 3. .Trip gcncratq~m rates used iu
the specific plan study were based on "typical" daily rates developed by the Institute of
Tr-a~on Engine, as for the individual land use catScries. Peak-hour trip ~acration for the
project sitg was atxually developed 'within the traffic forecast modeling procedure.
Rcc,;F,,,,~ended tong-range roadway impmvcmat uccds in the v~c%ity of the project (which resulted
from the specific plan build-out and clll~,,l~ive area dcve/opnletlt traffic iglpact arlalysis) included:
(1) ~hc wideruing of North Crencr',d Kearny Road to full Secondary Koadway standards; (2) ~
widening of /vlm'gnr~ :Road to full Artnial standards; (3) the widening of W/nchester Road to full
Urban ArtcrLaI ~-'tand,qrds; and (3) the signali~,~,On oflVlargarita Road irrterscctions at North C_~eral
Keamy and Campos Vcrdcs Lane.
Proposed Campos P~rdes Spec~c Plan
TabIc 4 surnmariz~ the currently proposed !and use for the CamNs Vefdes Specific Plan. Build-
out of the project is c~xpected to occm' within a five to six-year god ('by 2005). Trip generation
for the curtcurly prc~sect Campos Vefdes Spe~q_/ic Ptan is based on the most current edition of the
Institute of Trans[mticax Engineera Trip Generation. Daily and peak-hour tzip generation for the
proposed project is presented in Table i
Consistency wfth the Cwnpo8 Yetdes 5~vec~c Plan ErR Traff2c Study
The updamd trffffic generation study has maintained consistency with the original Specific Plan
Traffic Study. The updated traffic generation study diffen From the earlier study m that it
DE¢-22-98 lIE 08:52 PH WILBUR SHITH ASSOCIATES FaX NO. '/149781109 P. 04
,V.r. Nate PugsIcy
December 22, 1998
Page 3
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
incorporates nexv trip generation research data and reflects actual deveIopment proposals (e.g.
proposed home [rt!:wov~t/harcIwafe sup~tore within the commer~ ce~ztcr) which art known
at this time.
The most aprdrop~,sr~e meamn'e of consistent.-, ~'om a traffic impact perspective, should be based on
a comparison of traffic generazion. Tables 2 and 3 provide a summary of vehicle trip generation
~,mmzptions included in the briginal Speci~c Plan EItL Trat~ic Stud~y. The referenced development
areas are depiuled in Figure 1- .Altlxougk the configuration of land use det'eloprnent areas witkin the
Specific Plan has been modified in the current de~-elopment proposal, the modific--aions are
relatively minor and still allow for a comp~aiscrn of traffic generaiOn Lmpae~s on a sub-area
The original EIR Traffic Study was based on a tcrtal tr~p generation of 16, 184 daily trips, 997 ,', m.
peak-houz' tzips, a~d 1, !79 p.m. peak-hm~- trips.
As shcmn in Table 5, trip generation for the currently proposed Carnpos Vetdes Specific Plan falls
within the daily an dp. m. peak hour trip generation totals included in tl~e ori~-inal Specific Plan BIR
TrafSc Study. Daily vehicle trip go-notation is est/malM at 12,070 vekiele trips and evening peak-
hour trip generation is e~imated to be 1,I23 vehicle trips. During the morning peak .hour, the
currently proposed Specific Plan is e~-~mnted to generate a total cf 1,06Tvehide trips. This is 70
vehicle trips greater than was eslimated in the original Specific Plan EIR Tl-af~c Study. It should
be noted that the currently proposed middle school in Ar~ 6, with a typical enrollment of 1,050
students, results in a mDsmntially hlglzcr mo~ing pealc ttom' ~p generation tlsuan was estimated for
the residential use assumed in the original traffic study and has a higher trip generation than the
elementary school includ~ in the approved Specific Plan. Althouoda the total morning peak hour
trip generazion is slightly higher for the current project, the lrip g~ne. ration estimate should be
considerect as c, onsev~e since no b-ip rednotion has been as,surned for internal trip making or pass-
by lrips assodated wSth school traffic.
In teLms of the x-ecoznmended access con~u:aticn, the u0dated SpecLfic Plan is generally consistent
with the original Specific Plan EIR. Minor diffeences can be noted in ~em of the a~-umed on-s~te
circulation laTout however internal accessibility has been maintair~ed. This is important to the
eLi~na~on or'unnecessary traffic circu!~on on the adjacent street system when. trayoiling between
land use areas with{n the Specific Plan site.
0E¢-22-.98 TUE 0a:53 P~ glI.IqUR SalTH aSSOCIaTES FAX NO, 7149781109 P, 05
A~Lr. Nate P~gsley
Decemb~'9'~ 1998
Page 4
WILBUR
, SMITH
ASSOCIATES
Most of the reconamended roadway improvemeam in the vic'L-xity of the sire are eider completed cr
~re culTendy ul2der construction. A new signaj will be installed at the intea'section or' Margarlta
Road and North General Kearny by the .fourth quarter of 1999, when the Promenade Mall opeDs.
A new signal on Margarita ..at Campos Vetdes Lane would' be timed to correspond to either the
developmere of the Power Center component of the Regional C~ter property (on the west side of
Margarim Road) or th~ Campos Vetdes conDa~cad.al cooler site (on the east side of Nfm-garita Road).
The widening of Not~ G~eral Kearny Road would likely be accomplisI~ed in two phases. First
the intersection approach would be widened to coincide with the openqng of the Protnena& Mall
and ~en the remainder ofthe North General 'Keasny (along the project frontage) would be widened
as the Campos Verde; project is deweloped.
Based on WSA's assessment, trm~ic ia~pat,'ts a,~ociated witb the cm're-ntly proposed Camp0s Vet'des
Specific Plan site is consistent vdth the original Specific Plan BIR Traffic Study,
Should you or City of Tem~ula Planning Departmost staff have any questions concerning this
vPa]uation, please feel free to contact inc.
Sincerely,
WII,BFR SNIlTH 'ASSOCIATES
Robert A. Davis
Principa~ Transportation Pl.q,~ner
R.~M2): tad
Enclosure
. DE0-22-98 TUE 06:53 PIt ~]:LBUR SIIlTH P,S,SOOI,qTES FAX NO. 7149781109 P. D6
A. BY PLANNING ARE~
Development Tentativ~ Gross
Plar~ing TractNo. Acre~
Ar~ 1 Pacel.8 & 9 13.5
Table 1
' Assumed Land Use
Campos Verdes
A~ea 2 Parcel 7 10.4 93
Area 3 Parcel 4:5 & 6 222 377
· Area 4 Pard t 13.5 10
Area 5 Parcel 2 & 3 15.7: 267
Area 6 25214 27.1 141
Unit
Net Ac
D.U.'S*
NetAc
D.U.'s
D.U.'s
D.U.'s
Land Use
Open Space
Commercial Office
Multi Farofly Residential
Neighborhood Ret2il Center
Multi Farofly Residential
Sir, gle Faintly Residential
Single F~mily Re~identiaI
B. BY LAND USE CATEGORY
Land Use -
Single Faxm'ly Residemial
Multi Family Residential
Neighborhood Retail Center
Commercial Office
Size
206
13.5
10.4
Unit
'D.U.'s
D.U.'s
Ac.'
Ac.
--DEC-22.-98 TUE 06:63 PM gILBUR SMITH F)SSOOIfiTES F~ NO, 7149781109 P, 07
Table .2
Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
Campos Verdes
ILAND USE
Re.~dentiak
Singtc Fsm{ly
l~hm-Farmly
Retail:
Nei~Jaborhood Center (Almrnx. 110 !csf ~',)
N'etAc
Net Ae ~)~
LOCATION OF
LAND USE
Phn~ng Azcas 6 & 7
Planting Areas 3 & 5
Planning Area 4 -'
Ftamiug Area 2
-DE0-22:'98 TUE 08:54 Pll WILBUR 8Nll'H ~SOOII~'[F,S F~X NO. 7148781108 P. 08
DE0-22798 TUE 06:54 PM ~[LBUR S~]TH ~SSOCiATES FaX NO. 7149781109 P, O9
ILl J.l.I
LSJ O,
::2:_
5z
BO~
,DEC-22T~ 't'U~ dS:b4 HN WiLbUR 5NI'I'H ~SCCI~'I'ES F~× NO. 714~781109 P. IO
..[ji:UTZZ'~e lug. uD;sa rl'i NLLFIuK DallIH rt~:SCJ, jJ~.~i:jS I-~X NU./j4~t'~jlld9 P. II
~0
~0
~0
j
Wll BUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS · PLANNB1S
2300 E. KATELLA AVE. - St~TE 355 - ANAHEIM. CA 92~ - (714) 971~8'110 ;'FAX'[714) 911M }09
January 28, 1999
lVlr. Nate Pugsley
Project Manager
Woodside Homes of California, Inc.
30211 Banderas, 'Suite I30
Ran~o Santa Margarita, Ca 92688
Campos Verdes Specific PI~
Way
Update - Access Implications o.f Clodling Sanderling
Dear Mr. Pugsley:
In response to your request, Wilbur Smith Associates 0hrSA) has prepared the following review
of access implications related to the possible closure of Sandlg Way at the boundary of
Campos Verdes and Roripaugh Estates. The following sections discuss anticipated usage of
the new street connection, as estimated in the earlier traffic studies which were conducted for
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan, and the traffic re-distribution implications of closing
Sanderling Way.
Specific Plan Eltl Traffic Impact Study Findings
The original traffic study 'prepared for the Campos Verch~ Specific Plan RIP, asaaned that a
sircot connection would be provided at Sanderling Way and Starling Street..Th~ analysis of
· Campos Verdes traffic distribution assessed that approximately 4.5 percent of the project traffic
would use these two street connections to travel between the project and Winchester Road and
between the proj~t and Roripangh Estates, The vast majority of the traffic which would be
using these streets was determined to be geserated by the Campos Vetdes commercial'center
and residential dwelling units.
In June, I992, WSA completed a supplemental analysis which addressed the proposed closure
of Starling S~reet at the bounrl_:~ry of Campos Verdcs and Ro~paugh Estates- Bases on thc mix
of land uses proposed for the project at that time, the closure of Starling Street was estimated
to cause tlac re-distribution of approximately 2.5 percent of the project traffic or 400 vehicles
per day. The re-distribmion of traffic was found to have the following impacts:
~D. OH · C, OL~SA SC · CO(UMBUS. Oh · FAtiS C~CH. VA, HONOLULU. ~ · hONG KONG · HOUSTON. T'X - 5'UN. NJ
'-D(INC'-TON. K'Y · LONDON. ~D * MILWAL,.~ ',N1 - r,,Gv HAVEN, CT - O~,q..AM.~, FL - rj,'N~ PAr'a(, )C~ ' PHILADE~'../A PA ·
~tCHMOND. VA · SALT LAKE CffV. UIA~I - ,SAN F[>.ANC.~CO. CA - SAN JOSE CA · TALLAHAS~E. FL - TAM-°A,, FL - TORONTO, CANADA
Mr. Nate Pugsl~
January 28, 1999
Page 2
WUUDb I D~ MUMES CA
V LBU
ASSOCIATES
I ) A portion of the traffic would be added to General Zeamy Road and the Ge~eraI Kearny
Road/Margarita Road intersection.
2) A portion of the traffic would be added to Margarita Road between General Ke, amy Road
and Campos Verd~s Lane.
3) All of the traffi~ Would be added to the intersection of Margarita Road/~smpos Vcrdes
La~ and to Margarita Road bctwoc'n Campos Vcrde~ Lane and Wiuchest~' Road-
At the intersection of Margarita Road/W~ch~ Road most of the m-di~1ribute~l traffic
would be added to turni.'ng movements at the intersection and some would be removed
from the cast-west through movtn'nents,
5)
Most of the traffic would bc removed from turning movements at the intersection Of
Winchcst6r Road/Roripaugh Road and some of the traffic would be addca to east-west
through moveanents at the intersection.
The closure of Sanderling Way would have had similar impacts and would have affected 2
percent of the project traffic (approximately 320 additional vehicle trips par day),
The current Campos Vetdes Specific Plan Amendment land use proposes a significant
reduction in the number of rcsictcntial units planned for thc project. R~identiat units have
been rgduccd from 850 to 243. The residential ha~ genially been replaced with a middle'
school cxpcctcd to havc an enrollment of 1,050 students. While this changc in land usc is
expected to havc a nggligiblc change in overall trip generation, th~ would be a somewhat
diffcrent distribution of traffic associated with the new land use. Givcn the distribution of
residential in the area which would bc scrvexl by the middle school, it is expected that more
traffic would approach from Meadowview and areas along Margarita Road, south of the project
gite:. T~king this into account, the closure of Starling Street and Sandcrling Way should affect
a somewhat lowcr percentage of the total project traffic. WSA estimates that apprO~cimatcly
3 pcrce~t of the current specific plan traff:c would use these two slre~ts which connect to
Roripaugh Estates. It is estimated'that 2 percent would use Starling Stxcct and 1 pcrccnt would
use Sandcrling Way. This translates to approximately 240 vehicles per day on Starling Street
and ,,pproximatcly 120 vehicles per day on Sandsling Street that would bc diverted to
Margadta Road to access Winchcstcr Road.
Mr. NatePugsley
January28. 1999
Page 3
WLJULJO 1/jr_ rlLJi'lr_b
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
The general impacts of closing these streets with the current plan would be similar to those
described above for the previous plan. The magnitude of the impact has been reduced
somewhat due to the revised distribution pattern wkich has been influenced by the proposed
middle school
It should be noted that although the re-distribution of these trips (due the sWeet closures),
would not have signific~m negative impacts on the affected streets and intersections, it would
still be adding an increanent of traffic to streets and ;ntersections tintat are expeclext to
a~commodate relatively high volumes of traffic. It is also important to consider that Roripaugh
Estates residents will be negatively impactext by the loss of convenient vehiculax access to the
Canvpos Verd~ middle school and commercial center.
It is not possible at this time to predict the extent to which non-Carapos Vetdes trifle may use
Sanderling Way to travel between General Keamy Road and Winchester Road. the
configuration of on-site residential streets leading to Sandexling Way have intentionally been
designed to discourage this type of circulation,
Should you or City of Temecula Plsning Department staff have any questions concerning this
evaluation, please feel free to co .n~act me.
Sincerely,
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
Robert A. Davis
Pdz~ipal Trsrkslx, rtation Planner
R_A,D: rad
EXHIBIT 3
Planning Commission Staff Report
(February 3, 1999)
R: \STAFFRFI'X 15pa99CC -2. doc
9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Oit|6fNAL
February 3, 1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment); Planning Application
No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes Specific Plan including
Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified EIR No. 348) and Planning Application No.
PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510).
Prepared By: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT the Environmental Addendum No. 4 to the
previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR No.
348) adopted for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan;
e
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan
Amendment); Planning Application No. PA99-0015
(Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes Specific Plan
including Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified EIR
No. 348) and Planning Application No. PA98-0323
(Tentative Tract Map 28510) based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval;
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Woodside Homes (PA98-0323 Tentative Tract Map), the City of
Temecula (PA99-0015 Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes
Specific Plan) and (PA99-0016 General Plan Amendment)
REPRESENTATIVES:
Robert Bein, William Frost Inc.
PROPOSAL: Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510)
the subdivision of eight lots into 242 single family residential lots,
a park site and one commercial lot totaling approximately 71.1
acres within the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Planning
Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) which consists of increasing the school site
from 10 acres to 20 acres, a reduction of 66 residential parcels, a
reduction to the park site, and changing a portion of the
residential and park zoned property to a commercial zoning
classification. Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General
Plan Amendment) for consistency with the land use changes of
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan amendment.
\\TEMEC_FS201E)ATA~DEPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPT~23pa98pc..doc 1
LOCATION:
EXISTING GENERAL
PLAN DESIGNATION:
Generally located at the northeast comer of Margarita Road and
North General Keamy Road (south of Winchester. Road).
LM (Low Medium Residential), CC (Community Commercial). and
O (Professional Office)
EXISTING ZONING:
SP (Campos Verdes Specific Plan)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
CC (Community Commercial)
LM (Low Medium Density Residential) & OS (Open
Space)
VL (Very Low Density Residential)
SP (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263)
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing commercial and retail uses
Single-family residential currently under construction
and (OS) open space
Existing single-family residences
Temecula Regional Mall currently under construction
PROJECT STATISTICS
...'PlN!ning Areas
Existing
Campos Verdes
SpeCific Plan
Acreage
Proposed
Specific Plan
Amendment No. 1
Acreage
I Park 10.8 3,1
2 Commercial/Office/Detention Basin 13.7 21.4
3 Residential 12 14.6
4 Commercial 12 17.5
5 Residential 16.5 10.3
6 Residential 12.3 7.6
7 School Site 10.7 20
8 Residential 15.9 14.1
9 Residential 16 11.3
Roads 13 13
Total 132.9 132,9
Total Residential Area 72.7 57,9
The residential acreage in Planning Areas 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 has been reduced from 72.7
acres to 57.9. The total commercial area has increased by a total of 8 acres, 5.5 acres in
Planning Area 4 and 2.5 acres in Planning Area 2. The detention basin in Planning Area 2 has
also increased by 5.2 acres.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
2
BACKGROUND
Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510) was submitted to the
Planning Department on July 23, 1998. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting
was held on August 27, 1998. Prior to the submittal of the map, the school site located within
the Specific Plan changed from a ten acre elementary school to a twenty acre middle school.
This change resulted in a reduction of residential lots, reconfiguration of the planning area
boundaries, a reduction of the park site and an increase to the commercially zoned land. Due
to the extent of changes, the City initiated a Specific Plan Amendment to reflect these
changes. A General Plan Amendment is also required to amend the Land Use Map for
consistency with the changes made to the Specific Plan.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510) is for a large portion of the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan (71.1 acres) which includes the subdivision of 242 residential
lots, one commercial lot, and three open space lots
The City has initiated an amendment to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. The changes
include increasing the school site from 10 acres to 20 acres in Planning Area 7 due to the
school changing from an elementary school to a middle school. The increase to the school
site resulted in a reduction of 66 residential parcels and respectively, a reduction to the park
size in Planning Area I from 7.6 acres to 3.1. The residential acreage in Planning Areas 3, 4,
5, 6, 8, and 9 has been reduced from 72.7 acres to 57.9. The total commercial area has
increased by a total of 8 acres, 5.5 acres in Planning Area 4 and 2.5 acres in Planning Area 2.
The detention basin in Planning Area 2 has also increased by 5.2 acres. The City is also
proposing to amend the General Plan Land Use Map for consistency with the land use
changes of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan amendment.
ANALYSIS
Tentative Tract MaD
Tentative Tract Map 28510 is proposing 242 single family residential lots, a park site and one
commercial lot totaling approximately 71.1 acres. The subdivision is consistent with the
density, minimum lot size, width and length as required in the development standards of the
Specific Plan
Tentative Tract Map 28510 shall be conditioned to the approval of Amendment No. I to the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan and the General Plan Amendment due to the proposed land use
changes of the Specific Plan. If the map is not approved, the development shall comply with
the original Campos Verdes Specific Plan land uses.
Specific Plan (Proposed Chan.cles)
The City initiated Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and the General Plan
Amendment to update the Land Use Map to achieve consistency with the land use changes of
the Specific Plan. All applicable texts, graphs, exhibits, etc. have been modified, as
necessary, to be consistent with the proposed Specific Plan and General Plan amendments
(see Attachment 1 of Exhibit A and Attachment 1 of Exhibit B). The pdmary changes to the
specific plan are as follows:
\\TEMEC_FS201%DATA~)EPTS~LANNING%STAFFRPT~323pa98pc. ,doc
3
Planning Area 1:
The park site in Planning Area I has been decreased by 7.6 acres to 3.1 acres. The park site
will primarily serve Campos Verdes residents and not residents from other developer projects
as previously contemplated by the adopted Specific Plan.
Planning Area 2:
This commercial/office/church/detention basin planning area has increased by 7.7 acres with
2.5 additional acres of commercial and 5.2 additional acres of detention basin.
Planning Area 3:
This residential planning area has been decreased by 2.6 acres and one (1) residential parcel.
Planning Area 4:
This commercial planning area has increased by 5.5 commercial acres.
Plannin.q Area 5:
This residential planning area has been reduced by 6.2 acres and twenty three (23) residential
parcels.
Planning Area 6:
This residential planning area was been reduced by 4.7 acres and twenty six (26) residential
parcels.
Planning Area 7:
This public institution are increased from ten (10) to twenty (20) acres due to the school
changing from an elementary school to a middle school.
Plannin.cl Area 8:
This residential planning area has been reduced by 1.8 acres and fourteen (14) residential
parcels.
Planning Area 9:
This residential planning area has been reduced by 4.7 acres and two (2) residential parcels.
The 8' multi-purpose trail located within the 40' wide paseo buffer was changed to an 8' trail
along the edge of the paseo.
The total residential component of the Land Use Plan has decreased in size from 72.2 acres to
57.9 acres, a reduction of 14.3 acres. The number of dwelling units has been reduced from
308 to 242, a reduction of 66 dwelling units. The commercial areas have been increased by a
total of 8 acres. 5.5 acres in Planning Area 4 and 2.5 acres in Planning Area 2.
The language on pages 111-17, 111-31,111-35, 111-39, 111-40, 111-42, 111-46 of the Specific Plan
regarding the detention basin, maintenance and ownership shall read as follows:
"Amendment No. 1 to the Specific Plan shall specify that the detention basin will be maintained
by the property owner for a minimum of five (5) years which is estimated to be the period for
the vegetation to be established. The City of Temecula Public Works Department may then be
responsible for maintenance. A Property Owners Association or the Temecula Community
Services District will maintain the drainage area behind the park site in Planning Area 1. The
drainage area behind the commercial office/church area of Planning Area 2 will be maintained
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DE PTS\P LAN N IN G\STAF F R PTL'.'.'.323pa98pc, ,doc
4
by the City of Temecula Public Works Department or assignee if the drainage channel is
constructed according to City Standards."
The changes have been reflected in the documents transmitted to the Planning Commission in
the form of redlined (shaded) items for additions to the Plan and strikeout items for deletions
(Attachment 1 of Exhibit B).
The Specific Plan Amendment and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all
mitigation measures identified within the original Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and all
the subsequent environmental addendums No. 1-4,
Community Inquiry:
Several members of the Roripaugh Hills Homeowners Association met with staff from the
Community Development, Public Works Department and Fire Department to discuss the
possibility of closing Sandealing Way. The residents submitted several letters of opposition
(see Attachment 3) to Sanderling Way being kept open as a through street (as approved in the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan). Staff met with the Rodpaugh Hills Homeowners' president and
vice-president several times during the processing of this application. Staff explained that the
road issue was discussed and reviewed at length by the City Council prior to the approval of
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. It was determined that Sanderling Way was necessary for
overall traffic circulation pattems within the City and emergency response. Staff indicated that
the closing of Sandealing Way is not part of the proposed changes to Campos Verdes Specific
Plan Amendment.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND EXISTING ZONING
The current General Plan land use designation is LM (Low Medium Residential), CC
(Community Commercial) and O (Professional Office). The zoning classification is SP
(Campos Verdes Specific Plan). Planning Application PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment)
is proposing to amend the General Plan Land Use map to achieve consistency with the
changes in land use of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. 1. The zoning will
remain the same.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 348 was circulated for Campos Verdes Specific Plan;
however, prior to the City approving the Specific Plan or the EIR, three addenda to EIR 348
were prepared (see attached Addendum No. 4 for details of the prior addenda). According to
Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the
following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require
major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstance under
which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; or, new
information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes
available. The comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation measures contained in the
environmental addendum concludes that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified
EIR. In addition, there is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was
certified and completed. Therefore, Staff is recommending the Commission adopt Addendum
No. 4 to the previously certified EIR (No. 348) as no significant impacts or additional mitigation
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
5
measures are required given the scope of changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Amendment No. 1.
SUM MARY/CONCLUSIONS
Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510) is the first tentative tract
map submitted in the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. The school site located within the specific
plan changed from a ten acre elementary school to a twenty acre middle school which resulted
in a reduction of residential lots, reconfiguration of the planning area boundaries, a reduction
of the park site and an increase to the commercially zoned land. Due to the extent of
changes, the City initiated a Specific Plan Amendment to update the document, and a General
Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use Map for consistency with the changes made to the
specific plan.
FINDINGS
Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment)
Planning Application No.'s PA98-0016 (General Plan Amendment) as proposed is
compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The proposed use is
in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of
the City. The project is consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's
Development Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the
City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
The project is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. There are similar uses of
both commercial/retail and existing residential in the immediate area.
The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it
remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
Plannin.cl Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes Specific Plan)
Planning Application No. PA99-0015, as proposed, is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community. The proposed use is in conformance with all applicable
requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is consistent
with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 655
(Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
provisions.
Planning Application No. PA99-0015 is consistent with the City's General Plan. The
proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the land use densities, housing,
circulation, open space, public safety, and community design goals and policies of the
General Plan.
The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project consists of a
modification to an existing Specific Plan, with decreases to the overall density and the
number of residential units, and a small increase to the commercial zoned property.
Ultimate development of the site will be consistent and compatible with the existing land
use in the area.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS~oLANNING~STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
6
=
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does
not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact
that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 1.
o
The changes proposed in the approved Specific Plan were determined to be minor
based on an environmental Addendum (No. 4) to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348). The changes do not increase the impacts
associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as
analyzed in the original Environmental Impact Report. The environmental addendure
contained a comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation measures. This analysis
concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are
substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. In
addition, there is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was
certified and completed. Therefore, since there are no significant impacts beyond those
previously identified, the existing mitigation measures contained in the certified EIR No.
348 shall be sufficient for this project.
Planning Application No. PA98-0323 ('Tentative Tract Map 28510)
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 project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance
No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
provisions.
,
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances, and
meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare.
The proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The
proposed land division of the project is consistent with the City's General Plan land use
designation and therefore meets the goals and policies of the General Plan.
The design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable
general and Campos Verdes Specific Plans. The project is consistent with these
documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to
assure that the development conforms to City Standards.
The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development.
The physical characteristics of the site (topography, drainage, access, circulation, etc.)
was specifically designed to accommodate the proposed land division.
The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development. The project site is development in compliance with the City approved
Campos Vetdes Specific Plan in terms of density, minimum lot area, width, depth,
circulation, etc. The proposed tentative tract map density is consistent with the General
Plan Land Use Map.
The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc,,doc
7
wildlife or their habitat. The previously certified EIR (No. 348) contains mitigation
monitoring measures relative to fish, wildlife or their habitat. Tentative Tract Map 28510
is subject to the conditions of approval for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and
corresponding Environmental Impact Report No. 348. An environmental addendum
was also submitted which contained a comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation
measures. This analysis concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the
certified EIR. In addition, there is no new information that was not known at the time
the EIR was certified and completed. Therefore, since there are no significant impacts
beyond those previously identified, the existing mitigation measures contained in the
certified EIR No. 348 shall be sufficient for this project.
The project is conditioned to obtain all necessary permits and or clearances from the
applicable environmental agencies. It is determined that the project, as conditioned,
will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as
defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
The design of the proposed land division or the types of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance
with the City's General Plan and Specific Plan. The project is consistent with these
documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to
assure that the development conforms to City Standards.
10.
The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection
shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a
court of competent jurisdiction. The project will take access from Margarita Road and
North General Kearny and will not obstruct any easements.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc,.doc
8
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 99 - General Plan Amendment (PA99-0016) and Specific Plan
Amendment (PA99-0015) - Blue Page 10
Exhibit A - Draft City Council Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment
(PA99-0016) - Blue Page 14
Exhibit 1 -
Revised General Plan Land Use Map (PA99-0016) - Blue
Page 18
Exhibit B -- Draft City Council Ordinance No. 99-
No. I (PA99-0015) - Blue Page 19
Specific Plan Amendment
Exhibit 1- Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. 1- (Under
Separate Cover)
Exhibit 2- Specific Plan Amendment No. I Conditions of Approval -
Blue Page 24
PC Resolution No. 99- for Tentative Tract Map 28510 (PA98-0232) - Blue Page 29
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 33
3. Letters from the Public- Blue Page 50
4. Environmental Addendum No. 4 - (Under Separate Cover)
o
Traffic Letter for the proposed Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. I - Blue
Page 52
City Council Minutes from September 13, 1994 Approving Campos Verdes Specific
Plan No. I - Blue Page 53
Exhibits - Blue Page 54
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Proposed Land Use Map Zoning
R :~STAF FR PTL323pa98pc..doc
9
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND
AMENDMENT NO. I TO THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DEPTS~LANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc,,doc
10
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD
AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF
WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-
090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-
061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)" AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN (NO. 1) NORTHEAST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD)
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-
059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION
PA99-0015)"
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, that 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, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce;
and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on February 3, 1999, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition.
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FINDINGS ('General Plan Amendment):
A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed General
Plan Amendment, makes the following findings, to wit:
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS\PLAN NING\STAFFR PT~323pa98pc, .doc
11
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. The project is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Ultimate
development of the site will be residential, commercial, office and open space development in
an area that is comprised of a variety of residential and commercial uses.
3. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community
because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
FINDINGS (Specific Plan Amendment)
A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed General
Plan Amendment, makes the following findings, to wit:
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
2. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) is consistent with the land use densities, housing, circulation, open
space, public safety, and community design goals and policies of the General Plan.
3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the site and is
consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 1.
4. The amendment to Specific Plan No. I does not increase the impacts
associated with the development of the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in
Environmental Impact Report No. 348.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE A
RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP NORTHEAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH
OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-
090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)" SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM THAT IS
ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS EXHIBIT A; AND DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND
THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC
PLAN (NO. 1 ) NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOSo 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-
090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-
0015)" SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM THAT IS ATTACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS
EXHIBIT B.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS~°LANNING~STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
12
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February 1999.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of
February, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201%DATA~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~323pag8pc.,doc
13
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 99-
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PA99-0016)
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~ATA~)EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~23pa98pc..doc
14
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA
ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF
WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-
090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-
061 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)".
WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a
comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well
as any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, beam a relationship to its planning;
and
WHEREAS, On November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
the General Plan.
WHEREAS, Sections 65350 of the Government Code permits a city to amend the
general plan and specific plans; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the General Plan Land Use Map to accurately
reflect the changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan (Planning Application No. 99-0015);
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 3,
1999, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the
General Plan Land Use Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on
1999 to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FINDINGS (General Plan Amendment):
A. The City Council in approving the proposed General Plan Amendment, makes
the following findings, to wit:
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
R:\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
15
2. The project is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Ultimate
development of the site will be residential, commercial, office and open space development in
an area that is comprised of a variety of residential and commercial uses.
3. The proposed project 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. AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
The City Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Designations on the
following parcels as specified below and as shown on Attachment 1 of Exhibit A (Revised
General Plan Land Use Map):
A. For the parcel identified as APN 921-090-060: change a portion of this parcel
from the Land Use Designation of Low Medium Density (LM) Residential to Community
Commercial (CC); for the parcel identified as APN 921-090-058: change a portion of this parcel
from the Land Use Designation of Low Medium Density (LM) Residential to Low Medium
Density (L) Residential; and a portion of the parcel identified as APN 921-090-061 and APN
921-090-52 from the Land Use Designation of Open Space (OS) to Office/
Commercial/Church/Detention Basin.
B. For the parcel identified as APN 921-090-059, change the Land Use Designation
from Low Medium Density (LM) Residential to Public/Institutional Facilities (P).
Section 4. ENVIRONMFNTAL REVIEW The City Council, based upon the information
contained in the original Campos Verdes Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No.
348) and environmental Addendum (No. 4), finds that the proposed land use changes are minor
and that the changes did not increase the impacts associated with the development or the
overall intensity of the development as analyzed in the original Environmental Impact Report.
The environmental addendum contained a comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation
measures. This analysis concluded that the proposed land use changes to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified
EIR. In addition, them is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was
certified and completed. Therefore, no significant impacts or additional mitigation measures are
required given the existing mitigation measures contained in the certified EIR No. 348. The
mitigation measures prepared for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this
project. The Environmental Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 348, therefore, is
hereby adopted.
Section 5. SF:VERABILITY The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Resolution are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Resolution to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this Resolution.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
R:\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
16
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ._th day of ,1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
of the
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
,1999 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
17
EXHIBIT 1
REVISED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
PA99-0016
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~23pa98pc..doc
18
SC
P
.4
'SC
.f
SC
> BP
M
CC
BP
.:> Cc sc
M
BP
VL
PROPOSED LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO. 99-__
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. I
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~ATA~EPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc.,doc
19
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO. 98-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC
PLAN (NO. 1) OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, NORTHEAST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD)
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056,
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-
059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061 (PLANNING APPLICATION
PA99-0015).
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the Campos Verdes Specific Plan to accurately
reflect private property and to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February
3, 1999, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan as shown in Attachment 1 of Exhibit B (Amendment No. 1 to the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan); and
WHEREAS, that 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, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public headng on
1999 to consider the proposed amendments to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FINDINGS (Specific Plan Amendment)
A. The City Council in approving the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, makes
the following findings, to wit:
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~ E PTS~PLA N N IN G\STAF F R PT~323pa98pc..doc
20
1. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
2. Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan) is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted General
Plan.
3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the site and is
consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 1.
4. The amendment to Specific Plan No. I does not increase the impacts
associated with the development of the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in
Environmental Impact Report No, 348.
Section 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN: The City
Council hereby amends the Campos Verdes Specific Plan for the City of Temecula for as
specified below and as shown on Attachment 1 of Exhibit B {Amendment No. 1 to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan):
A. The ten (10) acre elementary school site in Planning Area 7 has been increased
by ten (10) acres and will now accommodate a 20-acre middle school.
B. The park site in Planning Area I has been decreased by 7.6 acres to 3.1 acres.
The park site will primarily serve Campos Verdes residents and not residents from other
developer projects as previously contemplated by the adopted Specific Plan.
C. The residential component of the Land Use Plan has decreased in size. The
residential area has been reduced from 72.2 acres to 57.9 acres, a reduction of 14.3 acres.
The number of dwelling units has been reduced from 308 to 242, a reduction of 66 dwelling
units. Planning Area 3 has been reduced from 76 to 75, Planning Area 5 decreased from 86
dwelling units to 63, Planning Area 6 decreased from 72 to 46 dwelling units, Planning Area 8
decreased from 56 dwelling units to 42, and Planning Area 9 decreased from 18 to 16 dwelling
units.
D. The commercial areas have been increased by a total of 8 acres. Planning
Area 4 which will consist entirely of retail commercial uses has increased by 55 acres, and the
commercial/office/church component of Planning Area 2 has increased by 2.5 acres.
Section 4. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council, based upon the information
contained in the Initial Environmental Study, finds that the changes proposed to the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan were determined to be minor based on an environmental Addendum (No.
4) to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348). The
addendum concluded that the changes did not increase the impacts associated with the
development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in the original
Environmental Impact Report. The environmental addendum contained a comparative analysis
of impacts and mitigation measures. This analysis concluded that the proposed changes to
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts
analyzed in the certified EIR. In addition, there is no new information that was not known at
the time the EIR was certified and completed. Therefore, no significant impacts or additional
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~23pa98pc..doc
21
mitigation measures are required given the existing mitigation measures contained in the
certified EIR No. 348. The mitigation measures prepared for the Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) will be applied to this project. The Environmental Addendum to Environmental Impact
Report No. 348, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 5. SEVERABILITY The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of
this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold
any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 6. 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 7. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this
Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and
against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk,
Section 8. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of
,1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I 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
,1999 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATAgEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
EXHIBIT 1
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1
SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
R:\STAFFRPT%323pa98pc..doc
24
EXHIBIT 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. I
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc.,doc
24
EXHIBIT 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes
Specific Plan including Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified EIR No. 348).
Project Description: Amendment No. I to Campos Verdes Specific Plan which
consists primarily of increasing the school site from 10 acres
to 20 acres, a reduction of 66 residential parcels, a reduction
to the park site, and a portion of the residentially and park
zoned property is being changed to a commercial zoning
classification.
Assessor's Parcel No.:
910-130-056,
921-090-058,
061
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052,
921-090-059, 921-090-060 and 921-090-
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
February 3, 1999
February 3, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set
aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative
body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Specific Plan
Amendment which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period
and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including
but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall promptly notify
the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this time
period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City
fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developedapplicant shall not, thereafter
be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
,
The specific plan amendment and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply
with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 348 and all the subsequent
addenda I through 4.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
25
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The Applicant shall comply with the approved Conditions of Approval of the underlying
Specific Plan No. 1, Campos Verdes Specific Plan, which was approved on September
13, 1994.
o
Amendment No. I to the Specific Plan shall specify that the detention basin will be
maintained by the property owner for a minimum of five (5) years which is estimated to
be the period for the vegetation to be established. The City of Temecula Public Works
Department may then be responsible for maintenance. A Property Owners Association
or the Temecula Community Services District will maintain the drainage area behind the
park site in Planning Area 1. The drainage area behind the commercial office/church
area of Planning Area 2 will be maintained by the City of Temecula Public Works
Department or assignee if the drainage channel is constructed according to City
Standards. Otherwise, the drainage area will be the responsibility of the property owner
for maintenance. This language shall be substituted for the language regarding the
detention basin, maintenance and ownership as stated on pages 111-17, 111-31,111-35, III-
39, 111-40, 111-42, 111-46 of the Specific Plan Amendment No. 1.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the Specific Plan text or exhibits, the
conditions enumerated herein shall take precedent.
All park and slope improvements shall be improved in conformance with the City of
Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications.
The City's park land dedication requirement for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan shall
be satisfied with the development and dedication of a 3.15 acre neighborhood park
located in Planning Area 1.
The actual design of the neighborhood park in Planning Area I shall be in substantial
conformance with the conceptual design identified within the Specific Plan. Prior to
submittal of construction plans, the developer shall meet with the Director of
Community Services to determine the location and specifications of the park amenities
to be provided on site.
The design of the park in Planning Area I shall provide for pedestrian circulation and
access for the disabled throughout the park.
Construction of the public park site and perimeter slopes/landscaping proposed for
dedication to the TCSD shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the
developer and TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD
review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD
maintenance programs.
10.
The developer shall maintain the park site and slopes/landscaping until such time as
those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD.
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA~)EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\323pa98pc..doc
26
11.
The park facility shall be dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessments,
or easements that would preclude the City from using the property for public park
purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be
provided with the transfer of the property to the City.
12.
The open space/paseo area in Planning Area 9 shall be privately maintained by an
established Homeowners Association.
13.
Upon acceptance and transfer of the park improvements to the City, that portion of the
drainage area located adjacent to the park, and not considered as habitat restoration
area, shall be maintained by the TCSD. Maintenance for the remaining drainage
facilities shall be determined by the by the Department of Public Works upon
construction of the improvements to City standards.
14.
All exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to single family
residential development shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance
purposes following compliance to existing City standards and completion of the
application process. All other slopes, open space, perimeter walls, and entry
monuments shall be maintained by the established Homeowners Association (HOA).
15.
Bike lanes shall be provided on site and designed to intercept with the City's Park and
Recreation Master Plan. Class II bike lanes, shall be constructed in concurrence with
the street improvements.
16.
In retum for park construction, the developer is entitled to receive a credit against the
park component of DIF based upon the actual cost of improving the park. The
fee/credit issue shall be addressed pursuant to the execution of a park improvement
agreement between the applicant and the City prior to approval of the final map.
17.
The developer shall file an application with the TCSD for the transfer of residential and
arterial street lighting into the respective maintenance program.
Prior to Approval of the Final Map:
18.
The developer or his assignee shall enter into an agreement and post security to
improve the proposed TCSD slope/landscape maintenance areas and the public park
facility located in Planning Area 1. All proposed TCSD slope/landscaping areas shall
be offered for dedication on the final map.
19.
Construction drawings for all proposed TCSD slope/landscape maintenance areas and
the public park site shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community
Services.
20.
A notice of intention to annex into the Temecula Community Services District Service
Levels B, C, and D shall be submitted to the TCSD prior to approval of the final map.
The property owner election costs involved in the district formation or annexation shall
be borne by the developer.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
27
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits:
21. The park in Planning Area I shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the
issuance of the 78th residential building permit for the overall project or within two (2)
years of the first phased lots, whichever comes first.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy:
20. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of
the TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that l 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 Name
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
28
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (28510)
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT\323pa98pc..doc
29
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA98-0323 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28510) FOR THE
SUBDIVISION OF 242 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A
PARK SITE AND ONE COMMERCIAL LOT WITHIN THE
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN ON PARCELS
CONTAINING 71.1 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL
KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD), KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.S 910-130-056, 910-130-059,
910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-
060 AND 921-090-061.
WHEREAS, Woodside Homes filed Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative
Tract Map 28510); and in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and
Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510); and
was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0323
(Tentative Tract Map 28510); on February 3, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as
prescribed by law, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all facts
relating to Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510);
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS,FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510); makes the following findings; to wit:
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 project
is consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances
and meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
30
C. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds.
Such impacts were analyzed in the original Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348) for the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan. The environmental addendum submitted with this application
concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and Tentative Tract
Map 28510 are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified
EIR. Therefore, no significant impacts or additional mitigation measures are required given the
existing mitigation measures contained in the certified EIR No. 348. The mitigation measures
prepared for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
specific plans.
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
E. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is
consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
F. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
type of development.
G. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
H. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of
improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.
I. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of
improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access
through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be
approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that
they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection
shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The changes proposed to the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan, and respectively the configuration of Tentative Tract Map 28510, were
determined to be minor based on an environmental Addendum (No. 4) to the Campos Vetdes
Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348). The addendum concluded that the
changes did not increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity
of the development as analyzed in the original Environmental Impact Report. The
environmental addendum contained a comparative analysis of impacts and mitigation
measures. This analysis concluded that the proposed changes to the Campos Verdes Specific
Plan are substantially the same as or less than the impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. In
addition, there is no new information that was not known at the time the EIR was certified and
completed. Therefore, no significant impacts or additional mitigation measures are required
given the existing mitigation measures contained in the certified EIR No. 348. The mitigation
measures prepared for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be applied to this project.
The Environmental Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 348, therefore, is hereby
adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
approves Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510) for the subdivision
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
31
of 242 single family residential lots, a park site and one commercial lot within the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan on parcels containing acres 71.1 acres located at the Northeast corner of
Margarita Road and North General Kearny Road (south of Winchester Road), known as
Assessor's Parcel No.s 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052, 921-090-
058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 and 921-090-061 subject to Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February, 1999.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of
February 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:'
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201 9ATA~DEPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc.,doc
32
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 28510 (PA98-0323)
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~EPTS~LANNING~.STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
33
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA 98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map No. 28510)
Project Description:
The subdivision of a 71.1 acre parcel into 242 single
family residential lots, a park site and one commercial
lot within the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
Assessor's Parcel No.:
910-130-056,
921-090-058,
061
910-130-059, 910-130-060, 921-090-052,
921-090-059, 921-090-060 and 921-090-
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
February 3, 1999
February 3, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
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 Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) 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 Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) 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).
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 developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set
aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative
body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Specific Plan
Amendment which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period
and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including
\~TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc 34
but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall promptly notify
the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this time
period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City
fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not, thereafter
be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasin¢l plan shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Director.
This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific
Plan No. I (Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. 1).
The map is subject to the approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0015
(Amendment No. 1 to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan) and Planning Application No.
PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment). If the map is not approved by the Planning
Commission and subsequently the City Council, the map shall comply with the original
Campos Verdes Specific Plan approval.
=
The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation
measures identified within EIR No. 348 and all the subsequent addenda 1 through 4.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
o
A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Director.
All paleontology/archaeology review is subject to the mitigation measures contained in
the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (No. 348).
10.
The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a wdtten report, compliance with the
Conceptual Landscape Plans for this stage of the development.
11.
The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this
stage of the development.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager:
a. A copy of the Final Map
b. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans
c. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes:
1)
This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory
recommendations. Ordinance No. 655.
\\TEMEC_FS201M:)ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~23pa98pc.,doc
35
2)
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 348 and its subsequent addenda
was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula
Planning Department.
3) This project is within a dam inundation area.
4) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone.
13.
Construction landscape plans shall be submitted that are consistent with City standards
and the approved conceptual plans including automatic irrigation for all landscaped
areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the
public from streets and adjacent property. In addition, the following information shall be
required:
All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD)
maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not
be limited to pdvate slopes and common areas.
Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-
way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger.
c. Hardscaping for the following:
1) Pedestrian trails within private common areas
2) Equestrian trails
3)
The height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences,
where there is a discrepancy, the Campos Verdes Specific Plan shall
take precedence:
a)
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.
b)
Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to
take advantage of views for side and rear yards,
c)
Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing
when not restricted by a and b above.
4) All existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map.
14. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager. 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.
b. 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
dght to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc 36
dghts 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.
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
15.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be
submitted to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation fees.
16. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager:
Construction landscape plans consistent with the City standards and the
approved Conceptual Landscape Plans including automatic irrigation for all
landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment
from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for:
Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits
for any lot(s).
c. Pdvate common areas prior to issuance of the 78th building permit.
d. Wall and fence plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans.
eo
Precise grading plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans
including all structural setback measurements.
17. The Model Home Complex Development Plan (if applicable) which includes the
following:
a. Site Plan with off-street parking
b. Construction Landscape Plans
c. Fencing Plans
d. Building Elevations
e. Floor Plans
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
37
f. Materials and Colors Board
18.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision,
however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with
Planning Manager approval.
19.
The applicant shall demonstrate by a wdtten report that all mitigation measures
identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the
development.
Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
20.
If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional
landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project.
21. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for
inspection.
22.
Pdvate common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of
the 78th occupancy permit.
23.
The applicant shall sign an agreement and/or post a bond with the City to insure the
maintenance of all landscaping within private common areas for a period of one year.
24.
All the Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors
of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety.
25.
The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures
identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the
development.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
26.
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff
person of the Department of Public Works.
General Requirements
27.
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.
28.
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.
29.
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.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRpTL323pa98pc..doc
30.
31.
32.
33.
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.
Pdor 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:
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
City of Temecula Fire Bureau
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
Riverside County Health Department
Cable TV Franchise
Community Services District
General Telephone
Southern California Edison Company
Southern California Gas Company
Fish & Game
Army Corps of Engineers
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Department of Public Works:
ao
Improve Verde Lane (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to
include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and
sewer).
b=
Improve Streets A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, Camino Campos Verdes,
Sandealing Way and Starling Street (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include
dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and
sewer).
Install a traffic signal at the intersections of Margarita Road/Verde Lane and
North General Kearny Road/Camino Campos Verdes to include signal
interconnect with the signal(s) at the intersection(s) of Margarita Road, North
General Kearny Road. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for the
signals and if warrants are met, shall be installed by the Developer.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
39
The Developer is eligible for Development Impact Fee credit for 50% cost of
design and construction of the traffic signal at Margarita Road/Verde Lane.
e=
A School Zone signing and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be
designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and
included with the street improvement plans for the project. Design shall also
include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met,
shall be installed by the Developer.
34.
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the
design of the street improvement plans:
Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00%
minimum over A.C. paving.
Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or
208.
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos.
400 and 401.
eo
Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the
project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining
properties.
f. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113.
g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section.
h. All street and ddveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door
openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk.
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.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301.
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.
35. 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.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
36.
Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Verde Lane, Margarita Road and
North General Keamy Road on the Final Map.
37.
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.
38.
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.
39.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of
an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section.
Prior to City Council approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall make an application
for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency.
40. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
41.
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 and Public
Works Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the
ECS:
a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain.
b. Special Study Zones.
c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report.
d. Archeological resources found on the site.
42.
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.
43.
The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of
the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements
pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such
agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City
to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision.
Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount
given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved i~y the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
44.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be
provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable
TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~E)ATAgEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc, .doc
41
45.
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.
46,
Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Department of Public Works.
47.
This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip Reduction
Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
48.
Pdvate drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be
delineated and noted on the Final Map.
49.
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
50.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
[]
[]
[]
[]
E]
[]
[]
[]
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
Riverside County Health Department
Community Services District
General Telephone
Southern California Edison Company
Southern California Gas Company
51.
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.
52.
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.
53.
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.
\\TEMEC_FS201 OATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPTLt23pa98pc..doc
42
54.
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.
55.
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.
56.
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.
57.
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.
58.
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.
59.
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
60. Final Map shall be approved and recorded.
61.
62.
A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer
for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report
addressing compaction and site conditions.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,
the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading
Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be
in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
63.
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.
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA~EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
64.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
[]
[]
[]
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water Distdct
Department of Public Works
65.
All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
66.
All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
67.
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
68.
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
Uniform Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are
in force at the time of building plan submittal.
69.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land
division per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-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. (UFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
70.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill. B, Table A-Ill-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (8" 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 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. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B)
71.
Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any
cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (UFC 902.2.2.2.3)
72.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2°2)
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~)EPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc, .doc
73.
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 70,000 Ibs GVW. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
74.
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 70,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of
.25 feet. ( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
75.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-bur (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen
(13) feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15)
76.
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. (UFC 902.2.2.4)
77.
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. (UFC 902.2.1)
78.
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.
(UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1)
79.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective
Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3)
80.
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 firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
General Recluirements:
81.
The City's parkland dedication requirement shall be satisfied with the development and
dedication of a 3.15 acre neighborhood park, more specifically identified as Lot No.
244. Said park site shall include the following amenities: Tot lot, picnic tables, shade
structure, parking lot, security lighting and open play areas, Actual construction plans
shall be required prior to final map approval.
82.
The installation of all slopes, medians, park facilities and landscaped areas shall be in
conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and
Specifications.
\\TEMEC_FS201~OATA~EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
45
83.
84.
85.
Construction of the park site, slopes and landscaped medians proposed for dedication
to the City shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the
TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and
inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD
maintenance programs.
Extedor slopes adjacent to residential development along North General Kearny Road,
Margarita Road, Verde Lane and Winchester Road shall be maintained by the
developer or the homeowners' association (HOA) until such time as those
responsibilities are offered and accepted by the TCSD for maintenance purposes.
The open space buffer and trail area, interior slopes, perimeter walls, and entry
monumentation shall be maintained by a private homeowner's association (HOA).
86.
87.
Upon acceptance and transfer of the park improvements to the City, that portion of the
drainage area located adjacent to the park, and not considered as habitat restoration
area, shall be maintained by the TCSD. Maintenance for the remaining drainage
facilities shall be determined by the Department of Public Works upon construction of
the improvements to City standards.
Class II bike lanes shall be provided along North General Kearny Road and Margarita
Road unless otherwise indicated by the City Engineer.
Prior to Al~proval of the Final Map:
88.
All proposed TCSD maintained slopes areas adjacent to North General Kearny Road,
Margarita Road, Verde Lane and Winchester Road shall be offered for dedication to
the TCSD on the final map as a slope maintenance easement.
89.
Landscape construction drawings for the park site, landscaped medians, and proposed
TCSD slope maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Services.
90.
The developer shall enter into an agreement and post security to improve the 3.15
acre neighborhood park facility (lot no. 244) and the proposed TCSD slope
maintenBnce 8tess.
91.
The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City in order to receive fee credits
towards the parks component of the City's current Development Impact Fee (DIF) for
those park facility improvements which exceed the park land dedication requirements.
Said agreement shall be based upon actual construction costs to be reviewed and
approved by City staff.
92.
The developer shall file a notice of intention with the TCSD to initiate election
proceedings for the annexation and acceptance of residential street lighting and slope
maintenance areas into the respective TCSD maintenance programs. All costs
associated with the election and annexation process shall be borne by the developer.
Failure to comply with this process will require that said maintenance responsibilities
are accepted by the HOA.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits:
93. The 3.15 acre park shall be improved and dedicated to the City pdor to issuance of the
78th residential building permit for the overall project, or within two (2) years of map
recordation for the first phased lots, whichever comes first.
94. The park facility shall be dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessments,
or easements that would preclude the City from using the property for park purposes.
A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be provided with the
transfer of the property to the City.
95. Pdor to issuance of building permits or installation of the street lights, whichever comes
first, the developer shall pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said
street lights into the TCSD maintenance program.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occul~ancy:
96. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of
the TCSD and service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
97. The developer shall apply for lot/parcels address assignment.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits:
98. The followin.cl fees shall be paid to the Building and Safety Department:
a. Library Fees
b. Fire Mitigation Fees
c. Regional Statistical Area (RSA) Fees
d. Development Agreement Fees
e. City Building Plan Review Fees
f. City Consistency Check Fees
g. School Fees (made payable to the Temecula Unified School District)
h. Other Fees
99. The applicant shall apply for Buildin.cl Plan Review and Consistency Check.
100. A copy of the approved Acoustical Analysis shall be submitted to the Building and
Safety Department to ensure compliance with 65 dBA for exterior and 45 dBA for
intedor noise levels.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc,.doc
47
101.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform
Building, Plumbin.q and Mechanical Codes; 1990 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
102. The applicant shall submit at time of plan review, complete exterior site lighting plans in
compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution.
103. The applicant shall obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal
for plan review.
104. The applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original
signature on plans submitted for plan review of model homes.
105. The applicant shall provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel
schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review for models.
OTHER AGENCIES
106.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
107.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated August 25, 1998, a copy of
which is attached.
108.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the
Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated September 9, 1998, a copy of
which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control drainage area
pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division Ordinance No. 460,
appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the
City pdor to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
109. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal
Water District transmittal dated August 18, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
110. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California
Water District transmittal dated August 18, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
111. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit
Agency transmittal dated September 15, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
112.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Temecula Valley
Unified School Distdct transmittal dated November 23, 1998, a copy of which is
attached.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~ATA~)EPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPTL323Pa98Pc, .doc
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 Name
\\TEM EC_FS201 ~DATA\DE PTS~° LA N N ING\STA F F R PT~323pa98pc..doc
49
'Tuesday November 24, 1998 11:35am -- Page 11 '~'~-
11/24/98 12:23 FAX
TEMECULA VALLEY USD
TEMECULA VALLEY
Unified School District
SUPERINTENDENT
' David B. AIIme~ '
I~]O01
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Jew/Hobbs
Baffiara Tooker
November 23, 1998
Ms. Patty Anclers
. City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT: School Mitigation for Campos Verdes Specific Plan: Map 28510
Dear Ms. Anders:
The Tcrnecula Valley Unified School District will require school facilities mitigation for ~ho above Tgatadve Map
in accordance with the rules set forlh in SB50.
Smccrcly,
Tem~ ~ool District
~ort{d')miator of Facilities Services
31350 Rancho Vista Road / Temecula, CA 92592 / (909) 676-2661
September 15, 1998
Ms. Patty Anders
City of Temecula
Temecula Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Riverside Transit Agency
1825 Third Street
P.O. Box 59968
Riverside, CA 92517
Phone: (909) 684-0850
Fax: (909) 684-1007
Dear Ms. Anders:
RTA presently provides transit service on Winchester Road via RTA Route 23A, which currently
stops near the intersection of Winchester and Margarita Road just outside the project boundary.
We currently do not provide service to the area in Tract 28510, however, based on the size of
this development and our own plans for future growth, we are requesting that bus turnouts be
incorporated into the general design. Ideal sites for the bus turnouts would be at the following
locations:
Winchester Road Farside Margarita Road
Marrgarita Road Farside Campos Verde Lane
If possible, we would also like to request that pedestrian openings be provided near the turnout
locations specified above. Paved, lighted and handicapped accessible pedestrian accessway
consistent with ADA standards should be provided between the stop and the project site. I can
indicate the exact locations for the turnouts as the project progresses.
This request will supercede our previous letter dated August 31, 1998. After speaking with the
developer it has been decided the ~:b.,-,Te requested. Etts *2.lrrlot~s would be a better choice for RTA
buses and passengers.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. Please keep us updated on the status of this
request and should you require additional information or specification, please call.
Sincerely,
Ileen Matute,
Planning Analyst
im/PDEV# 189
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/275-1200
9091788-9965 FAX
51180.1
City of Temecula
Planni De rtmen
Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033
Atten~on: P~ y ~H~ ~
Ladies and eentlemen: Re: ~F'M 2_ ~'/C) ~ P/q
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in inco.rp0rated
cities. The District also does hot an check ~ land use cases, or pro '.mdq.. State Division of Reel Estate letters or
other flood hazard ~ for su~Plcases. District comments/recommendations for such cases am normally limited
to items of s.pqcffic mnterest to the District indudi District Master Dmi Plan fadlilies, other ional flood
provided,
The District has not reviewed the prgposed project in detail and the followi.n~ checked comments do not in any way
constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed projG:,ct with respect to flood hazard, public
heelth and safety or any other such issue:
This project involves District Master Plan fadlities. The District will acce ownershi of such fadlities on
.~te. ~.~t of the c~. Faci,~es m.~ be o~..cted to Ois.~ ..~J., and )~.~ ~a. ~ a.d
ins .~on will be requirid for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be
required.
This p.roject prgpos~.' channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be
of the City. Fadlities must be constructed to District st~indids, and ~Pms~ct p)an check a 'ns.p.ection '
be requirC~d for District acceptance. plan check. inspection and administrative fees will be required. L.6,y
'
permits, whichever comes ~. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the
actual permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project m uira a National Pdlutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES! .permit from the State Water
Resources Cona~lmq~rd. Cleerance for grading, redxlation, or other final approva should not be given until the
xm
City has determined that the project has b~en granted a permit or is shown to be e · pt.
If this pro'ect involves a Federal Emerge .n~. Management Ag.ency (FEMA mapped flood plain, then the C' should
req.,. ~e ap..ca.t to .~o~de al, ~.dies .oulations, ~.a...nd o~r ..tormaUon ~_eq.l~ to ~,9
requirementa, and should further .require Fla{ the a ~icant bbtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revisi~n CLOMR)
pdor to grading, recordation or other final approva~3gf the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR(~ pdor to
occupancy.
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence fro these a encie
indicati.g the project is exempt. from these _requ~reme.ts. A Clea. Water Act Section 401 Water ~uali Cer~ca4~~
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Co.trol Board pdor to issuance of ~e Corps
permit.
C;
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
TO:
FROM
RE:
County of Riverside -
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE:
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
~-4~YGREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 28510
August 25, 1998
The Department of Environmental Health is unable to submit tentative recommendations until
receipt of the requested supplemental information conceming water and sewer availability.
GD:dr
(909) 955-8980
standl9.doc
CALIFORNIA
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES
INFORMATION
SYSTEM
RIVE!~IDE
Eastern Information Center
Department of Anthropology
University of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0418
Phone (909) 787-5745
Fax (909) 787-5409
August 18, 1998
Patty Anders
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P. O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Case No.:
Applicant:
PA98-0323(Tentative Tract Map 285 10)
Woodside Homes/RBF: Bill Greens
Dear Ms. Anders:
Please find enclosed our comments for one project transmittal as requested by the Planning
Department. If you have any questions, please contact the Eastern Information Center at
(909) 787-5745.
PA98-0323 ..................................... August 27, 1998
Sincerely,
Jennifer Bybee
Information Officer
Enclosure
CALIFORNIA
I{ISTORICAL
I~ESOURCES
INFORMATION
SYSTEM
Eastern Information Center
Department of Anthropology
University of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0418
Phone (909) 787-5745
Fax (909) 787-5409
CULTURAL RESOURCE REVIEW
DATE: 4u(~$.1~{ ]~, Iqq~
RE: Case Transmittal R6f6rence Designation:
Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System have
been reviewed to determine if this project would adversely affect prehistoric or historic cultural resources:
The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to known cultural
resource(s). A Phase I study is recommended.
Based upon existing data the proposed project area has the potential for containing cultural resources. A Phase I study
is recommended.
A Phase I cultural resource study (MF # ) identified one or more cultural resources.
The project area contains, or has the possibility of containing, cultural resources. However, due to the nature of the
project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on cultural resources is not anticipated. Further study is not
recommended.
A Phase I cultural resource study (MF/f ~1~}tt ) identified no cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
There is a low probability of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the immediate area while
a qualified archaeologist evaluates the f'mds and makes recommendations.
Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored by a professional
archaeologist.
The submission of a cultural resource management report is recommended following guidelines for Archaeological
Resource Management Reports prepared by the California Office of Historic Preservation, Preservation Planning Bulletin
4(a), December 1989.
Phase I
Phase II
Phase I11
Phase IV
Records search and field survey
Testing [Evaluate resource significance; propose mitigation measures for "significant" sites.]
Mitigation [Data recovery by excavation, preservation in place, or a combination of the two.]
Monitor earthmoving activities
COMMENTS:
If you have any questions, please contact us.
Eastern Information Center
BIQFRMS\TRANSMIT
Wa r
Board of Directors:
Csaba F. Ko
President
Ralph H. Daily
Sr Vice President
Lisa D. Heman
Doug Kulberg
Scott A. Mclntyre
Jeffrey L. Minklet
George M. Woods
Officers:
John F. Hennigar
Philllp L. Forbes
E. P. '~Bob' Lemons
Kenneth C. Dealy
Perry R. Louck
Linda M. Fregoso
C. Michael Cowett
Best Best & Krieger LLP
General Cflun~el
August 18, 1998
Ms. Patty Anders, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
TRACT NO. 28510
APN 910-130-056, APN 910-130-059 AND APN 910-130-
060; APN 921-090-052, APN 921-090-058, APN 921-090-
059, APN 921-090-060, AND APN 921-090-061
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0323
Dear Ms. Anders:
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 which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
98/SB:mc176/F012-T1/FCF
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
Rancho California Water District
42135 Winchester Road · Post Office Box9017 · Temecula, California92589-9017 · 1909~676-4101 · FAX I909t676-0615
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
50
January 26, 1999
City of Temecula
Planning Group
J~N ~ ? 1999
By
I am a resident in Roripaugh Hills. I moved here three years ago and have
seen the changes take place. I live here with my husband and two children
11 and 14. My son was hit by a car on Roripaugh Road three years
ago. Ever since then we have been fighting to get some kind of help to slow
traffic down. With the new High School it's been worse. Now the mall plus
the new Middle School. You want to make our area opened to more traffic
and trouble. This is not fair to our small community. Opening Sanderling
Street will not help the city but kill our value of life. I understand
Meadowview has gotten out of street opening and I can't understand that
one. Oh ! I can, but not really ,I guess it's who you know. Please DO NOT
OPEN SANDERLING OR RORIPAUGH TO ANY MORE PROBLEMS!
Instead we need some help slowing people down and keeping our children
safe.
Thank you in advance
Mrs. Connie Constable
iL. jd JAN 2 6 1999
rBy
January 4, 1999
RECEIVED JAM 13 7 1999
Ms. Joanne Carlson, Pres., of Rorlpaugh Hills
29379 Rancho California Road., Ste 206
Temecula, ca 92592
Homeowners AsSoc.
Dear Ms. Carlson:
As a resident of Rodpaugh Hills we are very concerned about the increased
traffic to our area with the widening of Winchester Road and the installation of a
traffic light at Roripaugh Road. Our children that live and play in our area are
a/ready in danger from speeding traffic on Roripaugh Road. The opening of
Sanderling Way would increase the danger of traffic to our children by 500 cars a
day. We know that Roripaugh Road will be used as a short cut to the High
school and Raiphs Shopping Center.
We moved especially to this tract because of high profile of safety and seclusion
this tract had to offer. We are increasly disappointed with aft the so call
';oromises" made to the tract and now being informed of this new Development
going in and using our street ways. We feel that the people that buy into the
Woodside Development wobld be better off using the Margarlta Road for the
entrance and exit to their property.
40173 Starling St.
Temecula, CA 92591
Martie V. Scott
27563 Sanderling Way
Temecula, CA 92591
2 6 1999
By
December 7, 1998
Joanne Carlson, President RHOA
c/o Avalon
29379 Rancho California Rd.
Temecula, CA 92591
Dear Mrs. Cadson;
As a concerned homeowner in Roripaugh Hills I strongly protest the opening of Sanderling way.
I am concerned with the safety of our dildren in this community. As you may well know Sanderling Way'
ends at Roripaugh ffdls Road, where the toddlers playground and pool area located as well as the schf~! bus
stop for our local elementary school children. ffSanderling Way is opened to from the Campus Verdes
Project I fear we will see an increase in traffic accidents, vandalism, and first and foremost the safety of our
children will definitely be cornpromised.
Since the opening of Chaparral High School I have ~ and increase in vandalism and speeding through
our area. Our dues have now been increased to cover the cost caused by vandals in our neighborhood.
Opening Sanderling Way will further hun our community not help our community. I purclmsed my ]rome
here to Set away from traffic and vanchtlism. I want to continue live in a quiet and safe community. I only
hope all tl~ homeowners of Roripaugh Hills voice their concerns and protest loud and clear to the Planning
Commission as I and my neighbors have since we are the homeowners who will be seriously impacted by
this. However evet3tone' s children, grandchildren and the community as a whole will: suffez the
consequences if this plan is approved.
'Sincerely, -
Mattie V. Scott
December 7, 1998
Ms~ Joanne Carlson, Pres.,RHOA
c/o Avalon
29379 Rancho Calif- Road Ste 206
Temecula, Calif. 92592
JAN Z 6 1999
By
Dear Ms- Carlson,
We have been informed that the city has decided to reopen the
specific plan of the CAMPUS VERDES PROJECT for consideration.
As a resident of Roripaugh Hills for 7 years we are very
concerned about the impact on eu~ area being adjacent to the
project.
We have noticed the increased traffic to our area since the
widening of Winchester Road and the installation of a traffic
light at Roripaugh Road. Our children tha~ live and play in
our area are already in jeopardy from speeding traffic on
Roripaugh Road. The opening of Sanderling Way would increase
the danger oE traffic to our children by 500 cars a day.
We Enow that Roripaugh Road will be used as a short cut to the
High School as'well as ~he Ralphs Shopping Center-
We had been told in the past that the Campus Verdes Project
was supposed bo be a low density development and we find that
242 residences would be unfair and unacceptable to the people
of the Roripaugh Hills'Home Owners Association-
We feel that the people that buy into the Woodside Development
would be better off using the Margarita Road for 'the entrance
and exit to their property.
Sincerely,
Dolores and Simon Aman
-40165 Starling St.
Temecula, Ca. 92591
Dec. 3, 1998
Joanne Carlson
President, Roripaugh Hills Owners Association
c/o Avalon
29379 Rancho California Road, Suite 206
'Temecula, CA 92592
Dear Ms. Carlson,
We own a home in Roripaugh Hills at 39800 Roripaugh Road. We originally
bought in Roripaugh because it was a nice and seemingly quiet residential
development, and traffic was at a minimum. We are very distressed to learn that
Sanderling Way may go through, adding many more cars to the residential streets
of the neighborhood!
Please pass our concerns regarding this on to the Planning Commission. We hope
that Sanderling Way does n.ot go through and that Starling Street remains as a fire
access road only. Thank you for your work on our behalf on this matter!
Sincerely,
Dennis & Mary Ettlin
310 370-6475
Tami Hartz 01veda
27551 Sanderling way
Temecula, CA 92591
December 8, 1998
Joanne Carlson
President, RHOA
c/o Avalon
29379 RanCho California Road, Ste. ~06
Temecula, CA 92591
Dear Joanne:
I'm writing this letter in response to the development of Campu~
Vetdes development and the city's plan of opening up Sanderling
Way to through traffic.
As a resident, living on Sanderling Way, and as a Realtor in the
area, I do not want this road opened. I liked to voice my
concerns ~nd would volunteer my time to going door to door if p3u
think a petition would help the cause.
I'm sure my concerns are not only my own but are shared with
other 450 residents who live in Roripaugh Hills. Has the city
took in consideration the problems that could result in the
opening up of Sanderling Way and the destruction that could occur
to our small neighborhood?
Sanderling Way is a culvasac built going up a small hill. The
kids in the neighborhood ride their bikes daily down this hill--
pedaling as fast has they can. So far, to my knowledge, nobody'
has been hit, as of yet. I personally have had to attend to a few
kids in the neighbo=hood who have fallen--including my own.
Sanderling Way is also at the end of an already built tot lot. We
have enough concern with the speeding down Roripaugh Road and the
kids crossing back and forth to the park without getting hit--let
alone opening up more traffic coming down Sanderling' Way.
Sanderling Way and the tot lot is also the pick up and drop off of
school bused children. Just the other day, the bus driver had to
yell at someone for speeding down Roripaugh and not coming to a
stop when the bus had its red lights flashing.
Since the opening of the new Chaparral High School, I have
personally noticed an increase in traffic and young drivers--
driving way too fast for our children safety. If the city gives
the go ahead open up Sanderling Way, how many more speeders to we
have to live with before an accident happens7
Four ~undred and fifty residents live in a 8evelopment that
includes lighted tennis courts, two pools and a tot lot. It's a
community that is filled with children. -The only traffic this
neighborhood needs is from its own residents and visitors.
If the residents of Campus Verdes need to get out--the developer
should build its own road exiting onto Margarita or N. Gernal
Kearny. I thought that is why Margarita Rd was widened to support
the traffic for new development end the mall. If it can't support
it--then maybe we should not be building au~a~ore homes or
commercial properties until the roads we have can support the
traffic without having to open up small neighborhood roads and
turning them into high traffic short cuts.
That's all we need is more traffic, traffic, traffic to deal with
in our own neighborhood let alone having to deal with it on the
main roads. Is there no peace here in Temecula?' Must we make our
front yards a thoroughfare too? Must developmen~ continue at a
pace that it destroys are first built neigl~rhoocts? The
neighborhoods where most of us have lived peacefully for the. last
ten years or so. Let's keep our kids safe, our property val~es
up, and our neighborhood traffic for residents only. Or maybe
now it's time to reconsider gating our community to protect it
from developers and city planners and stop their infringement.
You can bet they don't live here.
Joanne, please let me know, if I can be of service and what else
can be done to stop the city's plans to open up Sanderling Way.
Do we need to get a petition or protest going?
Sincerely,
~ami Hartz Olveda
Wright
27525 Jefferson Ave.
Temecula, CA 92590
Business 909-694-5300, Ext. 360
Fax 909-694-5401
Pager 909-414-3465 V, M.
Residence 909-676-8279
Each Oft;ce is ~ndspenUe~t~/Owned end OperateU.
Tami Hartz Olveda
REALTORe
Sixth Armored Division Association
Dat~
TO:
Mr. &Mrs. Geofge F. Vod(ad~
~
Dale and Jeanne Cadan
27~1(:) ~ Court · Temecula. CA ~'1 · USA
Phone ~)9/6G;~,-~1 ~ · Fax
January 26,1999
City of Temecula Planning Division
43200 Business Park Ddve
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: Campus Verdes
Dear Sir/Madam:
N 2 5 1999L
As homeowners in the Roripaugh Hills Home Owners Association Tract, we strongly urge the Planning
Commission to reconsider opening Sandealing Way into the Woodside Homes Developments which would
cause a pass through Roripaugh Hills. We have been residents in Temecula for over 10 years and have
seen the traffic flow increase at an alarmingly rate. We enjoy the safety of the residential neighborhood of
Rodpaugh Hills and feel that the opening of Sandealing Way would have a negative impact on our
community.
At the base of Sanderling Way is the bus stop for the children who attend Nicolas Elementary School. There
is also a park where the children play in safety. The width of Rodpaugh Road is such that we already have a
problem with speeding cars and the increase traffic that a connecting read would cause will endanger the
lives of our children and residents, and cause accidents as people cut through our neighborhood. When
Chaparral High School opened, no students were ddving, but on its second year of opening, more cars
began appearing and with the third year approaching, many more teenagers will be cutting through
Rodpaugh Hills to get to school or to leave school, many of them will be racing each other and witnessed on
City streets presently.
With the opening of the middle school, traffic will be increased with parents taking their children to school
since no bus service is provided to those children within a 2 mile radius. When the mall opens, many
residents from Summerfield, Amberwood, Portofino and Martinque developments will also cut through
Rodpaugh Hills to avoid the traffic lights and delays caused by the traffic congestion on Winchester Road.
While I appreciate that the City is attempting to ease the burden of the traffic flow problem that the City is
expedendng, I do not feel it is fair to jeopardize the lives and safety of the residents of Rodpaugh Hills to
make your traffic flow plan work. Residents of Rodpaugh Hills have the same concerns that Meadowview
residents had which enabled them to keep North General Kearney dosed, and our case is no different.
I hope that the Planning Commission will reconsider and close Sandealing Way when they approve the
revised Specific Plan for Campus Verde's. The City of Temecula is doing a fine job and hopefully will put the
needs and concerns of all the residents above an opportunity to provide a five-minute shod cut.
Sincerely,
Joanne Cadson
Homeowner
KATHRYN A. BUDD
27598 Sanderling Way - Temecula, CA 92591
909-699-7173
January 26, 1999
City of T emecula
Planning Commission
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: Planning Application Nos. PA98-0323, PA99-0015, PA99-0016
2 5 7999
Dear Planning Commission,
This letter is in opposition to the connecting of Sanderling Way through the new Campus Verdes Developmere for the
following reasons:
Increased traffic through Roripaugh Hills
a. New development will add approximately 484 more cars/trips through Roripaugh Hills
(242 homes x 2 cars per household)
b. Summerfield, Amberwood, Porto~no and other surrounding developments will cut through Roripaugh Hills to
get to the new Middle School.
c. Meadowview residents will cut through to drive kids to the High School and new surrounding shopping
centers.
cL Roripaugh Hills will become a cut through for the new mall, to either get to the mall or avoid mall traffic.
e. Increased bus/maintenance traffic from the Bus Barn to the new Middle School
f. Speedway between the Middie School and High School.
Safety Concerns
Roripaugh Hills is a residential neighborhood and not conducive to heavy traffic
The intersection of Sanderling Way and Roripaugh Road include the following:
a. An elementary school bus stop that sendcos approximately 60 children twice a day plus 1 Kindergarten stop.
b. Playground/Tot Lot geared towards children ages 3-14 years old
c. Pool with Toddler pool catering to families
d. Blind curve
Increasing the trattc through Roripaugh Hills is putting our children and community at risk. All of the increased traffic
would end up right where our children play. I am asking that you reconsider your previous decision and vote to close
Sanderling Way.
If the Commission is looking for ways to ease traEfic on this side of Temecula I suggest they reconsider opening North
General Kearney. This road was designed to handle the heavier traffic flow and does not endanger children/families the
way opening Sanderling Way does.
PLEASE DO NOT MAKE OUR STREET A CUT THROUGH FOR ALL OF TEMECULA!!
Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, or need help getting community support for putting North
General Kearny through please call me at the above number.
Sincere
thryn Budd
City of Temecula
Planning Commission
43174 Business Park Dr.
Temecula, Calif.
Re: Campos Verdes, Tentative tract # 28510
Members;
January 26, 1999
. 2 6 1999
!By
We live in the Roripaugh Hills neighborhood on Mimulus Way. Our home overlooks the area
where Woodside Homes plans to place 247 new houses, a major shopping area, a park, church
and numerous other commercial occupancies. Our yard will be adjoined by lots # 40 and 41 in this
proposed tract. In fact the head of our bed is a mere 40 feet from where heavy earth movers will
travel.
As you can well imagine we do have concems. They are classi~es as follows;
1. Vehicular access and safety.
The construction of 2 other residential projects along Margarita between Solana and Winchester,
the mall construction and adjacent business construction has added volumes to the traffic density
on Winchester Road. There are somewhere between 7 to 10 new traffic signals that will be added
to this drive to accommodate the mall area. The delays along Winchester increase daily.
The proposed tract will join and extend Sanderling and Starling streets. Both are existing streets
in our neighborhood. At first blush this would seem to pose no problem, however a look at the
larger picture is in order.
Currently our neighborhood is accessed by only 1 street, Roripaugh which connects with a signal
on Winchester and a stop sign on Nichols Rd. This street provides access to each end of
Chaparral High school. This High School will meet it's full student load in Sept. 1999.
Additionally a middle school will be opened for classes in the 1999-2000 school year at the comer
of N. General Kearny and Camino Campos Verdes. Camino Campos Verde will be the street
where the schools parking lot, bus pick-up point and inclement weather drop off area will be
concentrated. The most direct travel route between these two campus's and the district
transportation center is thru our neighborhood. Additionally the most direct route available for
the middle school from any of the homes along Nichols Rd., and the new neighborhoods along
Winchester North of Nichols is thru our neighborhood, bypassing the busy intersections of
Winchester and Margarita and Margarita and N. General Keamey. This traffic will overload the
streets in our neighborhood. These same streets t~ont single family homes where children play
everyday.
The City of Temecula is quite proud of the progress that is being accomplished in the
construction of the Overland bridge bypass to the I-15 freeway which will terminate at Margarita
near N. Gen. Kearny. N. Gen. Kearny DOES NOT continue on to Nichols rd. due to political
considerations posed by the affluent occupants of Meadowview. The intersection of Winchester
and Margarita is immediately adjacent to our neighborhood. On this single intersection is the
major mall, a 15 screen movie theater, the only Costco in the region, Ralphs grocery, and a Lowes
home improvement store and provides access to over 100 other business' large and small.
Traffic is already at a near standstill at the intersection of Winchester and Inez Traffic
enforcement is lackluster with 4 traffic motorcycles dividing the city into enforcement
quadrangles. ANY congestion, or other restriction such as a traffic collision or construction in
this intersection will result in heavy traffic being detoured thru our residential streets for the
duration of the delay. Without the continuation of N. Gen. Kearney thru to Nichols Rd. then
there is no other logical route for the detours to take. Our neighborhood will be asked to take on
the burden of bypass traffic traveling between the business' along Inez, Winchester, Margarita, the
Overland bypass The auto mall, Guident, 2 schools, thousands on exsisiting and proposed
residents and the freeway anytime there is a delay along Winchester between Nichols Road and
the 1-15.
SOLUTIONS:
1. Delay construction of the Campos Verdes Project until N. General Kearney road is completed
to Nichols Rd.
2. Erect gates at the neighborhood interface between Roripaugh Hills and Campos Verde at
Sanderling Rd. and Starling until N. Gen. Kearny is completed to Nichols Rd.
2. The Exsisting bridle trail between the developments;
There is a 15 foot bridle trail that extends from Sanderling west along the rear the houses along
Mimulus Way ending behind 40231 Mimulus Way. This trail will terminate at the junction of Lots
46 and 47 in the Carnpos Verde Development in a "blind alley" as no continuation into the new
neighborhood is accommodated. This "trail will be from 8 feet above grade at Sanderling to 20
feet below exsisiting grade at it's terminus for the homes along Mimulus. At this termination will
be placed a open pipe draining into the flood control system. The rear of the Campos Verde
homes from lot's 35 to 41 will slope down into this area. This will mount to a dirt lined drainage
ditch with an opening into the pipes of the drainage system. This trail will be below the level of
the yards on both sides and vehicular accessible from Sanderling providing a perfect place for
clandestine activities that includes weeds, dumping of refuse, criminal activities and unseen
entrance to the rear of homes along this trail
Concurrently the rear of lots 47 thru 56.will have a "V" notch between the two neighborhoods
to accommodate the differences in the elevations. This will produce the same results in this 'W".
Also at 40243 Mimulus Way there is a concrete channel that extends from the curb line on
Mimulus Way to the rear of the property. This ditch is the low point for watershed in our
neighborhood and this ditch would prevent flooding in the event that the storm drain system were
to plug up or be inadequate.. The homes behind this address are to be placed higher than the
homes along Mimulus way. This will create a dam with the potential of flooding our homes while
the Campos Verde homes remain high and dry.
SOLUTIONS;
1. Quick Deed the bridal trail adjacent Roripaugh homeowners along Mimulus Way.
2. Extend/expand drainage system accommodate exces iwater flows along Mimulus Way at it's
"worst case scenario" .
3. Remove the drainage ditch at 40243 Mimulus Way and restore the yard Woodside Homes
expense.
4. Grade all affected yards along Mimulus way to "level' with exsisting backyard levels and
replace all affected fences, landscape and irrigation.
4. Provide drainage between Roripaugh and Campos Verdes tracts where grade elevations are
different so that no yard becomes flooded.
5. Provide no open ended pipes leading into the flood control system that might attract children.
3. Noise and pollution.
As I have stated, our home is a few feet away from where heavy equipment will travel and
construction will occur over the life of this project. Currently we have the construction on 4
projects underway in our area. The apartments at Solana and Margarita, The homes adjacent to
those apartments, the middle school and of course the Mall and it's accouterments. The result is
that we have been bombarded with noise and dust from II of this. The tractors start up at 5:30 AM
and maintenance of them occurs at night. We have generators with lights at the school project.
As work progresses hammering, and other loud noises permeate our home. The City of Temecula
has a noise ordinance that the Sheriffs office is reluctant to enforce. They refer us to the cities
Code enforcement office who does not work past normal weekday hours and weekends. As s
Firefighter/Paramedic in Los Angeles, I come home quite tires fi?om time to time. My early
morning sleep has been interrupted many time with the current projects. and our home has been
covered in dust for the last year. With a project going on 50 feet away, this interruption in our
lives will become much worse.
SOLUTIONS;
A. The city must notify all workers and residents of the ordinances the are in effect regarding
noise levels and hours including work starting and stopping times and dust control measures.
B. The developer must provide a mechanism to address noise and dust issues immediately that
occur before or after the regulated work hours.
C. The City must instruct the Riverside County sheriff office that it must enforce the ordinances
within a reasonable time during hours that code enforcement personal are unavailable.
D. The City must provide an after hours contact if the above measures are unavailable.
David & Laura Barron
40223 Miftiulus Way
Temecula, Calif. 92591
909-693-4~86
iTuesday January 26, 19g~ ],-51pm -- From ~90~ 6~ 0522~ -- Page 2~
Jan-26-g9 16:21 Avalon Managemnt
Group. 909 699 0522 P.O2
/;-~/~/
~Tuesday January 26, 1999 3:51pm -- From '909 699 0522' -- Page ZSJ
Jan-26-g9 16:22 Avalon_ H_,anage~nt G~oup,
909 699 0522
P,03
Michael A. Budd
27598 SandedingWay
Temecula, CA 92591
Janua~26,1999
City of Temecula
Planning Commission
43200 Business Park Ddve
Temecula, CA 92590
JAN 2 6 7999
By~
Planning Application Nos. PA98-0323, PA99-015, PA99-0016
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am writing this letter in opposition to specific items in the aforementioned planning applications,
specifically the through connection of Sandealing Way from the Rodpaugh Hills development to
the Campus Verdes Development.
If Sandealing Way is made into a through street, it will become the north/south bypass for traffic
that wishes to avoid the Promenade Mall. When the plan for Sandealing Way was originally
proposed the regional mall was not yet planned. Sandealing Way will also become the pdmary
cut through for parents taking their children to the new middle school being built within Campus
Verdes.
We believe connecting North General Keamy would better solve the city traffic issues, as was
the odginal plan, and as all the published maps show. North General Keamy was designed to
handle the heavy volume of traffic in that there are no homes facing the street.
Has the Planning Commission considered that Sandealing Way intersects Rodpaugh Road at a
bus stop area, as well as a park designed for kids 5-14yrs old, and a community pool area which
has a Toddler pool, all of which increase the need for small children to cross at this intersection.
The homeowners of Rodpaugh Hills have previously filed complaints regarding the volume and
speed of traffic on Rodpaugh Road, asking for stop signs which have been denied, now the city
wants to increase the volume of traffic.
As a precedence for keeping Sandealing Way closed, we refer the Planning Commission to the
fact that the residence of Meadowview, which includes several city council members, have been
able to either block off or to have speed bumps added to all streets that would have allowed
traffic to flow through their development, i.e. Kahwea, N. General Keamy and Calle Pina Colada
to mention a few.
Michael A. Budd
January 26, 1999
To the City of Temecula: The Planning Commission,
Please seriously reconsider the opening of Sanderling Way as a
possible access way to the new Mall, and/or the new housing developments
that are proposed to be built close by. There are so many masons to
reconsider. I feel the most important reason is our high population of
children in this area. This housing development has attracted mainly families
with children and teens ... that is a lot due to the fact that we have a high
school, two pools, tennis courts and a big play-park. The play park is located
right at the entrance of Sande~ing Way! Also, the children love to ride their
bikes up and down Sanderling Way because of it's decline. We constantly
see the police stopping cars to give citations as cars speed thur this area,
mostly on our main road Roripaugh, because they can use it as a short cut
thru from Nicolas Rd., to closer to the main city. We have quite a problem in
this area with these speeding individuals who do not live in this area and do
not care about our children, or even the many people who walk their dogs
thru our streets. This is exactly what will happen if you open up another exit
(short cut), only it will be far worse. Sanderling Way would become an even
more desirable way to get thru!, and these cars certainly don't want' to stay at
25mph... so they will try to sneek thru quickly. This area will become a high
traffic area, and as I have already stated, this is a very family/children
concentrated housing development.
Please take all of us into consideration.
Debora and Leonnard Roth
Roripaugh Hills Home Owner
Dr. Michael R. Shaver
27586 Sanderling Way
Temecula, CA 92591
City of Temecula
Planning Commission
January 25, 1999
Dear Sirs,
By
I am writing to express my concern about the proposal to make Sande~ing Way a major
thoroughfare. This concems me because my opinion is that Roripaugh Road and
Sandealing Way will become a shortcut to the new mall and the new middle school. I am
very happy living in a small community where I feel that my family is safe. I feel that all of
this would change should the proposal to open Sandealing Way to through traffic be
approved.
I understand that the General Plan always had Sandealing Way as a through street and I
have no concerns with that. My concern stems from the fact that North General Kearney
was supposed to become a major artery for this area of Temecula and as we are all aware
it has yet to become a through street. I feel the impact of that will be increased traffic on a
street with eleven homes, hardly what I would consider an appropriate place to put a
major thoroughfare for our city.
My greatest concern is for the safety of my family and other families living in my
neighborhood, particularly all the children. As it stands, Roripaugh Road is already a
shortcut for a lot of people and speeding is a regular occurrence despite the regular
presence of the City of Temecula Police Department. Increasing traffic would just serve
to worsen a problem that in a real concern to me and my family. Before making your
decision on this matter please consider the effect it will have on the people already here,
and not completely of the people living in the new communities being built in our area. I
understand that our city is going through a lot of growing pains and I understand that, but
I would be very disappointed if this would bring the end to our small community for the
convenience of the city.
Thanks for your consideration.
Dr. Michael R. Shaver
January 26, 1999
City of Temecula
Planning Commision
I strongly object to the rezoning of the area contiguous to
Roripaugh Hills from Starling to ~imulus. Afew years ago, the
City Council assure~ the many Roripaugh home owners present that
this area would be low density, You now have planned for over
fifty houses to be built between Starling and ~imulus on forty five
and forty seven foot lots~ with no cul-de-sacs or common areas in
between. This means that many children in the area will play with
bicycles and skate-boards on Starling; a natural slope to Roripaugh.
We have already had some near misses. Also, this long line of houses,
on such narrow lots is not consistant with the planning of Roripaugh
Hills.
In regard to the opening of Sanderling; twice a day children
board buse~-~on both sides of Roripaugh at the intersection of Sand-
erling and Roripaugh. You can count on, at least, one hundred more
vehicles from the aforementioned area using this street for access.
~lso. because of the lack of common areas and proximity of these
houses, it will increase the vandalism and cleanup of common areas
paid for by Roripaugh Hills home owners.
It may not alleviate the total problem, but I beg you to con-
sider rezoning this area back to low density, and praythat you will
not open Sanderling or Starling.
40242 ~tarling ~t.
12-4-98
TO: Joanne Carlson
FROM: Kirk and Lori Bates
27459 Rosebay Ct.
Temeeula
We want to go on record that we agree with the Board requesting that Sandedrag
Way does not go through, and that Starling St. remains as a fire access only. We hope the
Planning Commission will consider the children that play at the park sad pool that will be
in danger if Sanderlingi:Way opens;. for it will increase traffic considerably at the
intersection of Roripaugh and Sanderling. We hope the Commission will help the
developer of the 242 new homes to see the importance to build new roads that will exit
off on Margarita therefore putting no more traffic pressures on residential streets. If
Sanderling is opened up the potential for more speeding high school students to and fro
Chaparral High will greatly increase, not to mention the traffic caused. by the new
shopping center(Ralphs). Roripaugh Hills needs no more traffic on its .already busy Httle
streets. Speeds on Roripaugh Rd. already well exceeds the 25 mph posted limit. We
would like to see it patrolled more often to remind folks that it is a residential zone md
not an extention of Hwy. 79. Each community should have it's own ways of egress
without eftcoring the neighboring community. Thank- You for your intelligent
consideration of this traffic concern.
Kirk and Lori Bates
Judy Bruno
40213 Mimulus Way
Temecula, CA,
January 26, 1999
City of Temecula Planning Commision: re Campus Verdes RcL
To whom it may concern,
I have resided at 40215 Mimulus way for nine years, this is a very quiet street with many, many children, including
my own. To think that you City Planners are actually going to try putting Campus Vetdes through is outrageous.
What ever happened to putting through N. General; Kearney ? Too many City council members live in
Meadowview I suppose. Or maybe its an artery too lodgical for the city of Temeeula. You already know exactly
what will happen with the traffic cutting through Roripaugh Hills Rot, on to Sanderling to Campus Verdes. Also
using Mimulus as another bypass. Remember there is a tot lot, a bus stop, and many children that live and play on
and near Ro~puugh Rd. and Sanderling. You better rethink this artery.
Sincerly,
1118/99
Tcmceula City Council/Planning Commission
% Kathy Budd
27598 Sanderling Way
Temecula, CA 92591
C,~nfieman,
I am writing this letter to protest the proposed opening of Sanderling Way and/or Starling Street to additional traffic due
to the proposed Campos Verde project. The additional non resident thru l~affic on Roripaugh Road that this project
would produce is not tenable. Homoowners off of Nienlas Road all the way to Calle Medusa would use Roripaugh
Road as a short cut to get to the new mall. Roripaugh Road is already a freeway due to non resident trio.
The vandalism to assooiation property by non residents is already out of enntrol. These ensts are born by the 439
residents who live in Roripaugh. The Roripaugh home owners do not want the additional traffic and or vandalisn at our
pools, tennis courts or common areas that Campos Verde would produce ff our community were to be opened up to this
project..
We have been told that the fife department requires requires ingress thru Roripaugh into Campos Verde. ff the new
middle sohool located on General Keamy has adequate fire access then Campos Verde with access off of Margarita and
General Kearny would oertainly have adequate fire access. Currently there is a project under construotion in that back
of Meadowview adjacent to Valle Olvera. These homes back up to General Kearny but do not have ingress or egress on
General Keamy. Fire equipment will need to wind all the way thru Meadowview to get to these homes. The city should
open up General Kearny thru Meadowview to Nicolas Road.
I am suggesting that the Roripaugh Hills Homoowners Assooiation hire an attortney and sue both the builder of
Campos Verde and the City of Temecula if either of our streets are opened up to Campos Verde and Mall traffic.
Bruc~ Weckesser
Roripaugh Hills
27441 Bolandra court
Temecula, CA 92591
January 26, 1999
Hjerholzer
27574 Sandealing Way
Temecula, Ca. 92591
Home Phone (909) 699-3037
To whom it may concern:
This lettu is in regards to the proposed opening of Sandealing Way in the Roripaugh Hills tract. As a resident whose
home is on Sanderling Way, I am fully opposed to the opening of the street. The unnecessary traffic this will cause
will be excessive, especially for a quiet neighborhood full of small children. We already have many people who do
not follow the 25 mile an hour residential speed limit and opening Sanderling to provide access to a new school will
only heighten this problem. In addition, we have a community pool and children' s playground at the end of
Sanderling and increased traffic could promote a higher level of danger for the many residents and children who
access those facilities. With residents and their children's' safety in mind, I feel it would be a bad decision to open
Sanderling Way and I fully oppose it.
Lisa Hierholzer
January 26, 1999
Dear City Planning Commission,
My family resides on Mimulus Way, in the Roripaugh Hills development. It has been
brought to my attention that you plan to put a major artery through this development,
Sanderling into Campus Verde's. I strongly feel that this plan has not been well thought
out, due to the amount of children in this area, this could become a hazard with all of the
cut through traffic that will be surely using this artery to get to there destinations. We
hope that you reconsider this faulted plan.
S~ly, ;JZ/;~
"TO uahom ',Jr Crqcky C.Z.,~(Le,.. r'
C,O e_ o,,,a ,,,-, o,, horn
· ~
o..Cy
c~ clOZSI mucus
{lop men¥, L)c
~ro~%~ Oh(
h~ G busy
LOc ask +Yr~ Vou
i
+his meG~rc-
-~J'rGCere/7 /
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
TRAFFIC LETTER FOR THE PROPOSED
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. I
\\TEMEC_FS201~ATA~)EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
52
DEO-22-g8 TTJE 08:51PH NILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES FAX NO. 7149781109
WILBUR
, SMITH
ASSOCIATES
~cNGINEERS · PLANNERS
23(.E3 E, KA rE[ [.A A'77:. - S L;ITE 3 5~ · ,k,NAH Ei M. CA 02~436-6Q~.7 - { 71 ~} ~73-8110 o FAX [7 ) 4) ~78- ~ 10Q
December 22, 1998
~'v6-. Nate Pugslsy
Project
Wooclsic~ Homes of CaLifornia, inc.
30211 Banderas, SuiT~ 130
Rancho SantaMarga-ita, CA 92688
Can~pos Verdes Spedtic Plan Tipdate - City Planning Dc>partme~zt Questions Cence.ming
Consistency With The Specific Plan FIR Traffic Study FLndings
Dem- Mr. Pugsley:
In response to qUe.,stions raised by City of T~meccla Planning Department staff, Wilb~ Smith
Associates (WSA) ha~ prepared the following discussion of consistency between potential raf~c
impacts associated with the currently propc~ed Campos Verdes Specific Plaa aztd traffic impacts
addm~ed in the original Campos Verdes Specific Plan F_JK Traffic Study. The i.~sues ~dressed
herein include: a compm'a~ve mnalysis of the land use comportcab; traffic gemera~ion ~np~--ts; ~d
an ~ssessment of con~.smncy, from a potential tzaffic impact penpcctLve.
C~rview of Specific Plan EiR Traffic Impact Stud),
The Caralx~ V~rd~ Specific Plan ElX Traffic Impact Study prepare, c[ for Specific Plaa i included
air analysis of the project impacts at fult d~velopment of the site- The analysis asstimed an
approximate me-year developraem schedul~ for the Campos Vtrdes project. IXuing this
developmere period, it was conservatively assumed that an of t.h~ approved Specific Plans within
the City of Temecula and surrcuading area of influence would also build out. Additionally, the
traifc saxty assumed build ou~ of all pl.a~ned (but not yet approved) projects within an approximate
two-mile radius of the project This included sig~i~can.t planned projects sud~ as Winchcst~ Hills
(S.P. 225), Temecula Regional Center (S.P. 263), and Wm~ester Meadows. Although these off-
si~ devel~ assumptio~ a~mally relxesenZth:l a forecast year which was well beyond the nine-
year time frame (year 2000) identified in the study, it w,ti important to consider the ~t. irn.n~e
cumulative effects of these projects on traffic flows in the study area. It is clear at this time that
some of these projects will not likely be built-out for auother ten years.
· DE0-22.-98 TUE 08:52 PI1 ~ILB~R SIIITH FtSSOOIfiTES FRX NO. 7149781109 P. 03
Mr. Nate Pugsl.ey
December 2, 1998
Page 2
WILBUR'
, SM~H
ASSOCIATES
The Specific Plan ErR n'affic analysis eraployed the use of a refined version of the SWAP
con~puter-based traffic forecasting model which later was modified -and re.fined as the City of
Tene~a General Plan Circulation Element Traffic Model. The traffic forecasting model allowed
tbr a more accurate assessment of long-term cumulative development traffic impacts in the ~c'mity
of the Campos Verdes project. The traffic maalysis included an evaluation of weekday daily,. a-re.
peak-bran-, ~ p.m.' peak-hour conditions.
Land use assumptions and associated trip generation estimates for the originally approved Campos
Vexdes Specific Plan are given in the allached Tables 1 through 3. .Trip gencratic,x rates used iu
the specific plnn study were based on "typical" daily rates developed by the I~stimte of
T. ransportation Engineers for the individual land use cat~ories. Peak-hour trip ge'aeration for Re
project site was actually developed 'within tlae ~raffic forecast m~deling procedure.
Recomu,ended long-range roadway improvement needs in me vicinity of the project (which resulted
from the specific plan .bgild-out and cumnl~five area development la'.affic impact analysis) included:
(1) ~he widening of North Cyeneral Kegray Road to fttlI Secondary Kc~'way standards; (2) the
'widening of Mmgm-im :Road to full Artexial standards; (3) ~e widening of Winchester Road to full
Urban AneriaI stanchrds; and (3) the sigt~aliz.~i.'oz of lVlzrgarita Road intersections at North General
Keamy and Campos Verdes Lane.
Currently Proposed Campos P~'des Specific Plan
'TabIe 4 summmizes the currently proposed lad use for the Caml>os Vetdes Specific Plan. Build-
out of the project is npected to occm' within a five te six-year period (by 2005), Trip generation
for the currently prcl~sed Canapes Vetdes Specific Plan is based on the most current edition of the
Institute of Transixxtatiott Engineers Trip Generation. Daily and peak-hour trip generation for the
proposed project is presented in Table 5.
Consistency with the Campo8 Yerdes Specific Plan EI'R Traffic Study
The updamd traffic generation study has maintained consistency with the original Specific Plan
Traffic Study. The updated traffic generati<m study differs from the earlier stuciy m that it
DE0-22~98 TUE 06:52 PM WILBUR SMITH fiSSOCI~TES FAX NO. 7149781109 P. 04
,x.,h'.NatePugsley
December22, I998
Page3
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
incorporates new trip generation research data and reflects actual development proposals (e.g.
proposed home improvermmt~hardware superstom within the commercial center) which are known
at this time.
The most appropriate meast~ of consistenq,, from a (raffic impact perspective, ghould be based on
a comparison of traffic generation. Tables 2 and 3 pro'~de a sunm~ary of vehicle trip generazion
~r, mimtXi~ms included in the brigthai Specific Plau EIK Traffic Study. The referenced development
areas are depiccrett in Figure 1. Although the configuration of land use development areas within tb.e
Specific Plan ha~ been modified in the current de~-elopment proposal, the modifications are
relatively minor and still allow for a comparison of tr'g~c generazion impacts on a sub-area baqi.q.
Tae originaI Em Traffic Study was based o,, atctal trip generation of 16,184 da~y trips, 997 a.m.
peak-hour tr/ps, a~d 1,179 p.m. peak-horn' trips.
As shown in Table 5, trip generation for the currently proposed Campos Vetdes Specific Plan falls
within the daily and p. m. peak l'tour trip generation totals included in the csriginal Specific Plan :ElK
Traffic Study. Daily vehicle trip generation is est/mated at 12,070 vehicle trips and evening peak-
hour trip generation is estimated to be 1,I23 vehicle trips. Dur/.ug the morning peak hour, the
currently proposed Specific Plan is e.stimated to generate a total cf 1,06Tvehide lrips. This is 70
vehicle trips greater than was estimated iu the ca'iginal Specific Plan EIR Traffic SLudy. It should
be rioted that the currently protx:nsed middle school in Ar~a 6, with a typical enrollment of 1
students, results in a substantially kighcr morning peak hour trip generation thaa was estimated for
the residential use a..m~.tmed in the original traffic study and has a higher trip generatim than the
elementary school included in the apprcared Specific Plan. Although the total morning peak hour
trip generation is sligh.~y higher for the current project, the trip generation estimate should be
considered as caservative since no trip redmi~ has been assumed for internal trip making or pass-
by ~ips associated with sctxool traffic.
In tern'is of the recommended access configuration, the updated Specific Pla~ is generally consistent
with the original Spedtic Plan EIR. Minor differences can be noted in terms of the assumed on-site
circulation layout however internal accessibility has been maintained. This is imperror to the
elimination of mmecessary traffic circaon on ti~e adjacent street system when. travelling between
land use areas within the Specific Plan site.
DE0-22-98 I'UE 08':53 PH WILBUR Sllll'H ~)SSOCIfiTES FfiX NO. 7149781109 P. 05
Mr. Nate Pugsley
December ~, 1998
P=ge 4
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
Most of the recommended roadway ~mpmvemeats in the vicinity of the site are either completed cr
are currend)' under construction, A new signal will be installcd at the intersection of Margar/ta
Road and North General Keamy by the .fourth quamr of t999, when the Promenade Mall ope~3s.
A new signal on Margarita ~ Campos Vetdes Lane would be timed to correspond to eider the
development of the Power Center component of the Regionat C~ter property (on the west side of
Margarita Rc~) or the Campos Vcrdes coii~z~ercial c~tear site (on ,he east side of /Vfm-garita Road).
The widening of Nott General Kearny Road would likely be accomplished in two phases. Fint
the intersection approach would be widened to coincide with the openine of the Promenade Mall
ar~ tia~ the remahde~ of the North General Kearay (along the project frontage) would be widened
as the Campos Verdes project is dgveloped.
Based on WSA's asse~rnent, waffle ia~at,-ts associated with the curren~y proposed Camp0s Vet'des
Specific Plan site is consistent with the origin-.~ Specific Plan EIR Traffic Study.
Should you or City of Iemecula Planning Depaxtment staff have auy questions concerning this
evaluation, please feel flee to contact me.
Sincerely,
wn,ntra S .m/TtI SSOCIA'rES
Robert A. Davis
Principal Transportation PLamxer
R.~x~D: tad
Enclosure
, DE0-22-98 TUE 06:53 P~ ~ILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES FAX NO, 714978]109 P. 06
Table 1
':Assumed Land Use
Campas Verdes
A. BY PIJtNNING AREA
Developmeant Tentativ~ Gross
Plaxming Tract No. Acres
Area ~
25213
Area 1 Pace/8 & 9 13.5
Unit
Area 2 Parcel ? i0.4 93 Net Ac
Land
Commercial Office
Area 3 .Parcel 4?5 & 6 222 377 D.U.'s* , Multi Farofly Residential
· Area 4 Pacd t 13.5
Area 5 ;Parcel 2 & 3 15.7
Area 6 25214 27.1
10 Net Ac
267 D.U.'s
141 D.U.'s
Neighborhood Rcta~ Center
Multi Family Residential
Single Family Residential
* D.U. - I:~elrmg Unl
D.U .'s
Single Family Residential
B. BY LAND USE CATEGORY
Land Use Size
Single Family Residerail
Multi Family Residential
Neighborhood Retail Center
.Commer¢iaI Office
2O6
644
13.5
10.4
Unit
D.U.'s
Ac.
Ae.
--~C-22-98 TUE ~6:53 P~ WILBUR S~ITH ~S3OCIgES FSX NO. 71~9781109 P. 07
Table 2
Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
Campos Vetdes
'LAND USE
LOCATION OF
LAND USE
Pla~nlng Arms 6 & 7
Planning Areas 3 & 5
Plaxming Area 4
Planning Ar~a 2
DE0-22798 TUE 06:54 Pff WIi_HUR SMITH RSSOCIRTES F~ NO, 7149781109
P, 09
,DEC-22:98 TUE 08:54 PH ~[LBUR S~ITH RSS"(3CIRTES FAX NO. 7149781109 P. IO
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APPROVING THE
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN ON SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATAQEPTS~LANNING\STAFFRPTLt23pa98pc..doc
53
City Council Minutes November 23. 1993
Director of Public Works Tim Serlet presented the staff report, outlining the three
alternatives proposed.
Bernie Thomas, 31525 Ave. Del Reposo, representing the Meadowview Community
Association Board of Directors, asked that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1.
Dr. Brock Kilbourne, 29821 Valle Olvera Street, addressed the City Council in
opposition to all three alternatives and requested that an Environmental Impact Report
be conducted prior to a vote being taken.
City Attorney Field advised this is an approved, recorded tract map and Alternative No.
3 has already gone through CEQA.
Kevin McKenzie, 40550 La Colima, addressed the Council in favor of Alternative No.
1, and listed his major concern regarding cut-through traffic.
Bob Ford, 29715 Valle Verde, addressed the Council in support of Alternative No. 1,
stating he would not be in support of any road that could connect Nicolas Road into
Meadowview in the future. He said Meadowview with its rural atmosphere of no street
lights and sidewalks, could not support the additional traffic this would generate.
Councilmember Parks stated he understands the request of the community to choose
Alternate No. 1, however he has a problem regarding safety with that alternative. He
explained he is in favor of Alternative No. 2 since it achieves the desires of the
community to block cut-through traffic, however it will provide internal circulation in
Meadowview and will limit the length of the cul-de-sac making it less of a fire hazard.
Councilmember Stone stated he would support Alternate No. 2 because it addresses
the concerns of the residents and also provides better access for emergency vehicles.
Kevin McKenzie, 40550 La Colima, stated he does not feel that Alternate No. 2 offers
any further safety benefits.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to direct
staff to proceed with Alternative No. 2 with modified conditions of approval to include
fire gates on North General Kearney Road Northeasterly of Calle Olvera.
The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 2
NOES: 1
ABSENT: 1
Minutes\l 12393
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
-9-
Parks, Stone
Mu~oz
Birdsall
11 ~03~95
24.
SI;>ecific Plan No. I (Cam Dos Verdes). Fnvironmental Iml)act Rel;)ort 348. Rnd Change of
7one No. 5617
City Attorney Peter Thorson explained that three members of the Council have a conflict
of interest; Councilmember MuRoz because of his work with Kemper, Mayor Roberts,
based on his residence in Meadowview and Councilmember Birdsall because she also
resides in Meadowview. Mr. Thorson explained that the "Rule of Necessity" applies in
this case and lots would be drawn to determine who would vote on this issue.
City Clerk June Greek distributed lots, two of which had the word "no" printed on it and
one which had the word "yes". Councilmember Birdsall received the paper with the
"yes" on it. City Attorney Thorson declared Councilmember Mui~oz and Mayor Roberrs
Minutes\9\13\94
-10-
11/07/96
Citv Council Minutes September 13.1994
disqualified and Councilmember Birdsall requalified. He advised that Councilmember
Birdsall should not participate in discussion, but only vote on the issue.
Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report and stated that the
Meadowview Homeowners Association supports this project.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing at 9:50 PM.
Ed Mowles, 27595 Dandelion Court, spoke in opposition to the connecting of both
Starling or Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hils.
Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, spoke in favor of the project, stating he feels
it will be of benefit to the community.
Councilmember Parks asked if a traffic analysis was done on the connecting roads.
Principal Engineer Ray Casey answered the issue is one of access rather than volume.
Jim Gremanis, 40212 Starling Street, spoke in opposition of connecting Starling and
Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hills.
Dave Gallagher, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, requested the
Council delay approval of t~is specific plan until a satisfactory mitigation plan between
the applicant and the school district is reached.
Councilmember Parks stated that the conditions of approval of the tentative map allow
this condition to be placed.
Eric Doring, Attorney for the Temecula Valley Unified School District, stated that
contradictory conditions exist and requested that time be given over the next two weeks
to address these concerns.
City Attorney Thorson stated that the Conditions of Approval clearly state there will not
be any development until a mitigation agreement is reached.
Donna Vedra, 40257 Mimulus Way, spoke in opposition of opening Starling Street and
Sanderling Way.
Aletha Herron, 27479 Senna Court, spoke in opposition to the opening of Starling Street
and Sanderling Way.
Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, stated it is a difficult decision regarding the
streets and he does not have a preference one way or the other. He said the City
Attorney has adequately addressed the school issue and stated Kemper has worked with
the school district and will continue to do so.
RFCFSS
Minutes\9\13~94 -11 - 11/07/96
City Council Minutes September 13.1994
Mayor Pro Tem Stone called a recess at 10:35 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 10:36 PM.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested placing a fire gate at Sanderling and eliminating
connecting Starling into Roripaugh.
Councilmember Parks stated he would support closing the interconnect at Starling with
a fire gate and allowing for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, but would prefer to open
Sanderling Way.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation on 24.1 as follows.
24.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-93
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ADOPTING FINDINGS
OF FACT AND STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND
APPROVING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND THE ADDENDA TO
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ON PROPERTY LOCATED
SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.2 as follows:
24.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-26
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING
LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. I (CAMPOS
VERDES| LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA
ROAD
Minutes\9\13\94 -12- 11/07/96
City Council Minutes Seotember 13.1994
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.3 as follows:
24.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-27
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MA OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5617
CHANGING THE ZONING FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY
AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) TO SP {SPECIFIC PLAN) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.4, and approve an amendment to the Specific Plan to close
the interconnect at Starling with a fire gate and to allow for pedestrian and bicycle
traffic, and to open the connection at Sanderling Way.
24.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. I (CAMPOS VERDES) PROPOSING 308 SINGLE
Minutes%9%13%94 -13- 11/07/96
Citv Council Minutes September 13.1994
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 19.8 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL\OFFICE\CHURCH
USES, A 5.8 ACRE DETENTION BASIN, A 10.8 ACRE PARK, A 10.7 ACRE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND 13.0 ACRES OF ON-SITE ROADWAYS, LOCATED
SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 2
NOES: 1
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 2
COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks
COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DE PTS~DLAN N ING~STAFF R PTL323pa98pc..doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
./
II
PROJECT
SITE
./',
/ ',,L,
../
CASE NO. - PA99-0016
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - FEBRUARY 3, 1999
VICINITY MAP
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~)ATA~DEPTS~DLANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
55
CITY OF TEMECULA
M
M
V
CASE NO. - PA99-0016
EXHIBIT- B
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - FEBRUARY 3, 1999
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~:)ATA~:)EPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~323pa98pc..doc
56
GENERAL PLAN MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
SP
CASE NO. - PA99-0016
EXHIBIT- C
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- FEBRUARY 3, 1999
ZONING MAP
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA\DEPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPTL323pa98pc..doc
57
CITY OF TEMECULA
; NC . ' [M
\.
r--"'t F'
BP
-,,,J
VL
L
\ P ·
CASE NO. - PA99-0016
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - FEBRUARY 3, 1999
PROPOSED LAND USE MAP ZONING
R :\STA F F R PT~323pag8pc.. doc
58
EXHIBIT 4
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
(dated February 3, 1999)
R: \STAFFRPT\ 15pa99CC -2. doc
10
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 3, 1999 .
DRAFT
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on
Wednesday, February 3, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Chairwoman Slaven.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Guerriero, Naggar, Soltysiak, Webster, and
Chairwoman Slaven.
Absent: None.
Also Present:
Deputy City Manager Thornhill,
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Senior Engineer Alegria,
Attorney Curley,
Mayor Ford,
Senior Planner Fagan,
Associate Planner Donahoe,
Assistant Planner Anders, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of A.qenda
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
2. Approval of Minutes - January 6, 1999
It was noted that page 5, paragraph 5 should reflect the addition of the word visual, in order to
indicate negative visual impact.
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Soltysiak and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Mayor Ford presented Chairwoman Slaven with a plaque; and expressed gratefulness (on
behalf of the City) for five years of dedicated service, and sorrow to see her leave, relaying his
love for her as a good friend.
Chairwoman Slaven's fiance presented her with roses.
Chairwoman Slaven thanked the staff and the City; relayed her personal history, with regard to
Temecula, having moved to the City in 1977; noted her enjoyment with the relaxed pace of life;
relayed that her interest in planning commissions began in Huntington Beach, where she
contested for maintaining the community assets she valued most, open spaces and trees. Ms.
Slaven noted that Temecula has provided a good life for her family in a safe atmosphere;
relayed that the City can pride itself in the quality of life that the staff has worked diligently to
ensure. Ms. Slaven advised that her involvement with the Temecula Planning Commission
came as a result of a desire to input her time and effort into the City she loved.
In conclusion, Ms. Slaven expressed her prayer for the City as the desire for the public to
participate in their City government, contributing their best, and, thereby, affecting their
children's lives, and their children's children. Ms. Slaven thanked the City for the opportunity to
serve them, and for the rich blessing this opportunity gave her life.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Planning Al~131ication No. PA98-0504 {Develol3ment Plan)
Request to construct and operate an 87,962 square foot, multi-screen motion
picture complex
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission
approve the request.
By way of overheads and color renderings, Associate Planner Donahoe presented the staff
report (per agenda material); reviewed the site plan, signage, landscaping, and architecture,
relaying that staff considers the proposed building design to be exciting and entertaining; and
noted that the proposed building will be 7,962 square feet larger than the originally approved
site plan.
The applicant's representative specified, for Commissioner Webster, the location of the bicycle
racks, relaying that the applicant was willing to add an additional bicycle rack if the Commission
desired.
Chairwoman Slaven closed the public hearing at this time.
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-03 approving Planning
Application No. PA98-0504 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the Conditions of Approval.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0504.
DEVELOPMENT - THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF AN
87,962 SQUARE FOOT MULTI-SCREEN MOTION PICTURE
COMPLEX LOCATED AT 40750 WINCHESTER ROAD, WITHIN THE
PROMENDADE MALL AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER AND YNEZ ROADS
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
Planning ADDlication No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510), Planning
Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment to Caml~os Verdes SI3ecific Plan) and
Planning Al~l~lication No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment)
Request for a tentative Tract Map for 242 single family residential lots, a park site
and one commercial lot totaling approximately 71.1 acres within the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan. An amendment to the existing Campos Verdes Specific
Plan which primarily consists of increasing the school site from 10 acres to 20
acres, resulting in a reduction of 81 residential parcels and a reduction to the park
site in Planning Area 1. Additionally, a portion of the residentially and park zoned
property is being changed to a commercial zoning classification. An amendment
to the General Plan Land Use Map for consistency with the land use changes of
the Campos Verdes Specific Plan amendment.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission
approye the request.
Assistant Planner Anders reviewed the staff report (of record), specifying the criteria
necessitating the amended Specific Plan as the direct result of the school site doubling in size
(from a 10-acre elementary school to a 20-acre middle school); clarified that the City initiated
the request for the amendment; noted that an exhibit presented referenced a 19-foot retaining
wall, relaying that staff does not approve of the 19-foot wall and, therefore, has added an
additional Condition of Approval; advised that Condition No. 1, regarding Development Fees, is
not applicable due to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and, therefore, will be deleted;
with regard to community concern, specified that staff has met with several members of the
community, specifically, the Roripaugh Hills Homeowners' president, clarifying that the road
issue (open/closure of Starling Street and Sanderling Way) was not a part of this proposed
amendment to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment, relaying that this issue was
previously reviewed by the City Council prior to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan; for
Chairwoman Slaven, clarified that the school site revision was based on a request by the
School District due to the needs of the community; and, for Commissioner Naggar, noted that
with regard to the open space area north of Sanderling Way, that the demarcation is a
proposed trail to tie into the southern trail which would be accessed from North General Kearny
Road, additionally, clarifying access from the Roripaugh area.
Mr. Barry Burnell, representing the applicant, relayed support of staffs recommendation and
conditions; with regard to the road issue (which is not an issue for consideration for the current
proposal) relayed that the applicant was willing to have the streets open or closed, abiding by
the City Council's recommendation, with the condition that the applicant is not required to re-
design the site plan. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Burnell advised that the environmental
issue has been mitigated, relaying that the supporting report would be provided to staff for the
record. With regard to Commissioner Soltysiak's comments, Mr. Burnell relayed that filling in
the retaining wall area, eliminating the alleyway between the existing ground, and the area to be
developed, would be agreeable to the applicant, clarifying, however, that this proposal would be
dependent upon the concurrence of the adjacent neighbors; and advised that the proposed site
plan provides for the provision of adequate drainage.
Attorney Curley clarified that the issue presented is a defined application, specifying, as follows:
it was prepared, publicly noticed, subjected to the variety of planning reviews (of record), .the
environmental review, and adherence to all the City codes. Ergo, the issue has been analyzed,
noticed, and subjected to the strict criteria noted. Mr. Curley specified that the proposal
presented is not the street open/closure issue, and since that is not part of the analyzed
proposal, it is not within the Commission's jurisdiction to take action on the road issue.
In response to Chairwoman Slaven's inquiry, Mr. Curley clarified appropriate alternate avenues
for public members that could facilitate the reconsideration of the road issue (i.e., appearance
at the City Council meeting, requesting the Council to direct the City staff to undertake a City-
initiated evaluation of the Specific Plan), specifying the avenue that could put in motion the task
of revisiting analysis of the aforementioned issue under the current standards and conditions.
Planning Manager Ubnoske further clarified that the amendment before the Commission does
not address the road issues.
Chairwoman Slaven reiterated that the Commission is reviewing the proposed amendment
exclusive of the road issue, relaying that it was not within the Commission's jurisdiction to make
a decision based on that issue.
Mr. Doug, Woeke, 27513 Jimison Circle, noted his approval of the project, relaying that that
encompassed his approval of the opening of Sanderling Way for the provision of access after
mall opening and the provision of effective overall circulation, with the condition of additional
traffic control.
The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project as currently proposed:
David Crook
David and Laura Barron
Kathryn and Michael Budd
Joanne Carlson
Mark Jones
40237 Mimulus Way
40223 Mimulus Way
27598 Sanderling Way
27510 Lark Court
29379 Rancho Calfornia Road
Patricia Hall
Oscar Murdock
Ray Tuider
27483 Lark Court
27495 Lark Court
27420 Bolandra Court
The above-mentioned individuals spoke in opposition to the project for the following reasons:
the reduced park site
the impediment upon view lots
the retaining wall
the drainage issue
the location of the small lots
Although Attorney Curley clarified that the road issue was not part of this particular project, the
aforementioned individuals noted their primary concern as the open/closure issue of Sanderling
Way and Starling Road, specified, as follows:
challenged the General Plan amendment, citing policies referencing
consideration of the surrounding community when considering traffic updates
a desire for provision of data clarifying the rationale of Sanderling Way going
through
requested a revisiting of the current population status with regard to the General
Plan
requested that additional traffic studies be implemented in the area of discussion
noted specific opposition to the opening of Sanderling Way or Starling Road
without the additional opening of alternate streets, facilitating a condition of
heavy traffic impact due to the utilizaton of one sole street
In response to Ms. Hall's comments, Commissioner Guerriero relayed that the population
portion of the General Plan was going to be further addressed at a future Commission meeting.
Chairwoman Slaven read into the record a letter from Mr, and Mrs. Tatantino expressing
opposition to the opening of Sanderling Way (per submitted material.)
A voting roster was submitted for the record, reflecting 163 votes in opposition to the opening of
the aforementioned streets, and none in favor.
Mr. Burnell specified the proposed reduction of dwelling units on the current project; noted that
Sanderling Way could be blockaded without design modifications; relayed that the Campos
Verdes project would not affect the existing trails; clarified the lot sizes and specific locations;
and specified the existing drainage condition, and the proposed drainage design.
Chairwoman Slaven advised, for Commissioner Naggar, that per Attorney Curley's advisement
the road issue was not a consideration for the Planning Commission regarding this particular
project proposal.
Chairwoman Slaven closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Naggar and Soltysiak, applauded the
developer's proposed reduction in density; recommended that the road issue be further
addressed, specifically with regard to Fire Department and Police Department access; relayed
that the additional 240 cars this project would generate could be mitigated through the addition
of stop signs, chokers, and the relocation of bus stops; and advised that if the City honored
every request to blockade streets it would render a condition of insufficient traffic circulation.
Commissioner Naggar clarified that the City has no control over State Highway 79, noting that
the signaling and timing of the signals are controlled by Caltrans; noted that various large
parcels in Temecula are under entitlement by development agreements made by the County,
and, therefore, granting those particular parcels certain provisions prior to the incorporation of
Temecula as a City; advised that with regard to those particular parcels, the most beneficial
asset to the City is the reduction in density, as this project proposed; assured the community
that per phone conversations with the School District, the buses did not intend to use this area
as a shortcut for bus transportation to access the school barn, relaying that the school
anticipated the addition of two buses in the morning and afternoon due to the site increase; with
regard to the retaining wall area, advised that the developer's proposal to backfill that area
would provide the homeowners with additional space.
Commissioner Soltysiak noted that the evidence was clear when the Roripaugh tract was
completed that the streets of issue were proposed to continue on, advising that this information
was provided for the original homeowners; relayed that since pertinent information regarding
the criteria for staffs rationale for the connection on Sanderling Way wasn't provided, no
advisement could be relayed; remarked with regard to the retaining wall area, concurrence with
Commissioner Naggar, specifically, that the developer's proposal to fill in the area appeared to
be a benefit to the landowners; and reiterated that the proposal before the Commission was
due to the School District's request to increase the site of the school.
With regard to the issues of concern raised by the public, noted as follows: the retaining wall,
the lot size location, the easements on the Roripaugh property, Commissioner Webster relayed
that the applicant has adequately addressed the aforementioned matters; with respect to the
existing traffic problem, advised further addressing those concerns to the Traffic Commission;
with regard to the opening of North General Kearny Road, noted that the Planning Commission
will be reviewing revisions to the Circulation Update within the next month or so, recommending
that the public utilize that meeting as a forum for discussion, reflective of the North General
Kearny Road comments.
Chairwoman Slaven balanced the concerns of the community with the developer's proposals,
recommending that more effort be exerted to communicate with the community; with regard to
the traffic issues, relayed that the potential for circulation revision in any community exists in
order to implement overall improvement of traffic circulation; noted her disapproval of
blockading any street due to the impact on the rest of the community; relayed that further
investigation measures are needed with regard to the closing of North General Kearny; and
advised that the developer be specific with proposals concerning the retaining wall, obtaining
more input from the adjacent neighbors.
Assistant Planner Anders reiterated that staff and the developer have had numerous
discussions with members of the public; and noted that staff has added an additional condition
to ensure the adequacy of the retaining wall provision.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to adopt the Environmental Addendum No. 4 to the
previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 348) adopted for the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan; and adopt Resolution No 99-04 recommending approval of Planning Application
No. PA99-0016 (General Plan Amendment); Planning Application No. PA99-0015 (Amendment
No. 1 to Campos Verdes Specific Plan including Addendum No. 4 to the previously certified EIR
No. 348) and Planning Application No. PA98-0323 (Tentative Tract Map 28510) based upon the
Analysis and the Findings contained in the Staff Report subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval:
RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A RESOLUTION
ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060,
921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061
(PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0016)"AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN (NO. 1)
NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND NORTH
GENERAL KEARNY ROAD (SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD) AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059, 910-130-060,
921-090-052, 921-090-058, 921-090-059, 921-090-060 AND 921-090-061)
PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0015)"
Add
an additional Condition with language relaying that all retaining walls shall
be 6' in height, unless reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager.
If a wall higher than 6' is approved, it shall be screened with landscaping
in order to maintain the appearance of no greater than 6' in height, and,
thereby, reduce the visual impact.
Delete
Condition No. 1 (regarding Development Fees)
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval with the excel:>tion of Chairwoman Slaven who voted n._9.
At 8:02 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 8:27 P.M.
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Planning Manager Ubnoske informed the Commission of the Director's Review
Committee (DRC) hearing held on Thursday mornings from 10:00 A.M. to noon, inviting them to
attend.
B. Ms. Ubnoske commented what a pleasure it had been to work with Chairwoman Slaven;
and relayed best wishes for her future.
C. Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted Chairwoman Slaven's role with the City; specified
her great assets of style and diplomacy; and relayed how much the City would miss her.
D. Commissioner Naggar expressed gratitude for Chairwoman Slaven's work on the
Commission, relaying that he regarded her as a mentor.
E. Ms. Slaven relayed her future plans in Iowa; noted her high regard for her fellow
Commissioners and the planning staff; and thanked the devoted public members, Mr. and Mrs.
Elton Ward, and Mr. Wayne Hall for their consistent attendance at the hearings.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
A. Commissioner Guerriero recommended that Senior Traffic Engineer Moghadam
investigate the site distance problem at the intersection of Dandelion Court and Roripaugh
Road, advising that the condition may warrant a three- or four-way stop.
B. For Commissioner Webster, Senior Planner Fagan clarified the DRC hearing item,
regarding the Van Daele Development.
C. Commissioner Webster relayed his interest in attending the April 29 - May 2 conference
in San Diego.
D. Commissioner Naggar recommended the development of an annual report in order for
the Commission to review the years accomplishments.
E. In response to Commissioner Naggar, Deputy City Manager Thornhill relayed that the
City could provide the Commissioners with business cards inclusive of personal phone numbers
in order to facilitate communication between the Commissioners.
F. Commissioner Naggar queried the status of the crosswalk at Moraga and Margarita
Roads.
G. For Chairwoman Slaven, Deputy City Manager Thornhill clarified the specifications of
the road-widening project at Ynez Road.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:52 P.M. Chairwoman Slaven formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday, February 17,
1999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Marcia Slaven, Chairwoman
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
EXHIBIT 5
Referendum Ballots
R:\STAFFRPT\I5pa99CC-2.doc
11
R.H.O.A. Board of Directors
September 8, 1993
Dear Roripaugh Hills Homeowner,
On the back of this letter is a homeowner referendum ballot. Please vote as
to your preference for allowing through-streets to be opened in the future
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh Hills.
Your response will be tabulated along with other returned ballots to
determine a majority (majority of returned ballots) position for formal
presentation to the Temecula City Council and Planning Department.
Also enclosed, please find two maps depicting alternative Campos Verdes
development proposals. One proposal shows the original plan which
included high-density land use abutting Roripaugh Hills; while the other map
shows an alternative which was developed at our request to provide lower
density land use against our boundaries. We have the assurance of the
Plan. ning Dept. and City Council that the latter, lower density alternative will
be pursued.
Your referendum decision should be based on information mailed to all
homeowners in a newsletter dated 6/28/93, and information provided in an
open forum meeting which was hosted by the Board on 7/15193 at the
Rancho Water District meeting room. Please make an effort to fill out the
ballot and return it promptly to:
Roripaugh Hills Owners Association
C/O Avalon Management Group
31532 Railroad Canyon Road, Suite 110
Canyon Lake, CA 92587
It is important that we present the city with our formal position quickly so
that our wishes can be integrated with the Campos Verdes development
plans at an early stage. Thank you.
The Board of Directors
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
· Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
~tOwo communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
ESanderlingWay
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address , .,
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Oppused to the opening of any street to through-traffic oetween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to ~ safety considerations:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~ S EP i ? 1993
Address
2Z,¢75" BCDL, kJ P RA' C__T
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic Detween tl~e
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the 'front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address :~ '
0wRer
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way ~t~r m~O~vrv, b~cN~n'V.
E3 Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Have no preference
13etween the
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration-~:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic bel~ween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
[:)wn r
Address 2, ~ ,5' ~a/'' ,/"~.,o~:'r~'Z,~2,,' Z'7~'
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
E3 /Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
[::)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
~'/~twoosed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations.:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations.:
Starling St.
DSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on ciW officials, they have stated t 'r
intent to pursue our wishes on this ma~er. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
r ss
!993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
ES
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not ity officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
699'
Owner
Address
~SEP '5:9 Ig93' ~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
3 ~'' Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the epening of any s~ree~ to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
GZ) Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
~)w~er
e~/~ca 1'~ n~ ?~ C,~. 1~ ,',~ i~
Address
~5~/
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
bwner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
'If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Q Sanderling Way V~O ~ ~ ' ~Yl
promptly to the address shown on the'front of this ballot.
~)wner
Address
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the Jpening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
F"~' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
/
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Dwner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
'3 Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations.:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot,
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Ad ress
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Q
E3
m
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
,Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
,. two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to ~ & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
D
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Q
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot. ~
Signed: ' _ / , -3 ,,.,. ~ ~' /' ," y
A: i:tress ' '
Addre~s~~ .
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
"'3 Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~:)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
~3 Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
dress
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address /
~wner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to ihe opening of any street to througn-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address ' '
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
D
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to througn-trattic between tl~e
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
o g of any street m ~nrougn-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot,
Signed:
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[~ Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
to the address shown on the of this ballot.
promptly the adreds ssh~/j~.~(~
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed 'io the opening of any street to througi~-traffic between the
two communities
E' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
J~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot,
Signed:
Owner
':':!'i <;r:-p, >: u 'i'~*:,j3 ,Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to The opening of any street To through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter, Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Address . ~'~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
m
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
. Starling St. --
D Sanderling Way crv,U'
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
wner
Addre s
Address
!"~ ~'EP" d 1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E] Starling St. ~
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
res '~ '
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed ro the opening of any street to through-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E3
E3
Starling St.
ng Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
ner
Owner
I
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
D
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
S E P f! ',3 t.'.Sg3 j~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to 'l:he opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration,s:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
i~L SEP :C 8 !'~93
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
0
0
0
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Addres~
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E2
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
Campos Verdes development and Rorip_ h
between the proposed
Hills
Q Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way ~ ~? % .~-'
Q Starling St. only
Q Sanderling Way only ..... ,,,.,"""'
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
F"i Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
~)wner
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
D
In favor of having one or more streets opened to throuc~i~-.tFaffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes develo ment'g'nd Rorip ugh
Hills ~,.,,o,~., ~
i'~, · , ~'
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way '~-;~ ~. ' .~.
Q Starling St. only ................
D Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
I""'1 Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner ~ ~' "'
;y,./,-/o Y-4
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to d,e up~nir~g of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot·
Signed' b/7 ~'(.X t/10 'r/~ rk?~ ~ ~'(~ "
· ~)wner { Y
Owner ~"
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
D
Opposed to The opening of any street to througi~-traffic Detween me
two communities
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Q Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
I"1 Starling St. only
~tOwpo¢ Sanderling Way only
"' Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:'
EStarlingSt.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
73/
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E]
m
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
I"'} Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
/
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
,,_ ~ ~-'~l~-O0t
While refde~d&rn~is binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
'3 In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
E3 Sanderling Way only
OL~tOw posed to The opening of any sxree~ to througmtraffic Detween the
o communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[~/'Starling St,
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address c,,_~
O r
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Starling St. only
~ Sanderling Way only
Opposed to tl ,~ upening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E:23 Starling St.
~ Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one
,~_.~..~ere
due to fire & safety considerations:
"~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Opposed to the opening of any street to ticrough-traffic between tl~e
two communities
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Q Q
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the 'front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to tile opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerationS:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter, Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
DIn favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
QBoth Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
' Opposed to the opening of any street to tl~rougl~-traffic between the
~communities
D' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerationS:
Starling St.
D D
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to ii,~ opening u[ any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
E' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sandedin
D ~Way
0a - ut I I ¢oT r
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter, Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
.~Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Q Q
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Lress
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
.,'-~. ~.~ ,' .: . -
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any s[reet to through-traffic between ti~e
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire safety considerations:
[StarlingSt.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
~O_w~.!~er
..., .,..
-,Address
·' . 'Z, :, ~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
/1~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposea to the opening of any street to tnrougl~-trafhc between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations.:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
Owner
Address
. ~:.~,~,,
.,r.:..~':,;,.' :! ::_:~.,,',,'
,,._
._~._
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~3wner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
F3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to ti~rougn-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to purs ur wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to th ress shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed: ~,e,R (ofJf~f,l/.
Address
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to L operfi,'~g o'~ any street to Through-traffic between tl~e
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~J~ Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~bwner
Address
7
Owner
A2dress
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed: ~~~2/
wner
Address
c4
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed To the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the 'front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
.,~.~SEP I 6 i993
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St. ~
Q Sanderling Way ~/~
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Qpposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
~-_,j,~
S E P i 6 1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E]
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed r.o th~ opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot -
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address ' ' ' ' ' / ....
Owner
S E P I G i993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
· 9
Address
Own'er
d
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration-~:
Q Starling St.
~ Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owne~ '
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E3 Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Address
Owner
· '~~'~.,' ddress
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
D
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
""Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
D
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
JSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
OwRer
Address
'7-cx e c u/a_, -
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
J~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed: /~/~
~wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
wn~rerq~
Address
~t>o }c~c~ co, O T.
/
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
S E P g ~:, lgg3
Opposed iu the opening of any street to tryrough-traffic between
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to~ safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E]
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
~ Starling St. only ~ ~ ...... : .....
~ Sanderling Way only
Opposed tu the opening of any street to mrough-trafhc between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
:n co ,-a
While this referendum is not binding on ciW officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this ma~er. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
' oo%ro 'Tom
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to tl~rougn-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
E~/Starling St. ~. E P 2 ' I~g3 ~
Q Q
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
C-77
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Starling St. only ~ S EP 2 3 tg~j3 ~
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E;Z] Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
982~3 CAIvtlI~,IITO CALOR
SAN DIEGO, CA, 9~
Address ' '
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed To the opening of any street to through-traffic between tl~e
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration,~:
Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
SE <
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~. Starling St.
z D ' Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed: ~ ,t,~-~- ,; ,, - ....
~:)wner
Addr ,ss ' ';
wner,~
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
~ S EP ~': i 1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
EZ3' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street "co through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
~ S EP ~! L !993 ~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
//~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
[:)wner
Address
I
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
"'1 Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
I~ Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening uf ar, y street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E~/ Starling St.
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
in favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
"l' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration,~:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
0
0
0
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street t~ through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
O Starling St.
~ Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
/90
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
t ()pposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
wo communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
L~-~tarling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed: ,d,l~4j c,
~::}wner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street Lu [i~rough-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
4
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opemng of any street to tarough-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandate .d
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to tl~rough-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
(Jwner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to th~ opening o'[ any street to through-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one-street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city offic'iais, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Q
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
, Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot,
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerationS:
m m
Starling St.
O Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Q
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Q Starling St.
/~ Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
~~ In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
,
,Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
' Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
~tEwo communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & fety considerations: ~Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~ S E P i 7 Ig93 ~
T:)wner
Address
owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St. //~ · r)
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Owne'~t ~t/,~,f. J
AA ddI
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street ~o Lhrough-traf[ic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address ·
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E~ Starling St.
F"l Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed m the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration,~:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
~)wner
Address
'~ SEP Z '7 !gg3'~""',~
dress
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
'[~t)pposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
wo 'commUnities '
Q' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration~
[~Starling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
MII~ & Jurte
40207 Valerzcmz Court
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to througn-tra~ic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerationS:
E3 Starling St.
,~ Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening 'of any s~reet to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Address
.ii Sop 1 ~ lggL~ :,
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
j~Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic laetween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations.:
[~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot,
Signed:
Owner
Address
-- SEP ! ? 19"g3
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
~:~ E ~ ::_ '~ 1993:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
D In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
D
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~ S EP ]. 3 1993
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to tnrougl~-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
~ S E" 1, 5~993 ~
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
OpposeG to '[h~ upening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
["~' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
E3
E3
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
T::)wner
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[~ Starling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
~ S EP Z 6 1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address "' ' ,~
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & few considerations: ~arling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Address
~5EP i S 1993 jUj
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
O/~ner \' '
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed To The opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the' front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Oppus~d to tile upening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address /
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration.~:
Starling St.
Q Q
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address?, :
/X' //'' ~ '? "
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In' favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
z~Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
, C ·
Address
c~ ,,./ .,:
Owner
Address
.' ~ ,~ -~,-~ ~,,~,~ ........
~ /
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to The opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
J~ Starling St.
DSanderling Way
While this referendum is not ing on city officials, they have stated their
Signed:
Address ' .. ''
. . /
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Oppos~d tu d-,~ opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration.s:
Starling St.
D D
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
dress
Owner
Address
~ ::.EP ~! ]. 1993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
~ipposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
wo communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & s fety considerations; ~:rling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the 'front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
[~3 Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address f
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
T q. /
I
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to ti~rougn-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration-~:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Dwner
27406 Senna Ct., Temecula,
Address
Owner ~
27406 Senna Ct,, Temecu'la,
Address
CA 92591
CA 92591
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
E3
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Owner
..............
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any s~reet To through-traffic between the
two communities
F"~' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
J~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between me
wo communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the'front of this ballot.
Signed:
~wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
· Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
ommunities
EZ3Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & afety considerations: ~Starling St.
Q Q
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
D Sanderling Way only
'
-.' E)pposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
ave no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q . Starling St.
anderling Way
WhZthis referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
ress ~'~ '/'/
~ :-EP i ? f993
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
~ Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot,
Signed:
__ .~j;l,dress /
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to thrc:~Gh-traffic bet,.~:een the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations;
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the'front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerationS:
'~:3/Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St. I1{
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Oppesed to the opening of any s~ree~ to through-traffic between the
two communities
["~' Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire/& safety considerations:
E~ Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way /~;'~: "="~Lb ~-;~i/2]
Starling St. only ~ ~"~P ~ 7 ic~3
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Q Starling St.
Q Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not bindin~i on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown o~fr f this ballot.
Signed: ,'
~wner '
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills ,.~~,
~ Starling St. only
Q Sanderling Way only
Opposed tu il ~ opening of any street to through-Traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
)
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety consideration,~:
, Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Dwner
Address
/f" ,! 1
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
~communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
[g'tarling St,
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter, Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
Opposed to the opening of any st to through-traffic
two communities
Have no preference
between the
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:.
intent to pursue our wishes on this ma~er. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
J 7 f" olflPRd..r-,.bt
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of ~y street to through-traffic Detween the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
~ Starling St.
QSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
ct 5?f
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~)wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
[:]wner
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
F3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to me opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fir & fety considerations:
.'~, Starling St.
~,~ Q Sanderling Way
endure is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
/L} O
[::)wner
,2. 7 c/71} ""'~~, j r% ~-'
Address, ' '
O~/ner --
j7//'7':,:'
d°77, "'f~-,~e~:,.,, [,4 92
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to tile opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
J~3 Starling St.
OSanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
O
O
O
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening'of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Address
Owner
Address
Signed:
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
AddresS. c--:: ,- :-.~ ..... . ........
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s)is/are:
QIn favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic betwaen the
communities
r--i- Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
EderlingWay
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Address
Owner
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire .& safety considerations:
I
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
~2)wner
Address
Owner
Address
/
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
RECEIVED
Opposed to tl',~ upening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
bwner
Address '
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E]
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
Opposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
'~ Starling St.
D Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
Owner
Addres
O
Address
REFERENDUM BALLOT
The undersigned homeowner(s) is/are:
In favor of having one or more streets opened to through-traffic
between the proposed Campos Verdes development and Roripaugh
Hills
E3
E3
Both Starling St. & Sanderling Way
Starling St. only
Sanderling Way only
L Qpposed to the opening of any street to through-traffic between the
two communities
Have no preference
If you checked the box opposing the opening of any street between the two
communities, then please check below which street you would prefer to
open to through-traffic if the opening of at least one street were mandated
due to fire & safety considerations:
Starling St.
[~/'Sanderling Way
While this referendum is not binding on city officials, they have stated their
intent to pursue our wishes on this matter. Please forward your ballot
promptly to the address shown on the front of this ballot.
Signed:
,:!L SEP '2 7 ~5~3
~wner
Address
Owner
tess
FEB 0 8 1999
To: City Council
cc: 'Shawn Nel~oh
Joe Kicak
ITEM
19
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Shawn D. Nelson
Acting City Manager
DATE: March 23, 1999
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Monthly Compensation
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION NO. 2.40. t00 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO MONTHLY
COMPENSATION FOR CITY COMMISSIONERS
2. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE MEETING SCHEDULE FOR
THE PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
BACKGROUND: At the request of the City Council, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission monthly
compensation has been increased to $100 per month, with the meeting schedule also being
changed from once to twice a month. Specific dates will be determined by Resolution of the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission.
FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been appropriated in the 1998-99 Public works
Department budget to fund the recommended compensation increase.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 99-
Resolution No. 99-
R:agenda rpt\meeting schedule 1
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION NO. 2.40.100 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO MONTHLY
COMPENSATION FOR CITY COMMISSIONERS.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin.cls. The City Council for the City of Temecula hereby finds the following:
A. That the City Council wishes to amend Section 2.40.100 to provide monthly
compensation for City Commissioners.
B. Monthly compensation for Commissioners is currently set at:
Planning Commission
Public Safety/Traffic Commission
Community Services/Parks Commission
$100 per month
$ 50 per month, and
$ 50 per month
Section 2. Section 2.040.100 of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read:
"City Commissioners shall receive monthly compensation as follows:
Planning Commission
Public Safety/Traffic Commission
Community Services/Parks Commission
$100 per month
$100 per month, and
$ 50 per month."
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in
the office of the City Clerk at least five days pdor to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days
from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together
with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same
in the office of the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
Ords\99- 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 99- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of March, 1999 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was
duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the
13th of April, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
Orals\99- 2
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE MEETING SCHEDULE
OF THE PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission shall conduct business in
accordance with the following guidelines.
A. Meetings
The Commission shall establish a regular date, time, and place for Commission
meetings, which shall be open to the public. Said meetings shall occur no less frequently
than twice a month. However, the Commission may adjoum to any other location within the
City. On such adjournment, the City Clerk shall cause to be posted on the door of the
Council Chambers a notice of the other location and the time thereof. In the event that the
date of any regular meetings falls on a holiday, the regular meeting shall be held on the
next succeeding day which is not a holiday.
In order to assure the efficient use of time for scheduled meetings, the Public/Traffic
Safety Commission will not commence the hearing of any item, whether scheduled for the
agenda or not, after 10:00 p.m. The presentation of any matter before the Commission
shall be limited to fifteen (15) minutes. Individuals in support of or opposition to the matter
shall be limited to three (3) minutes each, except that individuals representing a bona fide
group opinion shall be allowed a five (5) minute presentation. The time limits set forth
herein, including the 10:00 p.m. curfew, may be waived if, by a majority vote, the
Commission determines that said waiver would serve the public interest.
Special meetings may be called by the Chairman or a majority of the members of
the Commission be delivering personally or by mail written notice of said meeting to each
Commission member and to each local newspaper of general circulation, radio or television
station requesting such notice in writing. Such notice must be delivered personally or by
mail at least twenty-four (24) hours before the time of such meeting as specified in the
notice.
No business shall be transacted at any special meeting other than that stated in the
notice of said meeting.
The Commission may adjourn from time to time, with absentees being
notified thereof. In case there shall be no quorum present at any meeting, the
Commissioners present may adjourn from time to time until a quorum is obtained, may
adjourn to a special meeting date, or may adjoum to the next regularly scheduled meeting
date. If no members of the Commission are present, the City Clerk shall adjourn the
meeting.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Resos 99- -1-
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 23"" day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution No, 99-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23'd day of March, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
Resos 99- -2-
ITEM
2O
APPROVAL G~~
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN.
GITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
/~){William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ordinance
PREPARED BY: John Pourkazemi, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council introduce and read by title only an
ordinance:
ORDINANCE NO.99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA "ESTABLISHING STORMWATER/URBAN
RUNOFF MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROLS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PROGRAM" AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
BACKGROUND: The ordinance establishes stormwater/urban runoff
provisions for mitigation, management and discharge controls and enforcement
implications. The purpose of this ordinance is to ensure the future health, safety, and
general welfare of City citizens by:
A. Reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable;
B. Regulating illicit connections and discharges to the storm drain system; and
C. Regulating no-stormwater discharges to the storm drain system.
The intent of this ordinance is to protect and enhance the water quality of City
watercourses, water bodies, ground water, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and
consistent with the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1342).
Upon adoption of this ordinance discharge of pollutants will be prohibited unless specific
provisions have been accommodated, as described in the ordinance. Construction sites,
new and existing developments and industrial/commercial sites would have to control
and manage their site discharges and stormwater runoffs. Illicit connections to storm
drain systems will be prohibited. The ordinance further ordains enforcement action to be
taken upon those who violate the requirements of this ordinance.
R:~agdrptLq9~D323~poullantordin/ajp
1
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ordinance is a
requirement of the NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit adopted on May 13, 1998, by
the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (Order No. 98-02).
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance No. 99-
R:~agdrptLqg~0323~poullantordin/ajp
2
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING "STORMWATER/URBAN
RUNOFF MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROLS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHAGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM PROGRAM" AS AN AMENDMENT TO
TITLE 8 OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Amendment. A new chapter 8.28 entitled "Stormwater/Urban Runoff
Management and Discharge Controls" is hereby added to Title 8 of the City of Temecula
Municipal Code, to read as follows:
TITLE 8 HEALTH AND SAFETY
Chapter 8.28
Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management
and Discharge Controls
SUBARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 8.28.100
Section 8.28.105
Section 8.28.110
Section 8.28.115
Section 8.28.120
Title
Purpose and Intent
Definitions
Responsibility for Administration
Regulatory Consistency
SUBARTICLE 2. MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROLS
Section 8.28.210
Section 8.28.215
Section 8.28.220
Section 8.28.225
Reduction of Pollutants in Stormwater
Illicit Connections/Discharges
Non-Stormwater Discharges
Discharges in Violation of Permit
SUBARTICLE3. ENFORCEMENT
Section 8.28.310 Enforcement
SUBARTICLE1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
8.28.100. Title. This ordinance shall be known as the City of Temecula
Stomwvater~rban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls Ordinance and may be
so cited.
8.28.105. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this ordinance is to ensure the future
health, safety, and general welfare of City citizens by:
A. Reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable;
B. Regulating illicit connections and discharges to the storm drain system; and
R:%agdrptL99%0323~poullantordin/ajp
3
C. Regulating no-stormwater discharges to the storm drain system.
The intent of this ordinance is to protect and enhance the water quality of City watercourses,
water bodies, ground water, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the
Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1342).
8.28.110. Definitions. The terms as used in this ordinance shall have the following
meanings:
Best Management Practice (BMP's) shall mean any activities, prohibitions, practices,
procedures, programs, or other measures designed to prevent or reduce the discharge
or pollutants directly or indirectly into waters of the United States. BMP's shall include,
but are not limited to, those measures specified in the California Stormwater Best
Management Practice Handbooks for Municipal, Industrial/Commercial and Construction
Activity and those measures identified by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
B. City shall mean City of Temecula.
Director of Public Works shall mean the Director of Public Works/City Engineer or his
designated representative.
Illicit Connection shall mean any physical connection to a storm drain system which has
not been permitted by the City of Temecula.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit shall mean a
stormwater discharge permit issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board or the State Water Resources Control Board in compliance with the Clean Water
Act.
Municipal NPDES Permit shall mean an area-wide NPDES permit issued to a
government agency or agencies for the discharge of stormwater from a stormwater
system.
Non-Stormwater Discharge shall mean any discharge to the storm drain system that is
not entirely composed of stormwater.
Person shall mean any natural person, firm, association, club, organization, corporation,
partnership, business trust, company or other entity which is recognized by law as the
subject of rights or duties.
Pollutant shall mean anything which causes the deterioration of water quality such that it
impairs subsequent and/or competing uses of the water. Pollutants may include but are
not limited to paints, oil and other automotive fluids, soil, rubbish, trash, garbage, debris,
refuse, waste, fecal coliform, fecal streptococcus, enterococcus, heavy metals,
hazardous waste, chemicals, fresh concrete, yard waste from commercial landscaping
operations, animal waste, materials that result from the process of constructing a
building or structure, nauseous or offensive matter of any kind.
Premises shall mean any building, lot, parcel of land, land or portion of land whether
improved or unimproved.
Storm Drain System shall mean any facility within the city limits of the City of Temecula
by which stormwater may be conveyed to waters of the United States. Storm drain
system includes but is not limited to any roads with drainage systems, streets, curbs,
gutters, catch basins, natural and artificial channels, ditches, aqueducts, storm drains,
inlets, conduit or other drainage structure.
R:~agdrptL~9~0323~ooullantordin/ajp
4
Stormwater Runoff shall mean surface runoff and drainage associated with rainstorm
events and snowmelt.
Illicit Discharge shall mean any discharge to the storm drain system that is not
composed entirely of stormwater runoff except discharges made pursuant to a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit or as otherwise authorized by
the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board.
8.28.115. Responsibility for Administration. This ordinance shall be administered for
the City by the Director of Public Works.
8.28.120. Re.Qulatory Consistency. This ordinance shall be construed to assure
consistency with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and acts amendatory thereof or
supplementary thereto, applicable implementing regulations, and any existing or future
municipal NPDES Permits and any amendments or revisions thereto or reissuance thereof.
SUBARTICLE2. MANAGEMENTAND DISCHARGECONTROLS
8.28.210. Reduction of Pollutants in Stormwater.
General. It is a violation of this ordinance to throw, deposit, leave, maintain, keep
or permit to be thrown, deposited, placed, left or maintained, any pollutant in or upon any
street, alley, sidewalk, storm drain, inlet, catch basin, conduit or other drainage
structures, business place, or upon any public or pdvate plot of land in the City. The
only exception being where such pollutant is temporarily placed in an appropriate
container with a spill containment system for later collection and removal. It is a violation
of this ordinance to cause or permit any dumpster, solid waste bin, or similar container to
leak such that any pollutant is discharged into any street, alley, sidewalk, storm drain,
inlet, catch basin, conduit or other drainage structures, business place, or upon any
public or pdvate plot of land in the City.
Construction Sites. Any person performing construction work in the City shall comply
with the provision of this ordinance.
New Development and Redevelopment. New development or redevelopment
projects shall control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water
quality that would impair subsequent or competing uses of the water· The Director of
Public Works shall identify the BMP's that may be implemented to prevent such
deterioration and shall identify the manner of implementation· The BMP's may, among
other things, require new developments or redevelopmenrs to comply with the following:
Increase Permeable Areas, by leaving highly porous soil and low-lying
areas undisturbed: by incorporation landscaping and open space into the
project design: by using porous materials for or near driveways and
walkways: and by incorporating detention ponds and infiltration pits into
the project design.
Direct Runoff to Permeable Areas, by odenting it away from impermeable
areas to swales, berms, green strip filters, gravel beds, and french drains;
by installing rain-gutters oriented towards permeable areas; by modifying
the grade of the property to divert flow to permeable areas and minimize
the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the property; and by designing
curbs, berms or other structures such that they do not isolate permeable
or landscaped areas.
R:~agdrptLQg~0323~poullantordin/ajp
5
Maximize Stormwater Storage for Reuse, by using retention structures,
subsurface areas, cisterns, or other structures to store stormwater runoff
for reuse or slow release.
Existing Development. Existing development shall control stormwater runoff so as to
prevent any deterioration of water quality that would impair subsequent or competing
uses of the water. The Director of Public Works shall identify the BMP's that may be
implemented to prevent such deterioration and shall identify the manner of
implementation.
8.28.215. Illicit Connections/Dischames. It is a violation of this ordinance to
establish, use, maintain, or continue illicit connections to the storm drain system, or to
commence or continue any illicit discharge to the storm drain system. This prohibition against
illicit connections and discharges is expressly retroactive and applies to connections and
discharges made in the past, regardless of whether permissible under the law or practices
applicable or prevailing at the time of the connection or discharge.
8.28.220. Non-Stormwater DischarGes. The discharge of non-stormwater into the
storm drain system is a violation of this ordinance except as specified below.
The discharge prohibition shall not apply to any discharge regulated under an NPDES
Permit or waiver issued to the discharger and administered by the State of Califomia
under the authority of the EPA, provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all
requirements of the permit or waiver and other applicable laws or regulations.
Discharges from the following activities will not be considered a violation of this
ordinance when propedy managed: water line flushing and other discharges from
potable water sources, landscape irrigation and lawn watering, irrigation water, diverted
stream flows, dsing ground waters, infiltration to separate storm drains, uncontaminated
pumped ground water, foundation and footing drains, water from crawl space pumps, air
conditioning condensation, spdngs, individual residential car washing, flows from dparian
habitats and wetlands, swimming pool discharges or flows from fire fighting.
8.28.225. Discharges in Violation of Permit.
Municipal NPDES Permit. Any discharge that would result in or contribute to a violation
of an existing or future Municipal NPDES Permit(s) or any amendment or revision
thereto or reissuance thereof, either separately considered or when combined with other
discharges, is a violation of this ordinance and is prohibited. Liability for any such
discharge shall be the responsibility of the person(s) causing or responsible for the
discharge, and such persons shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City in any
administrative or judicial enforcement action relating to such discharge.
NPDES Permit for Industrfal/Commercial and Construction Activity. Any industrial
discharger, discharger associated with construction activity, or other discharger subject
to any NPDES permit issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the
State Water Resources Control Board, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board, shall comply with all requirements of such permit. Such dischargers shall
specifically comply with the following permits: The Industrial Stormwater General
Permit, the Construction Activity Stormwater General Permit, and the Dewatedng
General Permit. Proof of compliance with said NPDES General Permits may be
required in a form acceptable to the Director of Public Works pdor to issuance of any
City grading, building, or occupancy permits.
R:~agdrpt~99~0323~poullantordin/ajp
6
SUBARTICLE 3. ENFORCEMENT
8.28.310. Enforcement. Violation of the provisions of Chapter 8.28 may be prosecuted
pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 1.20 and 1.21 of this code and may be abated as public
nuisances pursuant to chapter 8.12 of this code.
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this
ordinance or the application thereof to any person, establishment, or circumstances shall be
held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or application of this ordinance
which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the
provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 3. ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and
shall publish a summary of this ordinance and post a certified copy of the full ordinance in the
office of the City Clerk at least five days pdor to the adoption of the proposed ordinance; and
within fifteen days after adoption of the ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of the
ordinance with the names of the councilmembers voting for and against the ordinance. This
ordinance shall take effect thirty days from the date of its adoption.
PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of March, 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. 99- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of March, 1999, and that thereafter the said
ordinance was duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the City Council on the 13t" day of
April, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal of the City of Temecula,
California, this 13th day of Apdl, 1999.
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
R:~agdrptLq9~0323~poullantordin/ajp
ITEM
21
APPROVAL
CITYATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITYMANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: March 23,1999
SUBJECT: 1998-99 Community Service Funding Program Spring Distribution
Recommendations
PREPARED BY: Linda Norton, Administrative Secretaryf'~
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and approve the 1998-99 (:ommunity
Service Funding Program - Spring distribution requests per the attached table outlining the
committee's recommendations of seven organizations totaling $38,480.
DISCUSSION: At the City Council meeting of September 22, 1998 the Council-appointed
Council members Jeff Comerchero and Jeff Stone to the 1998-99 Community Service Funding
Ad Hoc Committee to allocate grant funds to community service organizations. On October 15,
1998 the Committee Members, along with staff members Herman Parker, Linda Norton and
myself, reviewed the requests for funding based on criteria previously adopted by the entire
council. On October 27, 1998 Council approved awards for 26 organizations which totaled
$82,200. At the direction of council, a spring process would take place to distribute the
remaining $73,800 in the fund.
Spring '99 applications were mailed to 49 non-profit organizations in the Temecula Valley area
on January 20, 1999. In addition to the mailing, advertisements were placed il~ the local
papers. A total of 13 applications were received requesting $61,980.
The Ad Hoc Committee met March 16, 1999 to review the applications. After thorough review
and discussion, seven (7) of the 13 organizations are being recommended for grants, totaling
$38,480.
Of particular note, the recommended grant for the Senior Citizen's Service Center of Rancho
Temecula Area, Inc. totals $17,480. In the previous 1998-99 funding cycle the Senior Center
was awarded $5,000. The committee is requesting an exception to the $5,000 maximum
grant, due to the circumstances surrounding the Service Center's relocation. The Senior
Citizen's Service Center has relocated to a facility on Jefferson Road and the rental expense
is substantially higher than the previous location. Therefore, a grant amount of $17,480 is
necessary for the continued operation of the center.
It TEMEC_FS201 IDA TA tDEPTSIRNANCEINOR TONL tAG ENDA SI9899SpriRgCSFAgn. doc 03/16/99
FISCAL IMPACT: A total of $73,800 is available for Council recommendation from account
number 001-101-999-5267. The committee's recommendation is to award $38,480 and keep
the balance of $35,320 in the account as an emergency fund.
Attachment: Spreadsheet
It TEMEC_FS201 IDA TA )DEPTSIFINANCEtNORTONL L4GENDASI9899Sprir~gCSFAgn.doc 03/16/99
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager,~2~
March 23, 1999
Monthly Report
The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development
Department in the month of February, 1999.
Current Planning Activities
New Cases
The Division received 30 new applications for administrative and other minor cases and home
occupations and 5 new applications for public headngs during the month of February. The new
public hearing cases are as follows:
CEQA Initial Study 1
Development Code Amendment 1
Development Plan (over 10,000 sf) 2
Parcel Map (Com/Ind) 1
Pre-apl~lications
One pre-application meeting was held in February.
Status of Fast Track Projects
The City's award-winning Fast Track process provides a way for major businesses relocating to or
expanding in Temecula to get their facilities constructed and occupied in the shortest possible time.
The current Fast Track projects are as follows:
,k Bostik - is currently under construction in the Westside Business Centre.
· Moving and Storage company relocation on Zevo Drive. - The relocation of an existing
business to a new 14,600 square foot building. This project was approved by the Planning
Commission public hearing in December, 1998.
R:~MONTHLY.RPT~I 999~February 99.doc
1
Status of Maior Projects
Staff is working with project applicants to address any remaining issues and get the following cases
ready for public hearing before the Community Development Director or Planning Commission:
Rebel Rent's new facility on Winchester Road in the Westside Business Center. Staff is
awaiting second resubmittal from the applicant. Several of staffs original comments need
to be addressed from the original DRC comments.
A new 11,300 square foot speculative commercial building on Enterprise Circle South. Staff
is waiting for a resubmittal from the applicant based upon staffs DRC comments.
Rancho Community Church expansion on Vallejo Avenue. This project may require a
focused environmental impact report to enable the City to effectively deal with the potential
impacts associated with this project.
Tentative Parcel Map 28627, the Margarita Canyon Property. Staff is waiting for a
resubmittal from the applicant based upon staff's comments on the applicant's most recent
proposal.
Wolf Valley Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: A comment letter was mailed
to the applicant. Staff is awaiting resubmittal from the applicant.
A 28-1ot tract map on Via La Vida east of Calle Palmas, Tentative Tract Map 29036. Staff is
awaiting re-submittal addressing the comments raised the DRC meeting.
The expansion of Milgard into a new 108,000 square foot building in the Westside Business
Center. Staff is still working with the applicant on issues raised a the DRC meeting. (This
project represents the retention (and expansion) of business that is currently operating in the
City.)
Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Staff has received re-
submittal and is reviewing to determine if the Draft EIR can be circulated for public review
and comment.
Pacific Gulf Properties - A development of a 244 unit senior apartment complex with two and
three story building on an 8.13 acre lot. Located on the northeast comer of Winchester Road
and Nicolas Road. Planning Commission meeting will be held on March 17, 1999.
Encinitas Corporate Center Two LLC - Development Plan to construct a 32,000 square foot
speculative office, warehouse and manufacturing building on two parcels (0.94 acres/parcel)
totaling 1.88 acres. Located on the south side of Rio Nedo, approximately 1300' southwest
of the intersection of Tierra Alta Way and Rio Nedo. Planning Commission meeting to be
held on March 17, 1999.
Pacific Gulf Properties - Request for a General Plan Amendment and a Zoning Change to
coincide with the development of a 244 unit senior apartment complex with two and three
story buildings on an 8.13 acre lot. The land use will change from Business Park and Open
Space to Professional Office. Planning Commission date is March 17, 1999.
MCA - Development Plan for a 7,000 square foot retail building (formerly Blockbuster).
Located in the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center at the northeast comer of Winchester
Road and Margarita Road. Scheduled for Development Review Committee meeting on
February 25, 1999. Awaiting resubmittal.
R :V,A O N T H LY. R PT~I 999U=ebruary 99,doc
2
Winston Tires - Conditional Use Permit to design, construct and operate a 5,3100 square
foot tire sales and installation, automotive service and repair facility. Located at 40385
Winchester Road, within the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center at the northeast corner
of Margadta Road and Winchester Road. Staff is awaiting re-submittal for pending Planning
Commission date.
Clayton Hill, DVM - Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the development of a
veterinarian hospital on a .69 acre lot. Located on the south side of Winchester Road, west
of Nicolas Road. Development Review Committee on February 18, 1999. Awaiting
resubmittal.
Chemicon Intemational, Inc. - Development Plan to design, construct and operate an 85,056
square foot office/industrial, warehouse building. Located on the northwest comer of
Business Park Ddve and Single Oak Drive. Development Review Committee on February
25, 1999. Awaiting resubmittal for pending Planning Commission meeting.
Lowe's Company- Development Plan to design, construct and operate a 129,462 square
foot home improvement store with a 32,981 square foot garden area. Located on the
southeast corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads. Tentative Planning Commission
meeting April 7, 1999.
Small Business Assistance
Roadrunners Roadhouse: Helped applicant evaluate site for a deli/market and on-site
signs.
Palomar Hotel: Conducted an on-site evaluation of this historic building in order to help
the applicant prepare plan for the Old Town Local Review Board.
Temecula Valley Toyota: Assisted tenant improvement applicant with resolving disabled
access issues delaying his occupancy.
Lin~eld School: Helped contractor and board members evaluate options for replacement
of existing buildings.
-k Sl~ecial Event Permits
1999 Temecula Rod Run: Worked with the Temecula Town Association in coordinating this
annual event in Old Town.
-k Guidant Corporation: Business Tent Meeting.
Regular planning meetings with the Temecula Town Association for the 1999 Temecula
Rod Run (February 12-14) in Old Town Temecula.
R:WIONTHLY.RPT~I 999~February 99.doc
3
Special Proiects & Lon.a RanQe Plannin.a Activities
The Division also commits work effods toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both
pdvate and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or
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:
Old Town In Lieu Parking Program: Staff revised the earlier proposal and presented it for
Council's consideration in December.
Convention Center Study: A final draft of the Study has been reviewed by staff. The final
report will be scheduled for the Economic Development Subcommittee's review in March.
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the City Redevelopment Plan: The consultant
is currently gathering information to begin preparation of the Draft EIR. Staff is currently
reviewing the consultant's initial submittals.
Southside Specific Plan: Staff is revisiting the draft land use standards.
Massage Business Ordinance: A revised draft of the ordinance has being reviewed by the
City Attorney. Staff is making additional corrections, it will be returned for the Council's
consideration after the Massage Ordinance working group has had a chance to review the
proposed changes.
General Plan Circulation Element Update: The draft revisions have been reviewed by the
Planning and Traffic Safety Commissions at two joint meetings. Staff is reviewing the best
way to deal with the environmental review requirements for the Update.
* Subdivision Ordinance: Staff is finalizing the Ordinance to reflect recent law changes.
Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance: The coordinating committee is currently
reviewing a draft of the Ordinance. These oveday standards will allow developers to build
high quality pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods which can integrate various land use types
into a unified family-oriented community.
Redhawk/Vail Ranch Annexation Study: Staff has been working with County staff to try to
resolve the outstanding issues.
Surface Mining Ordinance: The State Depadment of Mines and Geology has reviewed and
commented on the draft Ordinance. Staff is making final changes prior to submitting this
item to the Council's for their consideration
Geographic Information System (GIS): Staff is working on the final GIS versions of colored
Zoning and General Plan Land Use maps.
Sign Ordinance Handbooks: To make it easier for City staff and the business community to
implement the Comprehensive Sign Ordinance, staff is preparing handbooks for
Commercial, Office, and Industrial Signage Handbooks. The Commercial Handbook is
being finalized. It should be available for use next month.
R :~,40 N T H LY. R P~1999\Februan/99 ,doc
4
Update to the Housing Element: Staff is drafting the Request For Proposals to obtain
consultant assistance in updating the Housing Element to meet the requirements of State
law.
Antenna Ordinance: The City Attorney is currently reviewing the draft document.
R :lAO NTH LY. R PT~I 999%February 99.doc
5
APPROVAL fl~'
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTOR
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council ~'/,~/v'v"--
Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manag/' /
March 23, 1999
Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report
Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator
The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for
the month of February, 1999.
Economic Development
City staff met with Dennis Frank at UCR regarding producing a marketing piece
highlighting UCR's custom training programs and the university. City staff will
coordinate with UCR on this project. This will be included in the City's business
brochure.
City staff met with General Manager Susan Hoilers, and Director of Sales Lisa Doertier,
of Temecula Creek Inn regarding business outreach with key business and business
executives staying at Temecula Creek Inn. The City will provide a gift basket and
business relocation information to selected business executives staying at TCI. Staff will
continue to follow-up with the business through our direct mail program as well as
personal contact. At this meeting, Temecula Creek Inn indicated that they would like to
sponsor a Napa Valley type wine auction. City staff put them in touch with the
Vintner's Association and is currently working together on this event.
The City continues to meet with the Southwest Riverside County EDC bi-weekly to
go over marketing/planning issues, leads, trade shows, etc.
Staff attended the monthly Business Retention meeting of the EDC. Staff is working
with the EDC and the Press-Enterprise to help plan the Career Fair on April 10%
The Southwest Riverside County EDC attended the Nepcon West '99 trade show at the
Anaheim Convention Center in February. The EDC received free passes to attend and
work the showroom floor. Nepcon West is the largest and most comprehensive
electronics show on the West Coast. It presents the opportunity for Temecula to reach
over 30,000 industry professionals and qualified buyers during the event.
Councilman Comerchero and City staff met with Jo Moulton and Herbert
Margoles of Cinema Entertainment Alliance regarding producing and
promoting the 5th Annual Temecula Valley International Film Festival. The
group has submitted a proposal to be reviewed. The Film Council will meet
with Councilman Comerchero and Cinema Entertainment Alliance to discuss
the event further.
Staff met with local commercial brokers and is starting to work on Temecula's Property
Data Base which will be incorporated onto the City's website.
City staff and the EDC met with the Inland Empire Economic Partnership on
February 10th tO discuss IEEP/Community Partners membership benefits and services
for the City of Temecula. This information will be compiled and presented to the City
Council at the April 13th Council meeting.
City staff attended the Inland Empire Economic Partnership's membership
luncheon on February 24th at the Mission Inn. The program consisted of a presentation
on the CORE21 program.
The marketing committee meeting was held on February 18th at Callaway Winery.
The cultural arts plan was discussed, an update was given on the City's web site and the
tourism marketing program was reviewed by the committee. Linda Kissam, the new
executive director of the Vintner's Association was introduced and welcomed.
Councilman Comerchero and the City met with the San Diego Padre organization
regarding the expansion of the Padre program and presence in the Temecula area.
There was also discussion for a possible scholarship program, mini Padre park, Padre
retail store and field trips to the stadium.
City staff has prepared the text to be displayed on the Riverside County Kiosk
Network's screen. Staff also worked with Group One Productions on producing a 40
second video for the kiosk network.
Inquiries
In the month of February, the City responded to 13 inquiries.
Note: Information on Fast Track, Expansion, Relocation and Speculative Building can
now be found in the Community Development Department report.
Media/Advertising
City staff submitted updated Temecula information for Plants Sites & Parks upcoming
annual directory issue.
The City placed an ad in the San Diego Business Journal High Tech Directory and
will receive a listing and 500 word advertorial. The directory will be distributed at trade
shows, job fairs, the High Tech 200 Gala Awards Dinner and will also be used by the
2
San Diego EDC out of town. Each directory has about six months of active service. At
least 30,000 issues will be printed.
Tourism
City staff attended the Inland Empire Tourism Council's Board of Directors meeting
on February 24th. The IETC's budget and California Travel Market tourism show was
discussed.
City staff continues to coordinate with the Inland Empire Tourism on showcasing our
region at the California Travel Market in Anaheim this April. The Riverside's County
booth, which is used at the California State Fair, will be set up in the exhibition area.
Wine tasting will be set up featuring Temecula wines and Temecula Valley Vintner's
wine corkscrews will be given out. Old Town will have photos displayed in the western
theme area of the booth. In addition, IETC will have a separate booth where
appointments are made with travel industry professionals. This booth will display photos
representing Temecula's tourism climate.
Michael & Karen Villalpando with the Beverly Press contacted the City for tourism
information. A press kit was sent out with additional items they requested. The
Villalpandos also mentioned they were planning to attend the Barrel Tasting event. They
are currently writing a travel piece on Temecula for their publication.
Temecula's Trade Show Booth has been ordered and will arrive late April. City staff
and the marketing committee are currently involved in selecting the photography to be
displayed at the booth. Meetings have also involved local professional photographers
discussing new photo shoots.
Attachments: Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Report
Southwest Riverside County EDC Report
Temecula Valley Film Council Report
RECEIVED
MAR 1 i 1999
27450 Ynez Road, Suite 104
Temecula, CA 92591
(909) 676-5090 · Fax (909) 694-0201
March 10, 1999
Shawn Nelson, Acting City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula CA 92590
Dear Shawn:
Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report provided as per our contract with the City of
Temecula. This is the month of February at a glance:
Business Inquiry Highlights
· 8 businesses requested information on staxtmg or reloc ating their business in Temecula.
They received a business packet which includes demographic, relocation, housing, etc.
Committee Highlights
The Tourism Sub-Committee is meeting its goal of having the motel/hotel individual & group
packages ready and in play by the end of March. Packages will range from golf, wine
country tours, hot air balloons, Old Town, spa, romantic get-away to rent-a-resort!
Education Committee News: The Renaissance Program at Vail Ranch Middle School
recognizes the most improved students by hosting a high energy awards assembly. The next
event is scheduled for April 1, 1999 and is organized by the students. TVCC has promoted
this program in Temecula Today Newsletter.
Mt. San Jacinto representative stated M.S.J. is the fastest growing college in the state. The
college offers a One Stop Career Center and a variety of programs to assist students in
continuing their education and careers.
The Ways & Means Committee is proud to announce a successful Installation Dinner Dance
& Presentation, held at Pechanga Entertainment Center on February 27, 1999. Winners for
1998 are; Citizen of the Year - Sally Myers, Lifetime Achievement - Donna Reeves, Sterling
Business of the Year - Timmy d. Productions, Gold Business of the Year - Diversified
Temporary Services, Inc. and Platinum Business of the Year - Toyota of Temecula Valley.
New Board Members were inducted into the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Board
of Directors.
State of the City Address received an overwhelming response. This sold out event was held
at Temeku Hills Auditorium on Thursday, March 4, 1999. The Chamber office has received
outstanding compliments in regards to the City's presentation.
The Chamrock Golf Classic, a sold out event, is set for March 15, 1999 at Temecula Creek
Inn.
Preparation for the 1999 Team Member of the Year award luncheon, are well under way.
Local Business Promotions Committee has set June 8, 1999 for the next Success Seminar
Series, to be held at Embassy Suites, with an emphasis on Marketing Your Business. Alain
Jourdier is a member of the American Marketing Association, and a recipient of numerous
marketing awards. This dynamic series will help businesses focus on entrepreneur and
develop a practical marketing plan for your success. Plans are underway for the "Shop
Temecula First" campaign to begin in June, 1999.
Govermnent Action Committees' Brian Reece, past committee chairman, has organized the
Inland Empire Civic Dialogue, a new program bringing federal, state, and local civic leaders
together through state-of-the-art video conferencing technologies and will be hosting its
inaugural event on March 11, 1999, at the Mt. San Jacinto College campus. Local,
Sacramento and Washington DC VIPs will be attending the event to discuss issues via video
connection.
Dusty Williams and Frank Deairs, P.E. of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District presented a progress report made by the Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District on the ongoing projects of the Santa Margarita
River Watershed Plan. Progress on capital projects was set back somewhat due to numerous
E1 Nino related restoration projects which were undertaken over the past year.
· Membership Committee Ambassadors attended 10 ribbon cuttings.
Membership Directories are currently being published with over 1,100 member business
listed. The Directory is available to all Chamber members free to encourage networking
between businesses and Shopping Temecula First.
In the month of February the Chamber referred over 8,900 businesses through mailings,
faxing, e-mails and walk-in visitors. The Chamber notifies each member via referral
postcard of monthly referrals.
Ambassador Training Workshop was held in March to review the role of an Ambassador
and to educate them on the benefits of joining the Temecula Chamber and supporting the
business community. Our Ambassadors are available at all Chamber Mixers, Ambassador
Networking Breakfasts and Ribbon Cuttings. This workshop is held on quarterly basis.
Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution)
· 225 Visitor Guides, 100 Old Town Maps and I00 Winery Brochures to One Song for
distribution to visitors in Old Town.
· 225 Visitor Guides and 150 Old Town Maps to TVCC's Weekend Visitor Center for
distribution to visitors.
· 100 Old Town Maps, 100 City with a Vision and 100 Temecula Brochures to the
International Information Center in San Diego for distribution to tourists.
· 80 Travel Packets, 80 Old Town Maps, 80 Temecula Brochures and 80 Winery Brochures
to Rancho-Temecula Area Woman's Club for the DeAnza District California Federation of
Woman's Club Convention.
· 50 Visitor Guides, 50 City Maps and 50 Relocation Packets to Tarbell Reality for
distribution to clients.
· 50 Old Town Maps and 50 Visitor Guides to Carol Bostwick for a fired-raiser in Temecula.
· 40 City Maps, 40 School Brochures and 40 Winery Brochures to Fred Sands Classic Real
Estate for distribution to prospective residents.
· 50 Winery Brochures to the Dolphin' s Cove Resort in Tustin, for distribution to guests.
· 40 City Maps and 40 Old Town Maps to Norman McKeithan for a Road Rally in Temecula.
· 40 City Maps to the City of Temecula for distribution to residents.
· 30 Winery Brochures to the Wine & Food Society visiting Temecula.
· 35 Travel Packets, 35 Old Town Maps, 35 Visitor Guides and 35 Winery Brochures to
Rancho California Gymnastics Booster Club for a state championship on March 27 & 28.
· 35 Travel Packets, 35 Old Town Maps, 35 Temecula Brochures, 35 Visitor Guides and 35
Winery Brochure to Temecula Valley Pop Warner for guests coming to Temecula.
· 25 Temecula Brochures, 25 Winery Brochures and 10 Visitor Guides to Good Times Travel
for distribution at a Senior Trade Show in Fountain Valley.
· 25 Visitor Guides to Union 76 Gas Station for distribution to tourists.
· 20 Winery Brochures, 10 Old Town Maps and 10 Visitor Guides to Pierson's Country Place
for distribution to guests.
Marketing Report
· TVC C Staff artended the Orange County Register Consumer Show and passed out
approximately 500 Winery Brochures, Temecula Brochures, Old Town Walking Tour Maps
and the Press Enterprise Calendars.
Activity Report
· Overall Tourism phone calls are up 54.08 percent from last year.
· Overall phone calls are up 29.92 percent from last year.
· Overall wa/k-ins are up 21.93 percent from last year.
E-Mail requests: 124
Also attached are the Meeting Minutes for the Tourism, Education, Ways & Means, Local
Business Promotions, Government Action, Membership Committees and "How did you hear
about Temecula?" report.
call me.
If you have any question regarding this information, please feel free to
Sincerely,
PresidentJCEO
CC~
Mayor Steven J. Ford
Mayor Pro Tem Jeffery. E. Stone
Councilman Jeff Comerchero
Councilman Karel F. Lindemans
Councilman Ronald H. Roberts
Shawn Nelson, Acting City Manager
Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager
Gloria Wotnick, Marketing Coordinator
TVCC Board of Directors
PHONE CALLS TOURISM
TOURISM REFERRALS
Calendar of Events
Special Events
General Information
TOTAL TOURISM CALLS
RELOCATION
DEMOGRAPHICS
CHAMBER
CHAMBER REFERRALS
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL PHONE CALLS
WALK-INS TOURISM
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
SPECIAL EVENTS
GENERAL INFORMATION
RELOCATION
DEMOGRAPHICS
CHAMBER
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL WALK-INS
MAILINGS
TOURISM
RELOCATION
DEMOGRAPHICS
TOTAL MAILINGS
E-MAIL
TOURISM
RELOCATION
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL E-MAIL
GRAND TOTALS
PHONE CALLS
WALK-INS
MAILINGS
E-MAIL
TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
For February, 1999
Chamber Vis. Center
This Month This Month
Total
Year-To-Date
503
128
825
1054
2,510
970
250
1322
1,847
4,389
197
87
1,735
8,962
148
13,639
372
130
3,295
16,869
290
25,345
183
109
107
613
173
51
1007
64
2,307
159
3
2
202
3
0
2
7
378
639
262
161
1,519
329
116
1,861
126
5,013
193
111
125
429
412
218
241
871
26
18
80
124
THIS MONTH
13,639
2,307
429
124
45
41
130
340
YEAR-TO-DATE
11,706
2,081
442
340
PHONE CALLS
TOURISM
Tourism Referrals
Calendar of Events
Special Events
* General Information
TOTAL TOURISM CALLS
RELOCATION
DEMOGRAPHICS
CHAMBER
CHAMBER REFERRALS
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL PHONE CALLS
WALK-INS
TOURISM
* CALENDAR OF EVENTS
* SPECIAL EVENTS
* GENERAL INFORMATION
RELOCATION
* DEMOGRAPHICS
CHAMBER
* MISCELLANEOUS
VISITOR CENTER WALK-INS
TOTAL WALK-INS
MAILINGS
TOURISM
RELOCATION
DEMOGRAPHICS
TOTAL MAILINGS
E-MAIL
TOURISM
RELOCATION
MISCELLANEOUS
ANNUAL VOLUME COMPARISONS
Chamber
February, 1998
Chamber
February, 1999
422
105
393
709
1,629
193
78
1,248
7,303
47
10,498
503
128
825
1,054
2,510
197
87
1,735
8,962
148
13,639
163
94
47
565
166
74
770
44
279
2,202
183
109
107
613
173
51
1007
64
378
2,685
226
114
120
460
193
111
125
429
N/A
N/A
N/A
16
15
27
Percentage
Increase
19.19
21.90
109.92
48.66
54.08
2.07
11.54
39.02
22.72
214.89
29.92
12.27
15.96
127.66
8.50
4.22
-31.08
30.78
45.45
35.48
21.93
-14.60
-2.63
4.17
-6.74
N/A
N/A
N/A
Southwest Riverside
March 15, 1999
Jim O'Grady
Assistant City Manager
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
RE: EDC Contract - Activity Summary
The following highlights the activities of the EDC during the month of February:
Business Development
The EDC responded to four inquiries received in the month of February. A
request for information from Ethan Allen Furniture store was received from Site
Selection magazine. Loews Enterprises requested a package be mailed
concerning the EDC and the possibility of a mutually beneficial relationship when
Loews sites their operation in Temecula. Hemet Federal called for information
concerning a possible location somewhere around the new mall. They are
negotiating with a broker and hope to be open concurrently with the opening of
the mall. Two demographic and commuter study packages were sent to out of
area brokers. Met with developers of a "pay for play" sports arena. Provided
information on state incentives, environmental and air quality federal programs
and demographics. Referred parties to Councilmen Stone and Lindemans for
possible involvement in the committee being formed to study a commercial sports
park facility. Three leads were received from the IEEP during the month of
February. Two responses were prepared entailing demographics, labor
information and site criteria. One lead requiring follow up on a 1996 home
improvement distribution facility request was not responded to due to no
information on original package and short turn around time for response.
Marketin.Q Outreach
The quarterly luncheon was held on February 2, 1999 at Temecula Creek Inn.
Speakers for the event were Steve Austin, partner with Swenson Corporation and
Chairperson of the CONNECT Temecula chapter and Michael Beck, Director of
the Office of New Initiatives and Economic Development representing Core 21.
Staats attended the quarterly meeting for California Trade and Commerce in
Post Office Box 1388 · Temecula, CA 92593-1388 · Office 909/695-5130 · FAX 909/695-5126
Jim O'Grady
March 15, 1999
Page Two
Yucaipa on February 3 and the Recreation committee meeting at the Eastside
Reservoir on the same date. The general meeting of the Southwest Riverside
County Manufacturers Council was held on February10th. A representative from
the Port of San Diego provided insightful information on the resources available
at that facility. Letters were mailed to the twenty-two responses received from the
raffle at the MDM conference in January. Staats attended the Nepcon Trade
Show on Thursday, February 25, 1999 in Anaheim. This trade show targets
electronics manufacturing and includes both the industry giants such as Sony,
Panasonic and the like and the small independent manufacturer as well.
Attendance was provided through a free ticket from the show producers.
Business Relations
The Business Relations Committee is on track with their goals for visitations.
Staff continues to assist the committee with documentation and preparation of the
visit materials and research regarding the companies to be visited. Discussion
continues concerning the planning of the "Career Fair', to be held on April 10~h .
A tour of the Moore Business Forms plant was conducted on February 12u~. They
are one of the original manufacturers in Temecula having located their plant here
in 1989. Sixty seven visitations have been conducted by the Business Relations
Committee through January 31, 1999.
Administration/Orqanization
Staff has continued to assist the Board of Directors and Executive Committee in
the strategic planning process. Work continues to evolve on the planning of the
One-Stop Career Center to be located in Temecula by the County of Riverside.
EDC plans to be a tenant in the facility if appropriate rental arrangements can be
made.
This concludes the written summary of activity for the month of February. Please
call if there are questions concerning this report.
ud~ Staats
· xecutive Director
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ACTIVITY REPORT
JULY 1, 1998 - DECEMBER 31, 1998
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Forty-Six responses were provided to inquiries received through a variety of
sources. Inquiries came from a closed-die forging and extrusion operator, light
industrial warehouse/distributor, health care professionals seeking to open an
Open MRI facility, hotel/motel developers, internet accounting service, gourmet
coffee manufacturer, developers of roller hockey rinks and an international
financial call center to name a few.
An additional ten responses were prepared requiring detailed labor statistics, job
training information and demographics in response to the leads received through
the State of California Trade and Commerce agency. Some of the companies
requesting information were an industrial crane manufacturer, a prefabricated
cement communications site manufacturer, corporate relocation request for an
advertising agency and a furniture manufacturer. Several requests could not be
responded to due to the requirement of rail access or enterprise zones.
Sixteen demographic and commuter study packages were sent out. Meetings
with six prospective businesses were held, three of which included site selection
tours and one produced a successful relocation of the company. An
announcement will be made concerning this firm sometime next month.
MARKETING/OUTREACH
EDC was a host sponsor of the first annual Air Quality Summit held for the
region. EDC was also a sponsor and exhibitor of the first annual Connections
Expo held at the Diamond Stadium in Lake Elsinore. This business symposium
brought together many of the manufacturers in the region and provided an
opportunity for networking and education. Staff has attended three of Supervisor
Venable's quarterly workshops designed to bring together interested parties that
are part of the third district. These workshops have focused on economic
development in the region, services provided by the county to business and
residents and communication between the county and its community partners.
Officers and staff have attended groundbreaking ceremonies for the new regional
mall, new industrial spec buildings and the opening of the Murrieta Creek Park
Pilot project.
Staff has attended three major trade shows during this first half of the fiscal year.
Wescon, Nacore and the Western Plastic show all provided an opportunity to
distribute material and talk about Southwest Riverside County.
A new website for the organization was developed and launched onto the World
Wide Web. Efforts are underway to develop additional materials that will make
the site one that will be visited often.
The fall newsletter was sent to the general membership and has been used
along with the marketing piece to provide information about the organization and
the region. EDC participated in several meetings hosted by the IEEP to discuss
marketing efforts being used by that organization to disseminate information
about the two county region on a national and international scale.
BUSINESS RELATIONS
The Business Relations committee was reorganized and revitalized through the
efforts of Randy Williams, Chair of the Committee, and staff at the EDC. A
comprehensive approach has been taken to developing a methodology that will
not only benefit the existing business community but will provide our municipal
partners with valuable information concerning their business community. New
goals have been set and the results to date are better than expected.
The Business Relations Committee has contacted thirty local companies and
either made a personal visit to the company or completed a survey about the
company. Assistance has been provided by the committee to those companies
requesting assistance and follow up measures have been instituted to interact
with municipal officials and provide information and education to all parties. One
of the major goals of the committee is to let the business community know that
the EDC wants to provide assistance, where appropriate, and foster good
business community relations.
In order to act as a facilitator in the resolution of many issues, the Business
Relations Committee has invited to its meetings persons responsible for
administering the programs that may be available as a community resource to
the business community. In addition, issues of relevance to the employer such
as a well-trained labor force have been discussed and solutions have been
posed and are being developed. The first job fair directed for all of Southwest
Riverside County is being co-produced by the Press Enterprise newspaper and
several of its community partners including the EDC. The event scheduled for
April of this year will bring together employers and potential employees along
with training professionals. The results aimed for are to provide the link that will
enable our citizens to be employed in their own community and halt the migration
for employment that occurs throughout this region.
ADMINIS TRA TION/ORGANIZA TION
A metamorphosis has occurred within the organization during this time period.
Moving from a single community based organization to one that encompasses
regional challenges is not an overnight process. A series of workshops have
been held to identify, quantify, and solidify the goals and objectives of the new
regional union. During the remaining fiscal year, more work is needed to
produce a plan that will provide the impetus for implementation of the work
process that will lead to accomplishment of the short-term goals and objectives.
This process will require the same dedication of purpose that the Board of
Directors and its officers and staff have shown in the last six months.
TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COUNCIL
ACTIVITIES REPORT
FEBRUARY 1999
Members of the Temecula Valley Film Council are Fred Huber, President; Brian Padberg, Vice-
President; Judi Staats, Treasurer; Maggi Allen, Secretary; Shed Davis; Steve Phelps; Penny
Rivera; and Sunny Thomas.
The Business of the Film Council
We have found a temporary home in the EDC offices in Temecula. Judi Staats will get
authorization for the Film Council to move into the EDC offices at their meeting in March.
We will continue to use volunteer staffing to handle telephone requests and mailings.
The Temecula Valley Film Council participated in the AFCI Locations '99 Trade Show at the
Los Angeles Convention Center from February 19 -21 in the Inland Empire Film
Commission Booth. Our poster size location photographs were displayed and we distributed
our locations postcards.
The Film Council has agreed to produce the Temecula Talent Showcase '99 as part of the
"Arts in the Country '99 - Arts Festival '99" in cooperation with The Arts Council of the
Temecula Valley. The Showcase will be presented on June 12, 1999.
Film Council telephone inquiries are being handled effectively by a voice mail answering
system. During the month of February we received 31 calls - 11 for production and location
information, 7 - for Film Festival information, 5 - for Talent Showcase information, 8 -
TVFC business.
Jo Moulton and Cinema Entertainment Alliance have expressed interest in producing the
1999 Temecula Valley Intemational Film Festival. They have presented their Business Plan
to Jim O'Grady and Jeff Comerchero to get sponsorship approval from the City of Temecula.
The Film Council will be meeting with Mr. O'Grady and Mr. Comerchero in March to
discuss our role in supporting the Film Festival efforts.
Filming activity
Bert Doyan, a local film producer with Doyan Townsend Enterprises, requested production
information regarding a possible feature film using Old Town Temecula and some
surrounding areas. Jo Moulton contacted Mr. Doyan and answered his questions. This
project is still in the formative stages.
There is a possible "Weekend in the Country" type film project in the works, scheduled for
this summer. The budget is $5 million. Plans are to feature Tom Selleck and Michael
Dudikoff. There will be 28 filming days, tentatively in Old Town, Sage Rd. off Hwy 79
South, some areas of Wamer Springs and 2 residential areas. Cast and crew will be housed in
Temecula. The script is going through rewrites and will be sent to Jo Moulton in a few weeks
when revisions are completed.
Photographer, Michael Salas met with Sunny Thomas and Maggi Allen to scout some still
photo locations. Mr. Salas was looking for horse and cattle ranches, vineyards and orange
groves that we were able to provide and on a beautiful sunny day. Preliminary photos were
taken and Mr. Salas will return in a few weeks to continue his work. In addition to his
commercial photography, Mr. Salas works with a national locations photo library in New
York, and he will be giving the TVFC copies of his photos to us in our Temecula locations
photo file.
We will continue to support the daily management of filmmaker's requests, and encourage the
growing awareness of the industry in this community. It is our goal to generate a higher
awareness of the Temecula Area within the context of filmmaking activities, and to present the
opportunities and benefits of this production to local merchants and businesses.
Respectfully,
Maggi Allen
Secretary
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 23, 1999
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 March, 1999.
MOACTRPT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Monthly Activity Report
February 1999
Submitted by: William G. Hughes
Date: March 23, 1999
WORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION:
1. 1-15/Rancho Califi}rnia Road Interchange Modifications:
The contractor will be performing miscellaneous landscape, concrete, and asphalt repair work throughout the
project. Completion of the project, based on an accelerated schedule including time extensions for weather
is March 1999.
2. Margarita Community Park Phase I:
The project improvements include restrooms, parking areas, picnic areas, play equipment, tennis courts, a
roller hockey rink, ballfields, lighting, picnic shelters, sidewalks, landscaping with open turf areas as well
as widening Margarita Road adjacent to the park to its ultimate width. Installation of the concrete walkways,
picnic areas, roller hockey rink and tennis court has been completed. The north ballfield lighting and
backstops are completed and the south lighting and backstops are presently being installed. Construction of
the restrooms and shade structures are nearly complete.
The project is completed and is currently in a 90-day landscape maintenance period.
3. Old Town Streetscape Project
The street improvements have been completed. A punch list and other design items are now being worked
on by the contractor. The project is substantially complete and the contractor expects to complete the
remaining items in March 1999.
4. Winchester Road Sidewalk:
The contractor has completed the sidewalk installation. The sidewalk portion on the north side of Winchester
Road between Margarita Road and Roripaugh Road was deleted, since the developer is conditioned to install
the sidewalk. The contractor installed additional sidewalk on the south side of Winchester Road from 200'
west of Roripaugh Road to gas station's driveway south of Nicolas. This project consists of the installation of
sidewalks on the north side of Winchester Road between Margarita Road and Winchester Creek Avenue.
Construction is completed and the recommendation for acceptance will go to City Council in April.
5. i-15/Winchester Southbound Off-ramp Widening:
The contracu~r has completed the first phase of paving on the southbound loop ramp. This project consists of
widening the southbound off-ramp to provide an additional left turn lane.
Construction is anticipated to be completed in March 1999.
I moactrpt/cip/99/mar
6. Temecula Duck Pond Park:
Good progress has been made on the perimeter wall around the pond and off-site construction activity is
gearing up for the construction of the Traffic Signals and widening of Ynez Road. The restroom building is
nearly complete and landscaping activities shotrid begin shor~y. The Temecnia Duck Pond Park Project will
include both park and off-site street improvements. Park improvements will include a gazebo/bandstand,
picnic facilities, a restroom, walkways, a parking lot, security lighting, monumentation, landscaping and
irrigation. The street improvements will consist of the widening of Ynez Road to full width between Rancho
Cali/brnia Road and Tierra Vista Road and will include new sidewalks along with additional turn lanes, traffic
signal modifications at Ynez Road and Rancho California Road, a new traffic signal at Ynez Road and Tierra
Vista Road, and pavement restriping to improve traffic circulation.
Construction of the off-site street improvement has begun and the completion is scheduled for June 1999.
7. Margarita Road Sidewalk (Rancho Vista to Pauba Road):
Demolition and relocation of existing facilities is continuing. Rapid progress should be made as soon as the
various utilities are relocated. The improvements will include the installation of concrete curbs, gutter, and
sidewalk along the west side of Margarita Road between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road. The sidewalk
will improve access to the Rancho California Sports Park. Also, as part of the design, additive alternate
improvements will include ADA ramp access from Margarita Road to the adjacent ballfields along with an
expanded parking area.
Construction is expected to be completed in April 1999.
8. Winchester Road & Ynez R{had Street Widening:
Construction began the first week of March with the installation of traffic control along Winchester Road and
Ynez Road. The Contractor will start the removals of existing curb, gutter, and asphalt along the roadways
the 2na week of March and begin rough grading the 3~a week of March. Traffic will be allowed through the
work zone and delays shall be expected.
Construction is scheduled to be completed in August 1999.
9. Overland Drive Street Improvements & Margarita Road Street Widening:
Construction began the first week of March with the installation of traffic control along Margarita and Ynez
Roads. The Contractor is rough grading along Margarita Road and the proposed Overland Drive, installing
the 36" storm drain line on Ynez Road and began constructing the box culvert crossing @ Overland Drive.
Traffic will be allowed through the work zone and delays shall be expected.
Construction is scheduled to be completed in August 1999.
10. Winchester Road Median Islands:
A pre-construction meeting was held on December 22. The contractor will install the traffic signal at the
intersection of Winchester Road and Enterprise Circle West before any median island work. The traffic signal
poles are on order and are expected to be delivered in March. This project includes installation of median
islands, landscaping and irrigation along Winchester Road between Enterprise Circle West and Jefferson
Avenue along with the installation of a traffic signal at Enterprise Circle West. Also, the existing median
island at Jefferson Avenue will be modified to provide for a longer left turn pocket for eastbound traffic.
Construction has begtan, the estimated completion date is June 1999.
2 moactrpt/eip/99/mar
11. Traffic Signal at Rancho California Road and Via Los Colinas:
On January 12, City Council awarded a contract to DBX, Inc. This project will install a traffic signal at the
intersectkin Rancho California Road and Via Los Colinas.
Construction is anticipated to begin in March 1999 with an estimated completion date of June 1999.
12. 1-15/Overland Drive Overcrossing Improvement:
The City Council awarded the construction contract to C. C. Myers Inc. The project includes construction
of an 800 tbot bridge over 1-15, installing two new traffic signals where Overland Drive meets Jefferson
Avenue and Ynez Road, relocation of SCE power lines, reconstruction of 1000 feet of Jefferson Avenue,
relocation of an existing sewer line, storm drain/channel improvements, and misc. irrigation/landscape
improvements. The estimated construction time for this project is 13 months.
13. Front Street Widening South of Rancho California Road
This project was completed as part of the Rancho California Road Loop project. The work consists of
widening the west side of Front Sweet from Rancho California Road to the southerly Moreno Road along with
overlaying the total width of Front Street. Front Street has been striped to provide two (2) lanes for both north
and southbound traffic.
14. Pala Road Bridge:
Construction of the Pala Road Bridge began March 1, 1999, with the clearing of the vegetation in the bed of
Temecula Creek. This project will include realignment of Pala Road from Highway 79 South to Rainbow
Canyon Road, which will require that a new bridge be constructed, installation of two (2) new traffic signals,
the removal of one (1) traffic signal, the installation of sound walls, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, street
lighting, bike lanes, signing, striping, channel improvements, and provisions for Wetland Mitigation. It is
anticipated that the new bridge will be open for vehicle traffic by January 2000.
Construction began March 1, 1999 with an estimated completion date of March 2000.
OUT TO BID:
I. Tennis Court Lighting at Temecula Valley High School
The bid olxming was February 25, 1999. This project will be presented to City Council for award of Contract
on March 23, 1999. This project will install tennis court lighting along with landscaping, irrigation, fencing,
striping, and minor concrete work at Temecula Valley High School.
Construction is anticipated to begin in May 1999 with an estimated completion date of July 1999.
2. Rotary Park
The design has been completed and the project is currently out to bid. The bid opening date is scheduled for
April l, 1999. This prt~iect will install a picnic shade structure, picnic tables, fencing, concrete and drainage
structures.
3 moactrpt/eip/99/mar
WORK IN DESIGN:
i. FY96-97 Pavement Management System:
Staff returned the third plan check to the consultant on February 10th. This project will provide street
rehabilitation of Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Rancho California Road. This project will
also include the installation of street lighting along the entire length of the project.
Construction is anticipated to begin in March 1999 with an estimated completion date of June 1999.
2. Pujoi Street Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter:
The c~msultant has completed the design survey and City staff is currently designing the project.
3. Street Name Sign Replacement - Phase I
This project is currently being designed in-house. This project will replace existing street name signs in the
Santiago Estates area with new plastic molded signs.
4. 1-15 Southbound Off-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road
The City Council approved the Consultant's contract at the February 9 meeting. This project will add one (1)
southbt~und lane on the 1-15 Freeway and also widen the bridge over the Santa Gertrudis Creek at the
southbound off-ramp. The consultant will provide a design to widen the northbound on-ramp from Winchester
Road.
5. !-15 Southbound Off-Ramp Widening at Rancho California Road
The City Council approved the Consultant's contract at the February 9 meeting. This project will add one (1)
southbound lane on the 1-15 Freeway. This design will aim require the extension of the existing Empire Creek
Bridge box culvert.
6. Butterfield Stage Park Improvements
This i~roject is currently being designed and is approximately 90% complete. This project will construct a
basketball court near the existing parking lot.
7. Traffic Signal on Margarita Road at Pio Pico Road and at Pauba Road
A Ctmsultant has been selected and the design is proceeding for installation of traffic signals at these locations.
8. Old Town Southside Parking Lots
This project is currently being designed in-house. This project consists of two (2) proposed parking lots. One
(1) will be located on the west side of Front Street just north of Second Street, and the other one (1) is on the
south side of Fourth Street west of Front Street.
9. Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail Undercrossing
This prt~ject is currently in first plan check. This project will construct a bike trail in the existing Santa
Gertrudis Creek under Winchester Road (Hwy. 79N) bridge.
4 moactrpt/cip/99/mar
10. First Street BridlZe
Final construction drawings are completed, construction advertisement is scheduled for May 1999.
5 moactrpt/cip199/mar
-r
i.-
o
0
~Y . .
0
a ~ 0
· ,J _.g.
i u~
z u, ,, z w
wwww
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Bill Hughes, Acting Director of Public Works/City Enginee
~//Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
March 3, 1999
Monthly Activity Report - February, 1998
The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-
house personnel for the month of February, 1999:
SIGNS
A. Total signs replaced 21
B. Total signs installed 32
C. Total signs repaired 6
II.
TREES
A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns
78
III.
ASPHALT REPAIRS
A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs
B. Total Tons
3,533
63
IV.
CATCH BASINS
A. Total catch basins cleaned
225
RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement
32,500
VI.
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A. Total locations
B. Total S.F.
12
584
VII.
STENCILING
A. 266
B. 65
New and repainted legends
L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping
Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 38 service order requests ranging from weed
abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is
compared to 25 service order requests for the month of January, 1999.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in 127 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 February, 1999 was
$ 21,958.00 compared to $ -0- for the month of January, 1999.
Account No. 5402
Account No. 5401
Account No. 999-5402
$20,163.00
$ 275.00
$ 1,520.00
cc:
Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - {CIP/Traffic)
Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development)
0
O~
vO
UJ
Z
LU
I--
Z
0 0 0 0
d d d d d
e~ ~e. E~e ~ E~e
0000 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 000000000 0
0 0 0 0 0
d d d d d
E~ ~ EFt ~ ~
0000 0 O0 O O0 0 0 0 000000000 0
0 0 0 0 0
d d d d d
~e' E~e l~e E/:t ec:t
o~
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS
The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of February, 1999
DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST
ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE
CONTRACTOR:
Date: 02/18/99
# 5402
SACKETT CONSTRUCTION
30760 Rustic Glen
30546 Iron Bark
42080 Humber
Remove and replace sidewalk curb & gutter
and root prune as needed
CONTRACTOR:
Date: 02/99
# 5402
L. WILLIAMS LANDSCAPE iNC.
Citywide R.O.W. Tree Trimming
TOTAL COST $ 3,785.00
108 R.O.W. trees
Class 1 trim
GQ!~!~'RA.C..TOR.:
Date: 02/10/99
# 5402
· BECKER ENGINEERING
Camino Verde & Camino Este
TOTAL COST $ 5,830.00
Remove & replace 2 undersidewalk drains
Date: 02/24/99
# 5402
Citywide P.C.C. repairs
TOTAL COST $ 4,950.00
Remove and replace sidewalk curb & gutter
and root prune as needed
TOTAL COST $ 4,980.00
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS
The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of February, 1999
DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST
ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE
CONTRACTOR:
Date: 02/23/99
# 5401
RENE'S COMMERCIAL' MANAGEMENT
Southeast corner of Santiago and
Front Street
Herbicide application for weed control in
channel
CONTRACTOR:
Date: 02/02/99
# 999-5402
MONTELEONE 'EXCAVATING'
Service Level "R"
TOTAL COST $ 275.00
Grading of dirt roads due to heavy rains
Date: 02/13/99
# 5402
Old Town
TOTAL COST
Wash down streets for Rod Run
$ 1,520.00
Date:
#
TOTAL COST $ 618.00
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT//5401
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT//5402
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT//99-5402
TOTAL COST
$ 275.00
$ 20,163.00
$ 1,520.00
DATE
RECEIVED
02/01/99
02/01199
02/02/99
02/02/99
02/02/99
02/02/99
02/03/99
02/03/99
02/09199
02/09/99
02/10/99
02/11/99
02/11 / 99
02/11/99
02/11/99
02/11/99
02/15199
02/16/99
02/16/99
02/16/99
0.2/17/99
02/18/99
02/18/99
02/19/99
02/19/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
~'LOCATION
REQUEST DATE WORK
COMPLETED
ROAD GRADING 02/01/99
P.C.C. REPAIRS 02/01/99
DEBRIS PICK UP 02/02/99
TREE REMOVAL 02/02/99
TREE REMOVAL 02/02/99
DEBRIS REMOVAL 02/02/99
R-35 DAMAGED 02/03/99
SNS 02/03/99
P.C.C. REPAIRS 02/09/99
DEBRIS PICK UP 02/09/99
SIGN REPAIR 02/10/99
ROOT PRUNING 02/11/99
TREE DOWN 02/11/99
TREE DOWN 02/11/99
TREE DOWN 02/11/99
TREE DOWN 02/11/99
SNS DOWN 02/15/99
TREE TRIMMING 02/16/99
TREE REMOVAL 02/16/99
POTHOLES 02/16/99
POTHOLES 02/17/99
TREE TRIMMING 02/18/99
TREE TRIMMING 02/18/99
TREE TRIMMING 02/19/99
POTHOLE REPAIR 02/19/99
31190 INDIAN SUMMER
39760 RUSTIC GLEN
27799 TIERRA VISTA
30797 POINT WOODS COURT
45928 PARSIPPANY COURT
41841 FROUTH STREET
DEL REY ROAD AT AVENIDA DEL REPOSO
SANDIA CREEK AT VIA MIROLA
39765 RUSTIC CLEN
PALA ROAD AT CASINO
39835 CANTRELL ROAD
43977 GATEWOOD WAY
OLYMPIA WAY AT GREENWAY CIRCLE
SWEETSHADE LANE AT KAFFIRBOOM COURT
ROANOAKE AT RUBICON
VALLEJO AT LA PAZ
31830 CALLE VIMIANZO
30981 CORTE ARROYO VISTA
31650 PASEO OOLETA
NICHOLAS ROAD
NICHOLAS ROAD
PAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA
31786 PASEO DE LAS OLAS
41966 HUMBER DRIVE
29610 AVENIDA DEL SOL
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATA~DEFI'S~W'uMAINTAIN~WKCMPLTD~SORSX99~FEBRUARY.99.DOC
DATE
:RECEIVED
02/19/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/23/99
02/23/99
02/23/99
02/23/99
02/24/99
LOCATiOS
40010 HOLDEN CIRCLE
GENERAL KEARNEY
MARGARITA ROAD
45771 PALMETTO WAY
29490 VALLEJO
45630 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD
29849 CORTE CASTILLE
30981 CORTE ARROYO VISTA
45040 CORTE ALEGRA
42096 VIA CUESTA AL SOL
MARGARITA ROAD
31695 PASEO GOLETA
29891 LONGVALE COURT
· REQUEST
STREET FAILURE
POTHOLE REPAIRS
POTHOLE REPAIRS
TREE REMOVAL
DEBRIS PICK UP
TREE TRIMMING
TREE TRIMMING
TREE TRIMMING
POTHOLE REPAIR
A.C. REPAIR
SIGN REPAIR
TREE REPLACEMENT
BROKEN SPRINKLER HEAD
'DATE WORK
COMPI:ETED
02/19/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02/22/99
02123199
02/23/99
02/23/99
02/23/99
02/24/99
02126199
02/26/98
TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS
38
ATEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~W~'vlAINTAIl~WKCMPLTD~SORSX99\FEBRUARY.99.DOC
02/01/99
02/02/99
02/03/99
02/05/99
02/22/99
02/26/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
CATCH BASINMAINTENANCE
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
L~AT!ON"'
AREA #2
AREA #2
AREA #2
CITYWIDE "RAIN"
AREA #2
AREA #2
WORK.COMPLETED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
26 CATCH BASINS
55 CATCH BASINS
65 CATCH BASINS
18 CATCH BASINS
19 CATCH BASINS
42 CATCH BASINS
TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED
225
R:'uMAINTAIN~WKCMPLETD\CATCHBAS~99',FEBRUARY.99
DATE.
02/01199
02/02/99
02/03199
02/08199
02/10/99
02/17199
02/17199
02/18199
02/19199
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
STENCILS / STRIPING
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
LOCATION
AREA #2
AREA #2
AREA #2 AND AREA #3
OLD TOWN
OLD TOWN
AREA #3
CUPENO LANE
AREA #3
OLD TOWN
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
REPAINTED
WORK COMPLETED
33 LEGENDS
35 LEGENDS
37 LEGENDS
48 LEGENDS
11 LEGENDS
34 LEGENDS
65 L.F. RED CURB
34 LEGENDS
34 LEGENDS
TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS
NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F.
\~TEMEC_FS201XDATAXDE~AINXWKCMPLTDXSq'RIpING~99~FEBRUARy.99.DOC
266
65
DATE
02/03/99
02/04/99
02/08/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DMSION
RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
LOCATION .'
42019 HUMBER DRIVE
VIA LOBO CHANNEL
FRONT SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
MORENO AT MOTEL 6
PALA ROAD SOUTH OF CLUBHOUSE
PALA ROAD SOUTH OF CLUBHOUSE
WORK COMPLETED
TRIMMED
TRIMMED
TRIMMED
TRIMMED
TRIMMED
TRIMMED
3 R.O.W. TREES
5 R.O.W. TREES
3 R.O.W. TREES
12 R.O.W. TREES
23 R.O.W. TREES
32 R.O.W. TREES
TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATA~DEFrSXPW~IMNTAIN~WKCMPLTD\TREESX99'xFEBRUAKY.99.DOC
DATE'
o2/ol/99
02/01/99
02/01/99
02/03/99
02/09/99
02/09/99
02/17/99
02/18/99
02/18/99
02/19/99
02/19/99
02/25/99
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
LOCATION
DE PORTOLA ROAD AT CAMPANULA
VIA LOBO CHANNEL
MORAGA CHANNEL
78266 FRONT STREET
DE PORTOLA ROAD AT DIVES WAY
30937 RIVERTON
MORAGA AT CHURCH
LONG VALLEY AT ROANOAK
STONEWOOD APARTMENTS
RANCHO VISTA AT MARGARITA
EDWARDS THEATRE
LONG VALLEY AT ROANOAK
WORK COMPLETED
REMOVED 25
REMOVED 240
REMOVED 176
REMOVED 4
REMOVED 6
REMOVED 4
REMOVED 15
REMOVED 4
REMOVED I00
REMOVED 2
REMOVED 4
REMOVED 4
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
S.F. OF GRAFFITI
TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 584
TOTAL LOCATIONS 12
R:MMAINTA/Nx, WKCMPLTD\GRAFFITIX.99~FEBRUARY.99.DOC
DATE
02/01199
02/02/99
02/03199
02/08199
02/09/99
02/10/99
02/11199
02/12/99
02/16199
02/17/99
02118199
02./19/99
02/22/99
02/23/99
02/2.~/c~
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
LOCATION
SCOPE OF WORK
41707 WINCHESTER
41707 WINCHESTER
CITYWIDE
5th STREET
5th STREET
OLD TOWN
OLD TOWN
CITYWIDE
41715 WINCHESTER
PAUBA WEST OF LA PRLMAVERA
CITYWIDE
CITYWIDE
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MORAGA
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT HUMBER
SPORTS PARK
SPORTS PARK
R&R A.C.
R&R A.C.
FILL POTHOLES
R&R A.C.
R&R A.C.
FILL POTHOLES
FILL POTHOLES
HLL POTHOLES
R&R A.C.
R&R A.C.
FILL POTHOLES
FILL POTHOLES
R&R A.C.
R&R A.C.
REPAIR PARKING LOT
REPAIR PARKING LOT
130
113
76
256
283
135
99
160
225
84
85
55
90
120
790
832
TOTAL
TONS
5.5
4.5
3.5
6.5
7.0
4.5
3.5
TEMP A.C.
4.5
4.0
3.5
2
2
3.5
5.5
3
TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS
TOTAL TONS
3,533
63
R:XMAINTAIlqIWKCMPLTD~ASPHALT.RPRX99XFEBRUARY 99
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DMSION
RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
WORK COMPLETED
02/03/99 VIA LOBO CHANNEL
ABATED 1,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS
02/09199 MORENO AT MOTEL 6
ABATED 30,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS
02/10/99 1sr TO TEXACO STATION
ABATED 1,500 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS
TOTAL S.F. R-O-W WEEDS ABATED 32,500
\\TEMEC-F~2~xDATA~DEPT~XPWMMA~NTAINXWK~M~LTD\WEED~x99~FEBRUARY.99.D~CFEB~UAKY.99
02/16199
02/16199
02/17/99
02/18199
02/23199
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SIGNS
MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1999
LOCATION.
SAM HICKS PARK
MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER
TORRES AT PACADO
YNEZ S/O WINCHESTER TO RANCO CALIFORNIA
FRONT SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT FRONT STREET
RAINBOW CANYON AT BAYHILL
CLUBHOUSE DRIVE AT PALA ROAD
RAINBOW CANYON AT PALA ROAD
MERCEDES AT 2"n STREET
YNEZ AT FORD DEALERSHIP
WALCOTT AT CALLE CHAPOS
VIA ANGELAS AT CORTE BONILLA
LONG VALLEY AT YUKON
COUNTRY GLEN SOUTH OF HWY 79
CALLE VIMIANZO
': 'WORK COMPLETED
INSTALLED 3 R-28
REPLACED R- 7 "DAMAGED"
REPLACED R- 1 "VANDALIZED"
REPLACED 8 TYPE "K' MARKERS, R-34
INSTALLED 6 R-26
INSTALLED 17 DELINEATORS
INSTALLED N.H.W. SIGNS
INSTALLED N.H.W. SIGNS
INSTALLED 3 N.H.W. SIGNS
REPLACED END MARKER
REPLACED W-10 2 TYPE "K" 2 TYPE "N"
REPLACED R2 - "30" "DAMAGED"
INSTALLED N.H. W. S.
REPLACED R- 1 GRAFFITI
REPLACED W-5 RT "MISSING"
REPLACED SNS
TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED
TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED
TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED
21
32
6
R:~VlAINTAIN~WKCMPLTD\SIGNS~9~EBRUARY.99